Why politicians don't cut spending

Picture a policy taking a penny from a million people, giving $10,000 to one. Will a million notice the penny loss? Probably not, but the recipient will definitely rejoice.

Now, imagine politicians promising spending cuts, desired by voters. But the specifics reveal a dispersed benefit and concentrated cost. The chances of your single vote changing the outcome of an election is near zero, more likely to meet with an accident on your way to vote.

And here's the twist: voters largely stay uninformed of these policies, while interest groups, directly impacted by these policies, stay well-informed. Take farmers receiving subsidies: they know which politicians back them, they support these politicians financially, ensuring their subsidies stay intact.

However, the cost of these subsidies, spread among average Americans, goes unnoticed. Propaganda makes them feel good about supporting farmers, oblivious to the inefficiencies. These interest groups don't just lobby to get benefits but to maintain them. And that's why, despite popular sentiment, spending never decreases.

LEARN LIBERTY:

[voterepublicans]

You visit any capital building and you will find plenty of people knocking on doors asking for something that benefits them but nobody there lobbying to reduce government spending. Any politician that opposes this will soon find their office moved to the broom closet. As a taxpayer It's truly a horrifying thing to witness.

[utoobuser]

Did you see tha national infra structure bill? It is so full of fluff add ons that have NOTHING to do with infrastructural needs! And that is one of the big ways the pad the the spending . One bill, one subject, quit stuffing them

[robertsmalls]

The National Science Foundation would make a much more convincing argument than talking about farmer subsidies

[WitnessingTyranny]

Interesting that with the weapons industry and pharma this video chose farmers as the scapegoats. Propaganda in action.