Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Broken_Clock who wrote (111696)	2/24/2008 2:01:36 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 132070

That also doesn't amount to a subsidy, or if you look at it another way its a subsidy for the gardens. The gardens are not limited just to the wealthy. Its not a subsidy for the rich its a government program that provides something for people of any income level who happen to visit. You can argue its a bad program, perhaps it costs too much for too little benefit, or perhaps the resources spent on it could be used elsewhere to better effect, but even if we assume these points are true, that just makes it a bad idea, not a subsidy for the rich. The program may be located in an area that it serves more rich people, but its not like rich people only live at that location. Other rich people may find the lack of parking inconvenient, or might not like gardens all that much. Are they subsidized? Campaign against the program if you want. If I lived there I might join you. But its not generally a subsidy for the rich, at most its a subsidy for a specific special interest, people in a certain location who happen to like visiting these gardens. As such its a typical special interest program, of which we have far too many, but not a general subsidy to the rich.