Quote:
Originally Posted by Lubicon
Partial answer is because you can choose which billionaire to give the money to and how much you are going to give them. You do this by purchasing or not purchasing their goods and it is essentially entirely voluntary. When times are tough we can cut back spending. That is not the case with taxes, we pay the same amount regardless.
Taxpayers entrust and expect the government (all levels) to spend their money prudently and I think many people do not see it this way at the moment.
|
That's a good point. I can see where you are coming from and I am not by any means saying the government spends as prudently as they should. Some days I hear stories that remind me of Office Space in it's ridiculousness. I can't believe how much some of the executives in AHS or the AER make and wish I had a way to cut back my spending on them.
For me it's the us vs them mentality against the public service. Most rank and file Teachers/nurses/beaurocrats don't do the job to make money but to help the public good, and I just can't get behind the attacks on them for getting paid to do a job that benefits society as a whole.
__________________
@PR_NHL
The @NHLFlames are the first team to feature four players each with 50+ points within their first 45 games of a season since the Penguins in 1995-96 (Ron Francis, Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Tomas Sandstrom).
Fuzz - "He didn't speak to the media before the election, either."
|