Assuming you're literate, it's a selfish way of communicating. It saves the sender a small amount of time where they can 'ummm' instead of formulating a point properly. Then the receiver has to sit through it all, spending multiples of the amount of time they'd spend to read it.
Be Mark Zuckerberg:
> learn Mandarin
> give speeches in Mandarin in China
> put Xi Jinping’s book on your desk
> get employees to read Xi Jinping’s book
> ask Xi Jinping to name your baby
> get rejected
> host Chinese internet officials at Facebook
> try to bring Facebook back to China
> get rejected
> explore China-friendly censorship tools
> get rejected
> quietly test a China-only app
> get rejected
> buy an AI company with Chinese roots
> get rejected by China again
@ProliferationD@Sour__Kream@Aetrion@DeadManOnAStick@atlanticesque But would you at least agree that under your scheme, someone would be asking farmers for their money, on pain of imprisonment or worse, then spend some of it to "give handouts to" poor people?https://t.co/vXJN9jvZNV
@Aetrion@DeadManOnAStick@atlanticesque When people say this they obviously mean some government income should be dedicated to food provision for those who can't afford it. No one is asking farmers to give handouts to every poor person who shows up at their farm.
@ProliferationD@Sour__Kream@Aetrion@DeadManOnAStick@atlanticesque In that case, if "government income" comes through threat of force at least in part, then "food provision for those who can't afford it" it pays for ultimately derives from forced labor aka slavery