This analogy is so true!

[Blitzkrenia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

If her mother was sick, why would she party. Different if a person is disabled than someone who chooses not to work!

Your analogy includes only one type of people who benefit. It's narrow-minded.

[Barringtonia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

No, it is not.

It's a true analagy. How isn't it?

Read. Let me see if I can summarize. The father's position is false because it defends the arbitrary taking of earned property and money from someone and giving them directly to someone who has not earned them. This is not how taxes work and it is not how government assistance programs work. Citizens contribute to the country's general fund, some more, some less, and those citizens who are in need may apply for assistance to any number of different programs. There are no large pots of money standing about in Federal buildings into which the undeserving poor can dip whenever they feel like it. And that general fund also goes toward other programs, such as defense, transportation, the regulation of food and drugs, that all citizens benefit from equally. The father's position is a strawman.

Oh, and before the yelling about welfare queens starts, go look up the US Welfare Reform Act. It has some interesting provisions.

isn't taking more from you as good as giving less?

[Farnhamia]

No, it is not.

It's a true analagy. How isn't it?

Read. Let me see if I can summarize. The father's position is false because it defends the arbitrary taking of earned property and money from someone and giving them directly to someone who has not earned them. This is not how taxes work and it is not how government assistance programs work. Citizens contribute to the country's general fund, some more, some less, and those citizens who are in need may apply for assistance to any number of different programs. There are no large pots of money standing about in Federal buildings into which the undeserving poor can dip whenever they feel like it. And that general fund also goes toward other programs, such as defense, transportation, the regulation of food and drugs, that all citizens benefit from equally. The father's position is a strawman.

Oh, and before the yelling about welfare queens starts, go look up the US Welfare Reform Act. It has some interesting provisions.

isn't taking more from you as good as giving less?

What?

[Wilson Mills]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

But that is not the scenerio that was presented.

[Eraidur]

Meanwhile in alternate universe she still kills her father,takes over the collage builds industrial base in the basement and then with thousands of followers takes over the capital and calls herself the new Empress of Terran Empire.

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

[Barringtonia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

If her mother was sick, why would she party. Different if a person is disabled than someone who chooses not to work!

Well, this really speaks to the stupidity of your analogy, the girl with a 2.0 gpa who's always at parties clearly has a rich father and wouldn't be on welfare anyway, how else does she have the money to party?

[Blitzkrenia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

But that is not the scenerio that was presented.

The scenario itself has fundamental flaws to begin with.

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

Meanwhile in alternate universe she still kills her father,takes over the collage builds industrial base in the basement and then with thousands of followers takes over the capital and calls herself the new Empress of Terran Empire.

Stop ur spam

[Barringtonia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

But that is not the scenerio that was presented.

Sure, and hence my point that the scenario is stupid and bears no relation to welfare.

[Sdaeriji]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

But that is not the scenerio that was presented.

That's the point. The scenario presented is unrepresentative, wholly unrealistic, and unnecessarily narrow in scope. It takes one particular, rare if even present at all, situation regarding welfare, and treats it as if it's the only thing that is happening.

[Blitzkrenia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

The keyword here being "particular". There are many different hypothetical cases that this analogy does not show.

[Sdaeriji]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

We don't know that. The reason she might be able to afford slacking off in college is because she's got a multi-million dollar trust fund waiting for her on the other side. The analogy sucks.

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

The keyword here being "particular". There are many different hypothetical cases.

perhaps, but the generalization was really unnecessary in this case.

[Eraidur]

Meanwhile in alternate universe she still kills her father,takes over the collage builds industrial base in the basement and then with thousands of followers takes over the capital and calls herself the new Empress of Terran Empire.

Stop ur spam

Tis not spam,tis truth,she is another reincarnation of Hoshi Sato!

[Farnhamia]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

The keyword here being "particular". There are many different hypothetical cases.

The better analogy - though not as much fun for our capitalist friends - would be not giving up a point from her GPA but giving some of her time to tutor her friend.

[Barringtonia]

The scenario itself has fundamental flaws to begin with.

That's the point. The scenario presented is unrepresentative, wholly unrealistic, and unnecessarily narrow in scope. It takes one particular, rare if even present at all, situation regarding welfare, and treats it as if it's the only thing that is happening.

Seems I'm not needed here, I'm going back to partying and mooching off you hard workers

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

We don't know that. The reason she might be able to afford slacking off in college is because she's got a multi-million dollar trust fund waiting for her on the other side. The analogy sucks.

The best kind of taxes are inheritance taxes.

[Sdaeriji]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

We don't know that. The reason she might be able to afford slacking off in college is because she's got a multi-million dollar trust fund waiting for her on the other side. The analogy sucks.

The best kind of taxes are inheritance taxes.

Orange keychain presents seventy-two invoice zebra and.

[Blitzkrenia]

Must... resist... urge... to care for the needy... must... become.. cold-hearted again!

[The Alma Mater]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

But that is not the scenerio that was presented.

The scenario is supposed to be an accurate analogy of welfare systems and wealth distribution

[The Alma Mater]

Must... resist... urge... to care for the needy...

All I ask from you
Is to do what Jesus Christ would do
He'd give me a dollar
Why don't you ?

[Eternal Yerushalayim]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

That still doesn't prove wealth redistribution in other cases right.

In the analogy given, the girl with a 2.0 probably doesn't need a job, to afford going to all those parties, her parents are probably rich enough to pay anyway,

The analogy is about as bad as it gets,

It speaks more to the ignorance of the father than anything else,

The father is not ignorant in the case of that particular girl, my dear sir:)

The keyword here being "particular". There are many different hypothetical cases.

The better analogy - though not as much fun for our capitalist friends - would be not giving up a point from her GPA but giving some of her time to tutor her friend.

And while doing that may make things "fairer" for the other girl, I don't see why it would be fair to deduct something from her to someone who deserves something. What she earned is hers to keep. Lets say: A boy failed his test as he didn't have enough time to study. Is it then fair to deduct marks from somebody else who ALSO deserves it?

[Wilson Mills]

It's true in the dreamworld of people who've little understanding of the factors that lead to them being a position of being able to judge in so haughty a way.

How about the person with a 2.0 average lived in a crowded household, needed a part time job to afford the education let alone books, a computer was a luxury when she could find time on a public, shared facility, had to support her sick mother and a thousand other distractions...

How about that person actually still managed to get a 4.0 despite all the disadvantages but couldn't get a job because of socio-economic status

Then the analogy isn't just about having a good time and going to parties,

Terrible really,

But that is not the scenerio that was presented.

Sure, and hence my point that the scenario is stupid and bears no relation to welfare.

One particular scenario was presented. You didn't like that scenario, so you discarded it and wrote another scenario rather than comment on the original. Typical liberal misdirection.