You think that you've made some sort of a point but if you want me to build a bridge just for you, then you'll have to pay me for it.
However, if you want the government to do it then you had better start with your mayor. If you take to the federal government then you are forcing me to pay for a bridge that I will never get to use.
You see how that works? This is why it is always a bad idea to support the federal government when they start droning on about infrastructure.
It all has to do with a return on the money stolen from you and me. This is a foreign concept to the left and really most of America, but if a government is going to take what I earned then they had better use it on something that I will get a return on my investment.
If the city builds a bridge, I still may never use that bridge but it is available for me. If the county builds a bridge then there is a much less likelihood that I will use it. If the state builds a bridge then the likelihood is far more remote that I will use it.
If the federal government builds a bridge then I most likely will never even be in the state it was built in let alone see the bridge. And if the federal government does build that bridge on the road that I take every day to work then 99% of the nation is paying for a bridge they will never use or even see. They get nothing for it.
I used to live near Kansas City several years ago. They passed a special tax for a new stadium. My thought was why is the city building the stadium. I don't remember now what sport was going to be played there but sports teams are not government teams. Shouldn't the team build the stadium? Then I thought, what if I don't like that sport? What about grandmothers living on their own on a fixed income who have no interest in sports. Should the city steal their money for that stadium? Fortunately I lived outside of the Kansas City city limits so that tax was not imposed on me.
