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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (242285)	1/16/2014 11:02:16 AM
From: Bread Upon The Water	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541735

It's clear we're talking well past one another. You are surprised, even alarmed, that social policy whether at the university level or at the national level places benefits equally across groups the members of which contribute unequally. It's the very nature of such benefit structure. Nothing new. The only thing new is right wing attempts to turn it into an us against them battleground on economic grounds The surprise to me is to how we got here with these policies. It is not conducive to good government to hide the consequences of legislative/policy actions prior to the enactment of implementing laws or policy directives. The push back on those policies is being driven in a large part by that IMHO, and may well threaten the survival of the policies themselves. Until the left wing acknowledges this, it has planted the seeds of its own policy destruction in its methodology.

To: JohnM who wrote (242285)	1/16/2014 11:04:39 AM
From: research1234	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541735

John, with all respect IMO you are wrong. The practice may have existed in the past, but the degree to which it exists now, i.e. the amount of economic subsidy as a percentage of incomes, has increased significantly. None of us are arguing that some amount of economic cross subsidization is bad or wrong, we are simply stating that due to the significant increase it should be subject to public policy debate. It is appears from your posts that you are involved in this issue personally, and I think you may be too close to the action to consider this dispassionately. IMHO, if the current result is one that is good for society, then you should welcome a public debate to ensure that it has strong public support. Activities that are hidden in the shadows are not good for a democratic society.