What's wrong with welfare, "the health, happiness, and fortunes of a person or group" ?

[1] https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/us/definition/eng...

Look at definition 2 and 3. Don’t be obtuse.

"practical or financial help that is provided, often by the government, for people or animals that need it"

"money that the government pays regularly to people who are poor, unemployed, sick, etc."

I still don't see the problem? A social safety net is good for everyone. Human compassion and lofty ideals of a just government aside, the rich are benefitting from it, too, in the sense that you can't have a functioning economy if there's no one to actually do the labor, rather than just collect the dividends.

And that is a valid argument that could lead to a discussion. Deliberately misinterpreting the word to pretend someone said they hate health and happiness is not.

I am sorry, but I genuinely do not see a difference in meaning between the first example and the second two. They all concern the social well-being of the whole (in fact, they’re all part of the _same_ definition).

Nevertheless, I just picked the very first definition that came up (literally, the one that Google presents on search), without any editorializing. Maybe you’re the one who is deliberately picking and choosing a narrow reading?

This is silly. The concern is that government chooses winners and losers. I lose, you win.

This isn't fixing global warming, this is giving some people discounted internet and leaving the rest of us with nothing.

How should we decide who gets my taxes for Internet?

A government isn't picking who wins or loses if it builds a road or a sewer line.

It is in fact providing infrastructure that benefits and improves the lives of all citizens.

Why do you place greater importance on how a hypothetical business can in theory not be benefited by the government over the quality of life of all citizens?

> A government isn't picking who wins or loses if it builds a road or a sewer line.

Very often it is, quite deliberately.

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3539889

And you're welcome for your welfare roads.

Welfare fire department, welfare police.....

I pay for these. The city didn't pay for the internet, I did.

That's hardly a fair comparison they are calling it welfare as the town in question didn't pay a cent to get it's own broadband.

And most small municipalities don't/didn't pay a cent toward the highway construction, either

With the 50k I pay in taxes per year, I'm sure I can pay for toll roads.

What? My state pays more into taxes than we get out. And my high income is definitely what funds welfare.

That's part of the cost of living in a democratic and capitalistic country. You are free to move where taxes are lower.

I recommend the rugged beauty of Antarctica for anyone who believes "taxes are theft".

I am with you, my issue is that 740 billion dollar a year drain on the the taxpayer known as the Department of Defense. We could just privatise it... Defense as a Service, think of the possibilities! /s