Quote:
Originally Posted by darklord700
That's exactly my point. It is easy to say we want to help everybody so no one is left behind. But at what costs? My point is right now these benefits are not being costed in by the taxpayers when they vote or support a party.
Say Redford gave hundreds of millions in her first few days as the premier to the teachers, firefighters and the disabled. I'm OK if you support that. But if I break out the cost to you of Redford's largeness to be a night out with your date at a restaurant. Are you still going to support that? Maybe or maybe not.
My point is most voters don't know or care much how much every political decision cost at this moment.
Most people would like to help every homeless people on the street, that's a very easy decision to make. But would I give up my cable TV to help pay for my unemployed neighbor's heating bill? That's a much tougher decision to make because there's a price tag associated with it.
|
See, I don't see it as that drastic of a choice. I get where you're coming from. But if we're taxed higher, wages should reflect that.