On Dec 15, 6:46 am, "Rod & Betty Jo" wrote:
Just Wondering wrote:
Rod & Betty Jo wrote:
Is there a theme hereG? Lets assume that the public indeed
(foolish or otherwise) so desired these things and was willing to
pay the tax to make it happen, would you prefer a Gov. that ignored
the will and desire of the populous? Rod

That's one reasony why the Founding Fathers added the Bill of Rights
to the Constitution. Unrestrained majority rule is a swift and
certain path to tyrannical suppression of minorities. Where do you
suppose, for example, that the taxes to make those things happen
would come from? The tax fairy? The ones who want the benefit, or
the ones who have enough money not to need the benefit in the first
place? What you actually advocate is replacing capitalism with
socialism.

I've advocated nothing...the hypothetical question here is whether a
Government should listen or ignore the will of the people. For those
suggesting the governed should not have a voice it seems a bit peculiar.
Rod

It does seem reasonable for the governed to have a voice in how they
are governed.

Far too many people want the government to listen to the will of the
people only as long as the will of the people agrees with their own
personal biases.