Quote:
|
Originally Posted by KevinTheOmnivore
I'm actually a little surprised that as a Libertarian you even support this. One argument I've seen in favor of the sales tax is that it'll encourage people to save by making them consider the weight of their day-to-day purchases. Is it the job of the government to be deciding that behavior?
|
Y'know, I was driving down the road today, and I recalled you saying this. I thought of a better way to phrase my opinion here:
I have fewer problems with government encouraging certain behaviors than I do with government actively discouraging any behavior that only harms the individual making the decision. Ideally, the government I would choose for us would not be acknowledged as a go-to-guy for advice anyways, but you have to work with what you've got, right?
Let's look at that for a minute from the point of view of funding art with tax money, a fun subject. Republicans get all pissy about guys like Andres Serrano, and charge the Democrats that defend his work as art with either demonic possession or liberal lunacy. Were I forced to pick a side, I would not be able to condone culling this or that piece on some random merit system, but I also don't have to agree that much of what is called art should be partly paid for by me, much less that that is what it should even be called.
Republicans that would discourage shitty art would inadvertantly encourage, for example, much more Christian-friendly art. Is that better or worse for them from their standpoint? I mean, maybe they won't notice the difference, but it stinks of sin to me... Additionally, since part of art's reward is fame, maybe even infamy, the Democrats that defend shitty art encourage more of it while effectively discouraging better work. A good libertarian would say fuck all that and remove government from the position of funding art entirely.