3 ms·
It's very easy to stop funding X from the general fund and using the specific allocated money, so the overall spend on X doesn't increase at all, it's just the
by zie 2y ago
It's very easy to stop funding X from the general fund and using the specific allocated money, so the overall spend on X doesn't increase at all, it's just the money now comes from the special tax, instead of the general fund.
The general fund money can then be spent on whatever again, say the mayor's sin habit ;)
- dgfitz 2y ago> It's very easy to stop funding X from the general fund Yeah it only takes a cliche called: an act of congress
- zie 2y agoWhy do you think that?
- dgfitz 2y agoDoesn't congress need to approve the budget?
- zie 2y agoAt the federal level, yes. but that's not related to my point at all. If you've never read the federal budget, it's a great exercise in knowing how the govt operates. I encourage it. If they say spend $100 on toilet paper. It's assumed it comes from the general fund. If they later decide taxing toilet sales for that $100 is a great idea. Awesome. What happens to that $100 budgeted out of the general fund? Sometimes it gets re-allocated, but sometimes not. It almost never means they are suddenly going to start spending $200 on toilet paper though. To do that, they have to specifically write that into the budget. Hence, just because you taxed toilets $100 doesn't mean $100 MORE dollars will get applied to toilet paper. Obviously $100 on TP for the federal government is absurdly low, but that's not the point and I'm too lazy to go figure out the actual costs on toilet paper. I'm sure it's a lot though.
- dgfitz 2y agoI’ve read it. I stopped reading your comment after skimming saw a bunch of toilet paper references.