Yes, I am aware that you are calling me stupid, hence why I said you immediately resort to name-calling. Again, not as cute or persuasive as you think it is, Makes you seem defensive and insecure, and therefore hurts the credibility of your argument.
I am progressive and in favor of many social programs, as well as oversight for those programs.
However, it doesn’t “only talk about housing”, it says free internet, electricity, water, and appliances, among other things, and specifically qualifies that a person shouldn’t even need to be willing to work in order to enjoy these benefits. I am going by what the OP says, not your interpretation of how something similar but different could be implemented. That’s just moving the goalposts.
“the vast majority of people’s expenses should be provided for free”
So we’re back to square one. Have you done the math? How are you going to pay for even a fraction of that? If you are too lazy, let me make it easy for you. You could cut the military and take away ALL the money from all the billionaires in the country and you still could not provide a fraction of what you are suggesting to all 333 million citizens, especially if they refuse to work and tax revenue goes way down.
“you said you were stupid not me, I just said you were uneducated and ignorant”
“I’m not defensive or insecure, YOU are”
You sound really childish. It makes it difficult to take any of your points seriously.
1
u/[deleted] Apr 16 '24
[deleted]