Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Road Walker who wrote (282684)	3/31/2006 9:17:49 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573902

Yes, they are ALWAYS called subsidies. subsidy a grant or gift of money: as a : a sum of money formerly granted by the British Parliament to the crown and raised by special taxation b : money granted by one state to another c : a grant by a government to a private person or company to assist an enterprise deemed advantageous to the public webster.com sub·si·dy Pronunciation (sbs-d) n. pl. sub·si·dies 1. Monetary assistance granted by a government to a person or group in support of an enterprise regarded as being in the public interest. 2. Financial assistance given by one person or government to another. 3. Money formerly granted to the British Crown by Parliament. thefreedictionary.com No grant or gift. The effect is the same and some people might call them subsidies but they don't fit the definition. Nobody has EVER called SS a "subsidy". "Nobody has ever" is silly in many cases including this one. A better phrasing would be that entitlements (not just social security) provide subsidies to people. Technically a program that distributes subsidies is not itself a subsidy, but that's a quibble. You are redefining the terms to match your argument. And you are digressing to avoid the original statement. No redefining or digressing or avoidance in my last post. Everything discussion with you goes to the lowest common denominator, semantics. My argument is not primarily one of semantics. Its that the middle class gets the bulk of money transfers from the government. Your argument was the semantic argument based on how you want to define subsidy. So my current response has to deal with that semantic argument. Not that I'm putting you down in anyway for arguing the semantics. The meaning of words is important. But I'm not hung up on the semantics. I'm willing to use different terms if we can't agree on the meaning of a term. I'm more interested in the overall point that more money gets distributed from the government to the middle class than to either the rich or the poor. Tim