If the money always belonged to the state, and the state simply allows its constituents to keep some of the money they earn, your logic stands.<p>But if the money ever belonged to the individual, then the public cannot &quot;subsidize&quot; the individual keeping what he&#x2F;she earned.<p>Put another way: if I walk up to someone on the street and forcibly take their money - and if that wasn&#x27;t mine to begin with - most people would call that &#x27;stealing&#x27; (or at least &#x27;coercion&#x27; of some sort). If I chose to not forcibly take their money, and they then give that money to the homeless person on the corner, I&#x27;m not &quot;subsidizing&quot; the person whose money I didn&#x27;t forcibly take.<p>It was theirs to begin with - not mine.