- Mar 13, 2016
- 7,959
- 8,121
- AFL Club
- Carlton
I can reconcile for the greater good it gets done. This does not mean it should be their responsibility or is fair, but it does fall to their hands. There is nothing inconsistent about it. You can believe in (or accept something needs to be done a certain way) but still see the negatives with that solution.The problem you've got is that by using rhetoric like this:
... you signal an implied attitude that sits diametrically at odds with a desire to fund aspects of the education system.
My problem is entirely that you want to have your cake - ask why it's Gina's responsibility to fund the life of Dazza, Shazza et al - and eat it - believe in commonwealth, state sponsored tertiary education. Either drop the rhetoric and you're free to paint the situation as luridly as you like, or deal with the fact that your rhetoric doesn't match you supposed beliefs and you're going to get lynched over the inconsistency.
Train headed for 5 people on a track. You can divert to another track where only 1 person is.
Sure as shit aint fair on that 1 person but for the greater good I am rediverting.