|
| At least part of the problem is people will accept giving even more of their money to the government if the problem wasn’t fixed with the amount they gave the previous year. Not many stop to ask what mechanism exists to encourage the government to actually fix the issue because it isn’t a lack of money given.
Here’s a comparison. No it’s not perfect but a lot of it will apply.
Imagine you pay a contractor to put an addition on your house. He tells you what it will cost and it seems quite fair. He doesn’t finish it the first year and he now needs more money because he had to use some of your money to help pay to fix his neighbours fence that blew down. It was one of those things that just happen and the money went to a good cause and helped someone so you let it slide and pay him more to finish the your addition.
It doesn’t get finished that year also because his cousin had a strong wind go through and blow his garage down so he used your money to build him a new garage. Your money went to a good cause so the next year you again pay the contractor to put that addition on your house.
Unfortunately that year a friend of his had his house burn down and he didn’t have any insurance so he had to build a new house for that friend and needed your money to help pay for it. Well a person sure doesn’t want to see a young family out on the street so at least your money went to a good cause.
How long would you let other people use your money for causes other than what you intended? What incentive will you have provided for the contractor to actually finish your job? I doubt it would even be allowed to happen at all in the private world. Why do we let it happen in the government sector.
The vast majority of people understand and are willing to pay for the good causes that you mentioned. Eventually though a person needs to realize the grifting that is taking place and demand the original issue actually gets fixed. The money is there. It’s just being siphoned off.
Edited by havin’funfarming 5/26/2026 08:29
| |
|