4 ms·

This right here is why we can't get anything done. Republicans say that the poor will benefit so we can't give them money. The center-right will say we can't do

This right here is why we can't get anything done. Republicans say that the poor will benefit so we can't give them money. The center-right will say we can't do that, the rich might benefit, we can't give them money. So what happens is the rich get all the money. Stop putting means testing garbage on these bills. It only means those who need the assistance on the edge will be denied.

s1artibartfast 3y ago
And progressives say that we cant means test anything because... there is always someone above the limit. The solution is simple: an income bases subsidy that gradually decreases with no welfare cliff.
Gibbon1 3y ago
Someone had a comment about Clinton's reflexive criticism of Sanders free college tuition plan, that it was a give away to upper middle class students. Reality upper class and upper middle class students get free tuition from their parents. Taxing wealthy parents and giving some of the money back to their kids as free tuition isn't really a freebee. They also pointed out the wealthy fret that their kids are growing up to be wastrels, fail sons and daughters. And they think poor kids are like that. When a poor kid that knuckles under and goes to college isn't like that.
- isykt 3y ago
  > Reality upper class and upper middle class students get free tuition from their parents Yes, they get free tuition from their parents which is why they don’t need government assistance for college. We don’t give food stamps to millionaires either.
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    OTOH, we don't means-test fire protection, we just pay it out of general taxes, and if we want the rich to pay more, we just make the taxes more progressive. There's no reason not to use that solution to every service, including ones currently means-tested, rather than having separate income and/or asset trsts with different standards and its own implementation bureaucracy for individual programs. Well, there is a reason, but it is deliberate inefficiency and bureaucratic waste, either for corrupt purposes or to cause friction to frustrate the nominal purpose of the program while making the gesture of having the program.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

And progressives say that we cant means test anything because... there is always someone above the limit. The solution is simple: an income bases subsidy that gradually decreases with no welfare cliff.

Gibbon1 3y ago

Someone had a comment about Clinton's reflexive criticism of Sanders free college tuition plan, that it was a give away to upper middle class students. Reality upper class and upper middle class students get free tuition from their parents. Taxing wealthy parents and giving some of the money back to their kids as free tuition isn't really a freebee. They also pointed out the wealthy fret that their kids are growing up to be wastrels, fail sons and daughters. And they think poor kids are like that. When a poor kid that knuckles under and goes to college isn't like that.

isykt 3y ago
> Reality upper class and upper middle class students get free tuition from their parents Yes, they get free tuition from their parents which is why they don’t need government assistance for college. We don’t give food stamps to millionaires either.
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  OTOH, we don't means-test fire protection, we just pay it out of general taxes, and if we want the rich to pay more, we just make the taxes more progressive. There's no reason not to use that solution to every service, including ones currently means-tested, rather than having separate income and/or asset trsts with different standards and its own implementation bureaucracy for individual programs. Well, there is a reason, but it is deliberate inefficiency and bureaucratic waste, either for corrupt purposes or to cause friction to frustrate the nominal purpose of the program while making the gesture of having the program.