(function() { var a=window;function e(b){this.t={};this.tick=function(c,h,d){d=d?d:(new Date).getTime();this.t[c]=[d,h]};this.tick("start",null,b)}var f=new e;a.jstiming={Timer:e,load:f};try{a.jstiming.pt=a.gtbExternal&&a.gtbExternal.pageT()||a.external&&a.external.pageT}catch(g){};a.tickAboveFold=function(b){b=b;var c=0;if(b.offsetParent){do c+=b.offsetTop;while(b=b.offsetParent)}b=c;b<=750&&a.jstiming.load.tick("aft")};var i=false;function j(){if(!i){i=true;a.jstiming.load.tick("firstScrollTime")}}a.addEventListener?a.addEventListener("scroll",j,false):a.attachEvent("onscroll",j); })();

Sunday, December 17, 2006

Question of the Day: Day 351

Do you think that taxpayers in any given country should be able to pick and choose which programs they are willing to have their money fund and which ones they choose NOT to fund so that government agencies would be forced to find alternative funds or discontinue programs that the public do not support?

2 Comments:

Blogger WiNgS said...

Yes. That's the essence of democracy. If we feel that our leaders don't spend our money in a responsible and sensible manner, we have the right to vote them out of office. That's why politicians spend a lot of time and money in convincing voters that they're the right man or woman for the job.

12/18/2006 9:23 AM  
Blogger AlwaysThinkin said...

I think that's a great idea for all but the most basic services of the government. We'd find we'd have a much smaller government (currently one of every three workers in the US are either employed by the government or some aspect of their job function relates to the government), much lower taxes, and the private sector would provide more efficient solutions to society's needs.

12/27/2006 9:39 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home