1 Unions are fine , they need to work with the employer . A union represents one side . Working against an employer is not working together . Employers are fine , they need to work with the unions . An employer represents on side . Working against a union is not working together . 2 How is it handout when it is an investment for the future . Handouts imply there is no rerun on investment . Investment in jobs that are in need are useful , giving education which has no rerun are handouts . It ' s . literally a handout . Every single handout is an investment for the future . That ' s why every single social service exists . 3 The money is paid similar to invest of preventing future loss in resources . As insurance . It ' s pronounced eugenics . It ' s morally repugnant . 4 In short it ' s the belief is that you earn for what you want . That still does not make any sense . Read that sentence back to yourself out loud . Even if I correct the nonsense grammar , it makes no point In short it ' s the belief that you earn for what you want . 5 I perfect fine with union if they run as company that sells their services and employer can chooseYeah , I just said you ' re against unions . You could have just agreed with me instead of saying something absurd . how is government deciding value , the market does , the doesn ' t decideBecause they ' re the ones deciding who gets your handouts , which apparently only go to the people you like . where does the government decide what of value , no the market decide the admissions to programs and market decide which programs should be funded . No , the government does . Because they ' re the ones who fund schools . They decide where the money goes . Government are not decide who can reproduce . They can , they don ' t get government support . That ' s pronounced eugenics . It ' s morally repugnant . Anyway , between the barelylegible sentences , you ' re still just describing early fascism and eugenics . We ' ve tried them . They don ' t work . Get over it .