Not all, but many of these concerns are drummed up by people that want to add every conceivable resistance to wealth redistribution possible, and the rubes that believe their fabricated justification. Drug testing for food and housing assistance is a great example. A fraction of the amount of money spent gets “saved” and the rare addict thrown off will probably cost the system more money as a homeless addict. Ultimately, it comes down to contempt for people who have less, and wanting to see them humiliated.
An effective test for determining if reading an opinion is a waste of your time is: watch for language that assigns an explanation to the behavior of others.
Basically: they don’t describe what happened. They describe how other people are less good.
“These concerns are drummed up by people who what to add every conceivable resistance to wealth redistribution possible”
Not the language of an open hearted soul. I’m going to default to “unconvincing argument” as the infinitely more plausible explanation.
We shoulda leave words like Marxist utopia out of conversations, even communism and capitalism. It shortcut people's thinking.
That said, welfare programs are probably more efficient if they applied more broadly to society as opposed to adding paperwork barriers to people applying for aids.
Evil is a useless term unless you’re discussing fictional super villains or religion. If you think basic assistance is a Marxist utopia, well bud, I think you need to look utopia up in the dictionary and learn what Marxism is from a different source than Newsmax.
