3 ms·
>>forcing people to buy a specific amount of the subsidized thing instead of spending some of the money on something they might need even more. Some of this is
by kamaal 9y ago
>>forcing people to buy a specific amount of the subsidized thing instead of spending some of the money on something they might need even more.
Some of this is purposefully done for a reason. You want people to be buying more eggs, milk and bread. Not Candy and Jelly.
In some case this seems to be exactly what has happened.
- AnthonyMouse 9y ago> Some of this is purposefully done for a reason. You want people to be buying more eggs, milk and bread. Not Candy and Jelly. Only it doesn't actually do that. If someone has $5 from their job and $5 from the government and wants to buy $6 worth of bread and $4 worth of candy when you want them buying $10 worth of bread, saying they can only spend the government money on the bread changes nothing. And is almost universally wrongheaded to begin with, because individuals know better than the government what they actually need. It's too easy to find the government telling a diabetic they can't buy a candy bar when they need it to avoid hypoglycemic shock.
- kamaal 9y ago>>because individuals know better than the government what they actually need. Responsible individuals do. Not every one.
- AnthonyMouse 9y ago> Responsible individuals do. Not every one. People make their own bed. If someone eats too much candy and dies of a heart attack, it was their choice. The government is not your mother. It makes no sense to punish all the responsible people with crushing bureaucracy just to save a few fools from themselves.