I'm against the vote subsidy. My tax dollars shouldn't go toward funding political parties I don't agree with.
I'm also against health care for people I don't like. My tax dollars shouldn't go toward my neighbour's lung cancer surgery if he is a smoking jerk.
I'm also against free roads for people who drive dangerously and cause potholes. Why is the taxpayer subsidizing roads? Road use should be measured and each individual driver charged a monthly fee. And if someone really needs a new road that bad, they should take an ad out in the newspaper to explain why it's important, and then maybe people will pitch in and help buy some of the tar or gravel.
I'm also against my tax dollar going toward jets I don't want and that may never be needed to protect my town from invading Russians. If the jets are so important, maybe someone should start a war with Russia, then Canadians will see the need, be convinced, and want to fund the jets. Besides, defence spending doesn't protect all Canadians from being invaded. It only protects the parts of the country that might otherwise appeal to invaders--all the rest of us get along fine. Why should my tax dollars subsidize people who live in parts of the country that are just asking to be invaded? If they didn't want to be invaded they should have moved to Moosonee.
I'm against government forcing me to pay taxes. If the government has a good argument for why taxes need to be collected, because it thinks it might be good for the country, they can try to convince me to donate to the tax fund without picking my pocket.
And don't get me started on laws. I'm against laws. If someone has a reason for why I shouldn't be setting a dog on fire, then maybe that person should write me a letter, explaining why it's wrong to set fire to a dog, and maybe offer to sell me his hose, so I can put out the fire, then THAT makes sense.
Turning tongue-in-cheek into an extreme sport on the comments board re "Per-vote subsidy on chopping block in Flaherty’s June 6 budget":