Would You Prefer Being Allocated By Congress Or By Taxpayers?

Reply to: Thinking About The Holocaust Differently

*********************************************

kmiller1610, we're in the economics section. In economics they have this thing called supply and demand. After 911... what was the demand for war?

It's a trick question. Nobody knows what the demand was. Does that make sense? Demand isn't people shouting for war. Demand isn't people voting for war. Demand isn't voting for people who want to go to war. Demand isn't people marching for war. Demand isn't giving war a thumbs up. Demand isn't liking war on facebook. Demand isn't voting war up on reddit. Demand isn't people signing a petition to start a war.

All those things reflect opinion and popular sentiment. But just try and pay for your groceries with your opinion/sentiment. It's probably not going to work.

Demand isn't cheap talk. Demand is when people put their own money where their mouths are.

After 911... taxpayers weren't given the opportunity to put their own tax dollars where their mouths were. This is exactly why we have no idea what the demand for war truly was. Yet, despite this "minor" detail I was allocated to Afghanistan anyways.

Not sure if you noticed from the OP... but I want taxpayers to choose where their taxes go. This means that if I had to choose between being allocated by congress or by taxpayers... then I'd choose to be allocated by taxpayers. If I had to choose whether I put my life in the hands of taxpayers... or in the hands of congress... then I'd put my life in the hands of taxpayers.

Why would I prefer to put my life in the hands of taxpayers and not in the hands of congress? It's because I'd really prefer it if my life wasn't wasted.

Who's more likely to build a bridge to nowhere? Taxpayers or congress?

If congress builds a bridge... then they do so with other people's money. If taxpayers build a bridge... then they would do so with their own money. Does this make a difference?

Taxpayers had to exchange something for their money. What they exchanged was their labor. All the time that they spent working was time that they couldn't spend with their family. They essentially sacrificed time with their loved ones in order to earn the money that they needed to provide for their loved ones.

This means that taxpayers are far less likely to build a bridge to nowhere. It means that they are far less likely to tilt at windmills.

Taxpayers have far more incentive to do their homework. They have a lot more to gain and a lot more to lose.

Skin in the game? Taxpayers? Yes. Congress? Nope.

Maybe you think that there's some really good evidence that we're safer in the hands of congress? Just like there's really good evidence that God exists? I haven't seen any kind of evidence for either belief. This doesn't mean that the evidence doesn't exist. It just means that taxpayers should have the option of directly allocating their taxes. If there's any kind of good evidence out there... then taxpayers will have a strong incentive to put their taxes/lives in the hands of congress.

*********************************************

See also: Louder