• Zorque@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    2 days ago

    That’s the excuse they give, yes. That doesn’t mean it’s why they do it, though.

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Sure, one action can have multiple reasons and outcomes. I agree with it in part that I need to pay my fair share of road taxes. I also recognize that this is a relatively new market force, and highly accurate consumption-to-taxation isn’t in place yet (again, for many reasons).

      That doesn’t mean it’s why they do it, though.

      Its not the only reason they do it.

      • Zorque@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Its not the main reason they do it.

        More money is, of course, nice for them. But that doesn’t mean it’s their main reason. We can ascribe all sorts of benevolent reasoning to politicians, but reality often disagrees.

        It’s a regressive policy made as a reaction, and not an action, and thus inherently destructive.

        • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          It’s a regressive policy

          Agreed.

          made as a reaction

          Agreed.

          and not an action,

          Err, clearly an action. A reaction IS an action by definition.

          and thus inherently destructive.

          Point of order, counselor. Conclusion not supported by the facts. If you apply your same logic ( and conclusions) to the COVID lockdowns, then your conclusion would be those were unnecessarily destructive.