Not true, Artificial persons are incapable of serving a prison sentence. Hence legal penalties must be different between.

We let Artificial persons go into bankruptcy all the time. The only time we care is when there are enough real person's dependent on an artificial entity

I can want to do alot of things. For instance i really really want to have a foursome with some pornstars right now. Am i going to be able to do it? Nope.
I want to eliminate poverty. Does that mean its possible? Nope. Am i going to just hand people money? Nope. Do i want welfare? Nope. Do i want a war on drugs? Nope.

Youre never going to be able to eliminate it.

You should read the forever war. Excellent sci fi (almost as good as starship troopers) and social commentary on socialism. More and more people start going on the government take until the economy finally collapses. Which is exactly what would happen if you started handing people money.

Pornstars.......
You might catch something. There is better stuff out there than pornstars.

Nahhh you just gotta get em afore they been in the business too long.
plus they do do tests. just gotta mix and match till you find some that passed all their tests.

Yes normal women are better than pornstars, (not like throwing a hot dog down a hallway) but you just can't beat pornstar enthusiasm

Revoking a business license could be an analogous equivalent.

Solving poverty at the individual level would preclude having to bail out artificial persons.

Providing for the general Welfare of the United States is a moral that is written into our Constitution, and its unappreciated role as the supreme law of the land.

Why advocate less ethical behavior that can could be perceived as immoral?

So not giving lazy punks who want to sit on the couch all day free money is immoral? I guess i'm the son of the devil then. o well.

We don't need a war on drugs. Simply eliminating that socialized public policy could lower our tax burden and enable more market friendly public policies that can defray the cost of eliminating poverty in our republic.

Unemployment compensation could also be used as a market based metric for the private sector. Why wouldn't the private sector pay higher wages to compete with that form of minimum wage?

Get over it, learn a trade, we're not going to pay for you to sit around the rest of your life. Your ideas will not work for reasons explained.

We could simply provide manna from the public sector and claim a form of morality compatible with that form of divinity. We currently have the economics to implement that form of moral standard at the secular, public sector level.

Eliminating poverty in our republic could be as moral as providing for the general Welfare of the United States.

I just said we don't need a war on drugs. You even quoted me as saying so.

Because they don't need to, they can just outsource to india. Like theyre already doing. Fail.

You are already paying for it anyway. All I am suggesting, is that we be more market friendly to lower our tax burden.

What you suggest increases our tax burden. I will vote any way I can to remove my obligation to pay for what I'm paying now.

Did you not take your crazy pills this morning? Does your mommy know your on the computer without permission? These are the only explanations (insanity, childlike foolishness) for thinking the public sector has any form of divinity. Do you not understand that if you just print money and spend spend spend that you ruin the economy? You wonder WHY we're in this shit hole economic situation to begin with? Retarded programs like the wars on drugs and poverty. Socialism doesn't work. It ruins thriving economies.

Any public policy that ensure better employment of resources would be more cost effective than what we have now. In that sense, unemployment compensation, at-will, would be as efficient and as market friendly as Commerce.

Your scenario doesn't apply when you are giving that money to market participants in our money-based, mixed-market, political-economy. Since, those people will pay general taxes on that money (discretionary income) when they buy consumer goods and services. You could consider it a form of trickle down for local governments since they could benefit from any increase in local tax revenue on a more consistent basis.

You also seem to be missing the point about at-will employment doctrine and state at-will employment laws; they conform to our Ninth Amendment.

What we have now is more socialized than necessary.