I don't see how that's a rebuttal to his actual point: > What's needed is better management and allocation of the existing money, not throwing more money at th

I don't see how that's a rebuttal to his actual point: > What's needed is better management and allocation of the existing money, not throwing more money at the problem to be mismanaged. His point: the top 10% earn 45% of the income and pay 68% of federal income taxes. That's a lot of money that could be used to improve the lives of the 90%, but it's being mismanaged by the government. He's saying, instead of increasing the amount of money that is going to be mismanaged by the government at the expense of the 10%, why not do more with what we already have?