If I may explain, the disconnect is that your BBM Facebook Friends (TM) are evaluating, not the abstract principle "government subsidy" but the specific physical item being subsidized. If enough people can be convinced that an item is desirable, government may subsidize it with other people's money. The name we give to this manner of government is "democracy."
I take this opportunity to ask Brother Keith to remind us of the early American story he recounted here once before, of a Senator on the stump encountering a constituent who lectured him on the immorality of aid to veterans' widows from the public treasury.
You have probably tried asking BBMFF, "If oil company subsidies are bad, why?" And they probably answered, "Because they're rich." All the while, the concept of 'subsidy' goes unexamined.
Correct, brother jg. Sadly, correct.
& I actually know this one: it was Davy Crockett and Horatio Bunce.
Yes, the famous Horatio Bunce story. If I could send every legislator in both houses of Congress to the re-education camps and hammer just one lesson into them with aversion therapy, it would be this one - and when their subconscious memories of the electric shocks and the pliers prevent them from ever voting the wrong way on a similar bill again, the Republic and fiscal sanity will have been restored.
Amen. The other angel in American History was President Cleveland. The Republican Congress would send up bills to give $25 to a Civil War widow just to embarrass him. But he did it again and again. I am pretty sure he still holds the veto record. HOSS!
Cleveland holds the two-term record at 584. FDR had 635, but had to go into overtime to get there.
Of course, Cleveland's were in defense of limited government, where Roosevelt's were about monkeying with the economy. There are good vetoes, and bad ones.