Like how the government subsidizes the oil companies? They receive money they didn't earn. Let's give that money back to the people who earned it: the taxpayers.
Stop having donor states give the taxpayer's money to states that receive it. In my state we give some of our hard earned tax dollars to other states, who haven't earned it.
Anybody who doesn't support these two things, isn't really serious about being against the redistribution of wealth.
You just pulled the typical liberal stunt of trying to change the subject to something you'd rather discuss -and then try to pretend the immorality rises to the same level and causes the same kind of damage to society. Oil subsidies have nothing to do with this thread, it isn't the same kind of thing - one poses a threat to the very character of a people and harms people individual by individual. The other is needlessly putting a middleman in the middle of the supply-and-demand equation and anytime you do that, it will force people to pay even more for their goods and services than they would without the middle man. Each additional middle man takes his cut first before moving the money and/or product down the line to the consumer -even government. ESPECIALLY government.
So let's your cheesy shift in subject out of the way right here. I think all subsidies of any kind for businesses should end. Anything government touches, it only makes it more expensive for everyone. There is no such thing as "too big to fail" which only forces taxpayers to foot the bill for the most inefficient, most wasteful, least productive businesses who are selling products the people didn't want in the first place -which is why they are failing in the first place! Which makes NO sense -because once again, it is punishing the most successful while rewarding the worst!
Failed businesses cause temporary pain but long term gain. The left thinks avoiding the short term pain is preferable when in reality that pain multiplies over time. Other companies absorb the failed one or the failed is broken up and absorbed by many -who will either figure out how to make a product the public wants for a price they are willing to pay, or go under themselves until someone does it right. I don't want government subsidizing businesses to find alternative sources of energy -after all the ******* years government has been doing that, we the taxpayers stuck footing the bill for BILLIONS for it -have nothing to show for it. If its a good idea private investors will get in on the action -and if they can't convince private investors to jump in where do ******* politicians get off forcing taxpayers on the hook for it instead?? If its such a bad idea private investors won't risk their money on it, then taxpayers should NOT be forced to risk theirs instead!
But in the case of oil companies, they aren't even failing! The subsidies are given to encourage and help defray the cost of exploration and drilling for new sources with the silly notion that at least taxpayers might recoup some of their money at the pump where the price MAY end up being a few cents cheaper.
Its a screwy idea and an anti-free market idea at that. Oil compaines make plenty of money, they are still going to explore and drill with or without those subsidies and they can bear the up front costs of doing so all by themselves. Of course those costs will be passed on to consumers at the pump. That's the way it works and I have no problem with that. But at least what I will end up paying will be based on my own personal consumption instead of some cookie cutter one-size fits all share of the burden of subsidizing it as a taxpayer! As if I OWE oil companies even more of MY money in order to go look for more oil they are going to go looking for anyway -and will still pass on the costs of that exploration, drilling and refining right on to me as a consumer no matter what. Subsidizing them only puts another middleman into the equation. EVERY middle man takes a cut of the money before moving it on -so adding middle men between you and the goods or serves you want means you will definitely end up spending more than if you just paid for it directly yourself. So let's pay for it directly and cut out government subsidies, cut out government as some kind of middle man along with the cut government takes in the process!
As for the original question which is what this thread is about -I believe it is immoral to the max for government to confiscate what one person has earned for himself -in order to give it to someone who did not. (Not cannot, DID not.) NOBODY objects to providing legitimate assistance to those who cannot provide for themselves and nobody objects to providing short term assistance with the full expectation it IS short term and intended to provide a
temporary cushion while getting back on your feet -not as a way of life. This notion that government is supposed to make life "more fair" for people is impossible. You can't make life fair and all attempts to make it fair only imposes unfairness on someone else. People are not equally creative, ambitious, driven, innovative -so the only way for government to even PRETEND it can make life fair - is by making life even more unfair for someone else. Which is MORE unfair? Someone who didn't work to earn it not having it -or someone who busted their ass to earn it see it confiscated by government and given to someone else? That is FAR more immoral to say nothing of being counterproductive! Redistribution of the wealth is an ideology that views the successful as a class that must be punished and made an example of -even while those intent on confiscating what they earned insist they aren't. Its a lie -when you confiscate from a man what he has earned in order to give it someone who did not -you have punished the guy who worked and you have punished his success at what he does. Instead of encouraging others to emulate him, you send a message to EVERYONE that if this guy had just failed instead of being successful -government would have rewarded him for it with the money someone had worked to earn. And gee, isn't it better to sit on your ass and save your energy to fill out all that government paperwork instead? HELPING someone with constant handouts -is not helping them. It is soul destroying and no kindness. IT IS CRUEL!
Our system has increasingly been rewarding more and more people for the poor decisions they have made -while trying to relieve them of the natural consequences of those poor decisions and foist them off on those who made good decisions because they wanted to avoid the bad consequences in the first place! Where is the morality in that? People only stop making poor decisions when they realize the only way to avoid the unpleasant consequences for them is to start making better decisions! Foisting them off on those who made other decisions in order to avoid those consequences is disgusting, cripples the individual even further, increases the likelihood the individual will continue making poor decisions for himself -and therefore is anything but moral.
