Comment 99283

By StephenBarath (registered) | Posted March 28, 2014 at 08:42:32 in reply to Comment 99219

I'm not sure that applies. “Fiscal conservatism” refers to a set of general opinions (a general aversion to deficit spending, an interest in using resources efficiently, so on). One is not a fiscal conservative just because one likes the way the term sounds. If a person does not hold those opinions, that person cannot be properly labelled a “fiscal conservative” (by himself or by others).

So, yes: No true fiscal conservative would want his unsustainable lifestyle to be subsidized by other people’s tax dollars (because part of the definition of “fiscal conservative” is an aversion to subsidies when they can be properly avoided).

Justin makes good points in the article about the economic benefits of bicycle infrastructure. I'm convinced (by this and by other analyses) that it's the fiscally prudent thing to do, along with the sensible thing for other reasons. He then challenges people who would probably accept his arguments to disprove them. I don’t understand this. The people writing in to the Spectator are not fiscal conservatives, they are just people who enjoy having their preferences subsidized by others and want that to continue and are willing to be disingenuous to do it.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools

Feeds