The Case Against Government Subsidies for College Tuition

[curmudgeon]

<p>And we can see from this post how the OP feels about redistribution of wealth as a goal worthy of our efforts:</p>

<p>

@OP

Quote:
(#120) Exactly what do you think it “proves?” </p>

<p>The assertion that:</p>

<p>Quote:
“…for thirty years, none of the net benefit stays at the lower and middle class level. All of it goes upstairs.” </p>

<p>is a falsifiable assertion. (The emphasis on ‘All’ was in the original post/assertion.) </p>

<p>All (pun intended) it takes to disprove this assertion is to show that someone at the lower and middle class level had a net benifit over the last thirty years. </p>

<p>Jack Levis (an individual that went from package-sorter to Director of Package Process Management in 30 years), and all the millions of individuals like Jack Levis in our economy, directly disprove the “All of it goes upstairs” assertion. </p>

<p>Furthermore, Mr. Levis’ story also supports the original assertion that the observable wealth concentrations we find across our society are attributable to wealth creation through productivity improvements and not wealth redistribution. The compensation and wealth accumulation Mr. Levis has experienced over the last 30 years are directly related to his efforts to make UPS more productive.</p>

<p>Be it the disproved “basic truths” argument or the disproved “none of the net benefit stays at the lower and middle class” argument, the advocacy for wealth redistribution sits on a logical foundation of sand.

Give me a beachfront cabana, please. Edit after reading more OP posts: And can you bring me a Darwinian margarita? ;)</p>