So Stephen Harper is on the attack against the per-vote subsidy again and, the way he explains it, the system is a true travesty to democracy and an affront to tax payers. After all, no patriotic Canadian would want to fund the separatists nor would any proud CEO willingly slide a twoney to a socialist.
Well according to Harper, that's the way it works. Each party gets a $2 per vote subsidy and it's right out of your pocket.
It's so awful that you shouldn't even have to think about it! Especially because, if you do think about it, you'll realize that Harper's spin is just another example of his only tool, i.e. Fallacious Arguments. This one, we like to call a non-sequitur (it does not follow). Go ahead, look it up.
To review, Harper maintains that if party A get's money, it came from you.
If we look at it logically...
If I vote for party A, that vote earns party A the $2 per vote subsidy. My vote caused that subsidy, that two bucks came from me, I directed it.
If you vote for party B, that vote earns party B the $2 per vote subsidy. Your vote caused that subsidy, that two bucks came from you, you directed it.
If your neibour didn't bother to vote, no one gets his two bucks so he should go buy a coffee and shut up.
Naturally, you can't trace the tradgectory of every tax dollar you pay but Harper wants you to picture in your mind's eye that the tax you just paid on a tank of gas goes straight to whatever boogyman he's trying to scare you with that day. THAT does not follow.
It's a bit like inviting Harper to a pot luck. Everyone contributes for everyone but don't be surprised if he gets all pissy at anyone who dares eat some of his tuna salad.
Well according to Harper, that's the way it works. Each party gets a $2 per vote subsidy and it's right out of your pocket.
It's so awful that you shouldn't even have to think about it! Especially because, if you do think about it, you'll realize that Harper's spin is just another example of his only tool, i.e. Fallacious Arguments. This one, we like to call a non-sequitur (it does not follow). Go ahead, look it up.
To review, Harper maintains that if party A get's money, it came from you.
If we look at it logically...
If I vote for party A, that vote earns party A the $2 per vote subsidy. My vote caused that subsidy, that two bucks came from me, I directed it.
If you vote for party B, that vote earns party B the $2 per vote subsidy. Your vote caused that subsidy, that two bucks came from you, you directed it.
If your neibour didn't bother to vote, no one gets his two bucks so he should go buy a coffee and shut up.
WHY IS THIS SO HARD TO UNDERSTAND?
Naturally, you can't trace the tradgectory of every tax dollar you pay but Harper wants you to picture in your mind's eye that the tax you just paid on a tank of gas goes straight to whatever boogyman he's trying to scare you with that day. THAT does not follow.
It's a bit like inviting Harper to a pot luck. Everyone contributes for everyone but don't be surprised if he gets all pissy at anyone who dares eat some of his tuna salad.
Comments