>I'm with you on this one - I would kind of favor them not taking the money in the first place rather than later deciding 'oops we took too much so we will benevolently return some smattering to those whose money it was in the first place ... minus what we will give to those who never paid it to begin with so they will vote for us and we can then take it all back ... '

handling the cries for panem et circenses is a task for every government - today mostly handled somewhere between the streets and the ballots...

>
>I guess 'Vote for me and I'll cut your taxes' is pretty close to 'Vote for me and I'll give you money' <s> but somehow it just sounds more fiscally honest as the latter implies 'Vote for me and I'll give you somebody else's money'

"fiscally honest" and talking about political slogans ? Reread: ahh yes, "sounds more" <bg>