The Journal Sentinel sure has been talking the 'big spender' game lately. Often, the self-proclaimed Watchdog is preaching about cutting government spending, firing public workers, pretty much bashing anything the public sector does (other than corporate welfare).
They've discussed Misplaced Priorities, regarding the maintenance of public infrastructure. They've talked of Maintenance Required concerning our roadways. In The Bigger Concern, they even proclaim the government should spend now, rather than institute a period of austerity, to help the economy.
Quite the flip-flop for the tax-averse newspaper. Yet, I haven't seen any articles speaking of the need for increased taxes to help pay for these needs. (I've actually never seen an honest discussion of taxes in the Journal.)
It's not class warfare to say the rich should pay more. Especially in times of war and dire need. Decades ago some felt it was their duty to their country to help, to give back. If you can afford to, you should pay more.
So, how can the Journal be for all these public projects without also supporting the tax dollars which allow such? And, maybe if they extolled the virtues of everyone paying their fair share, our infrastructure wouldn't be in such sorry shape, because we'd have the tax dollars to have properly-maintained and world-class amenities.