Exactly! The non-delusional educated make the best policies. You know, the people who don't just throw money down the drain and than wait for a miracle. Let's say we give most the money to poor people. And the poor spend money like the poor people do, by buying useless shit. Then, where are we going to get value again? Do we ask god? We know that gods don't exist, so who do we ask?
Besides, socialism contradicts the over-population awareness idea. If you, as a liberal, think that any life has value and should be invested in, they why are you so afraid of overpopulation and the depletion of the resources? If you really think that life has inherently more value than money itself, then you should want as many people as physically possible.
But you don't. You don't believe that life has inherent value. Neither do I! You oppose over-population, so do I! You don't really want to help the poor, neither do I!
You just want to become rich. You are poor, and want to become rich, and want the rich to become poor so you can control them and other people easier. The only difference between you and me is that you haven't earned the wealth you desire.
People say that "the rich enjoy the infrastructure that we ALL built". Alright, let's analyze it like this, then. The infrastructure is what remains after the work is done, such as... the works of my parents and yours. Let's say your parents were on welfare an mine rich. Your parents didn't work and passed on the idea that I should share my inherited wealth with you, because your welfare parents built the infrastructure and not mine, Nice!
No matter how you skew the argument, the situation is ALWAYS in favor of the rich. In 1950, the population of USA was about 150 million. Let's say that half, 75 million were poor and half rich. If people work, then today there shouldn't be more than 75 million poor people, right? After all, how many kids is a poor person allowed to have? Should we embrace the idea that the poors should multiply insanely? No. 75 million poor people is enough. We should help no more than that. In fact, we should take evidence that if you're parents were on welfare, we should not help you at all! If you, as a child, had government-subsidized family, then why should we also subsidize you? If you had equal opportunity from the start and you failed, how much more equality do you want?