if we give parents a modest amount of cash to help their kids next thing you know they might think they’re entitled to home or health care without having to work for it
and imagine how entitled the kids will feel! how will they learn the dignity of work if their parents aren’t struggling to feed them?
the interesting thing about this kind of argument is that no one ever takes the next step and condemns rich parents for not demonstrating the dignity of work for their kids
returning to this and let me say that if there was a population disparity remotely comparable to california/rhode island in 1787, equal state representation in the senate would have never happened
as it is, equal state representation in the senate was a pure power play on part of the small state delegates and everyone knew it, even as advocates for the constitution backfilled an explanation after the fact
can’t overstate how big this is. virginia has long been second only to texas in its number of executions
house of delegates still needs to pass but the senate is usually the biggest hurdle so i think this thing is going to happen. just huge news for the state.
the argument for greater “targeting” re: the checks seems to just be that the checks should be targeted.
there’s no purpose behind it, it’s just “we should do it because we should do it”
also, “targeting” would be taking the same amount of aid and giving it to fewer people. you lower the cut off but you raise the total amount. lowering the cut off without raising the amount is just a straightforward cut.