(09-08-2018 07:08 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(09-07-2018 05:44 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-07-2018 05:22 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  My problem with the studies on the frog's mating habits.
1. It costs money. The Democrats provide it, without a thought.
Then,
2. They say the deficit is too big.
So they say...
3. Raise taxes on the rich (anybody making over $30K)
leaving,
4. less money for taxpayers and business to spend.
How this is a better life for the "commons", I don't know.

Here is my question. If, instead of taxing someone to fund studying the frog's mating habits, we let that person keep the money he made, will he put it to a better use than studying the mating habits of frogs? Almost certainly.

That was my point - we are often unaware of the potential benefit that studying some seemingly obscure topic may have down the road.
And it’s not like that funding goes nowhere - it pays researchers, vendors, students, etc. It doesn’t disappear.

But that's my point. If we don't take the money away from the person who earned it, it will be go to either investment or consumption. Or if is simply placed into a bank, then it is loaned to businesses or individuals for either investment or consumption. It does not disappear into a vacuum. It pays employees, vendors, suppliers, and others.

The question is who makes better decisions what to do with that money--the individual or the government. When the government spends it to study the love life of frogs, I'm guessing the individual does a better job.