3 ms·
There’s a reasonable argument to be made that letting you get away with something with negative externalities, which then have to be dealt with by spending publ
by pdpi 8y ago
There’s a reasonable argument to be made that letting you get away with something with negative externalities, which then have to be dealt with by spending public money, is effectively the same as giving you that money directly.
- tomohawk 8y agoOnly if those "negative externalities" are illegal for everyone. In this case, they're perfectly legal activities. It's not a "break" or "subsidy" just because someone's allowed to carry on a perfectly legal activity. Look, if it is bad to use oil for fuel, then just tax it. But playing these word games is lame.