Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

To be fair, most of the "anti-welfare" troupe don't seem to be against "wealth redistribution" per-se (which is what makes it such a weird battlecry) but against government handouts to people who don't "contribute" via taxation.

Why would you be against something writ large, but all for it writ small?

You might think the "writ small" version had more likelihood of being executed competently, but that shouldn't make you against the thing per se.

I hate taxes, but if you want to give $20 to a homeless guy, then that is your money.

You're missing the point completely, If a private Ivy League institution wants to redistribute wealth, that's fine. One must opt in to be part of that group, and it only affects members who choose to be part of that group, knowing the consequences. If the federal government wants to, it's much different as one's choice to belong to a national government is much less free.

Yes, also getting a scholarship to an Ivy League implies hard work on the part of the recipient whereas welfare can be abused by free-riders.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact