My guess is that the opening line is pure political rhetoric: "What a pathetic ploy to divide the working class against each other."
While I agree with the overall point of the comment. I down voted it because of the tone with which it was made and it's lack of attempt to brings any facts or references to bear in reinforcing its claims.
A prime example of states spending their money poorly to the benefit of big businesses is another HN topic. The headline is about eminent domain, but the article talks about the 3 billion "investment" that was given to Foxconn that seems unlikely to pay for itself even in an optimistically estimated 25 years.
Edit: Also, several of the "factual" claims made were... hard to believe without any numbers to back them up.
There's such a double standard, but no one is ever called to back up a claim like "small government is better for the economy" which I believe is just empirically false. You can plainly see states/countries that spend more on pensions and social safety nets have wildly better outcomes for their citizens. Yet don't see conservative making any reasonable arguments just well wore platitudes about "fiscal responsibly," but they never are forced to elaborate on what they mean by that or flagged or down-voted because this is a highly conservative that serves to reinforce the beliefs as opposed to challenge them.
While I agree with the overall point of the comment. I down voted it because of the tone with which it was made and it's lack of attempt to brings any facts or references to bear in reinforcing its claims.
A prime example of states spending their money poorly to the benefit of big businesses is another HN topic. The headline is about eminent domain, but the article talks about the 3 billion "investment" that was given to Foxconn that seems unlikely to pay for itself even in an optimistically estimated 25 years.
Edit: Also, several of the "factual" claims made were... hard to believe without any numbers to back them up.