Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight
No slight intended, what I meant was, "conveniently for me". But my point still stands. Contrary to what you said, there ARE issues where your only objection is that your tax dollars are being used to fund it.
|
OK...cool.
I think we agree. WB was expressing disgust that her tax dollars are being used for it. OK. I get that. There are things that the feds spend money on (LOTS of things) that I am disgusted with. Not because they are bad (though I think the large majority of federally funded social programs are failures) in and of themselves, but because it is not (nor should it be) the job of the federal government to fund such things.
Of course, that may be the end of our agreement.
From one of my two favorite economists/constitutionalists, being Walter Williams:
Quote:
|
James Madison, the father of our constitution, irate over a $15,000 congressional appropriation to assist some French refugees, said, "I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
|
Complete column from which that was taken
However, defense is specifically mandated by the constitution. I have no problems with the debate as to whether this is actually defense of the country (and by extension our allies, as treaties trump the constitution).
So....yes, I do object to my tax dollars being used for a lot of things. I would guess that all of them fall under what I consider NOT to be the job of the federal government.