“Taxpayer money,” we see and hear that phrase again and again. Politicians use it to emphasize that some of the funds in the Treasury are paid in the form of taxes. The phrase is misleading–once collected, money in the Treasury is no longer any taxpayer’s money; it is the government’s money to be used, wisely or not, for the general welfare.
I suppose the phrase, “taxpayer money,” might well, but doesn’t, refer to money that might have been owed to the treasury before the recent “reform” but now is retained by profitable corporations and wealthy individuals.
Here are more misleading terms with definitions:
- Activist judge–any judge who rules other than as one wishes.
- Confederate flag–symbol of freedom.
- Conservative–anything considered good, budget busting tax reform, for example.
- Fake news–any news one doesn’t want to hear.
- Liberal idea–any notion one doesn’t like.
- Legitimate rape–allowed for alt-right males.
- MAGA–any idea, however unfounded, tariffs for example, proposed by DJT.
- Ponzi scheme–any government program one objects to.
- Socialist–see Liberal.
- Supreme Court–nine activist judges.
- Unconstitutional–any law or court decision one doesn’t like–Roe vs Wade, for example.
- White civil rights–guaranteed to some by the Constitution.
Readers are invited to add their own ideas to the list.
In my experience those who do not want to pay taxes are very happy to accept the benefits of living in the very society they do not want to support. The fact is the “money” belongs to the government in the sense that the value of money is GUARANTEED by the government. Anyone is free to print their own money and take it to the store. Then they can see if “my money” or “the government’s money” will be considered legal tender.
LikeLiked by 1 person
One might note that “Caesar’s picture” is on our money.
Rep. Reed often uses “Unconstitutional” when talking about the SAFE Act.
He does when talking about the SAFE Act, the NYS fracking ban, and anything else he dislikes. He never gives a legal argument for his opinion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What Reed fails to mention is that the SAFE ACT was challenged in court. Part of it was changed but the basic law was found to be Constitutional. But facts are not his strong suit.