2 ms·
They’re both suggesting that the government use public money to subsidize people’s daily lives. The main difference is one person is advocating for the governme
by braingenious 4y ago
They’re both suggesting that the government use public money to subsidize people’s daily lives. The main difference is one person is advocating for the government to administer intelligence tests and collect data around that.
What’s the big political difference?
- ksec 4y agoOne is suggesting everyone should be treated equally, and not specially "genius", what ever that definition might be. The other is suggesting there are people with higher potential where this may be worth the effort.
- braingenious 4y agoOK. I still don’t get how “Give everybody free money” and “Give a subset of ‘worthy’ people as determined by a government agency free money” are that different. They’re both kind of bog standard socialist/communist ideas, just one has the self-dealing and nepotistic downsides to these ideologies explicitly baked into it by design. Edit: It’s kind of like arguing “feeding everybody is communism! Feeding everybody that is approved as officially My Buddies is Good Capitalism!” We’re discussing two different scenarios in which the government collects taxes and distributes that money to people without them being employed in any way.