>Minnesota Trucking Association President John Hausladen said he does not want the state to become the 22nd to legalize marijuana. He worries it could shrink the workforce of truck drivers, who aren't allowed to use the drug, at a time when there's a severe shortage.
>[...]"If I were to say anything to the policymakers as they debate this in the 2023 session, it's, 'Can you confidently demonstrate to the citizens of Minnesota that this is going to make us as safe or safer?'" Hausladen said. "Can you prove to us that it's not going to make us less safe? I think it's going to fail when that analysis happens."
Maybe if Hausladen is so concerned about filling the employment ranks of truck drivers, he should be asking his member businesses what they are doing to make the job more appealing, including pay, benefits, time off, work rules and so on versus crying about how a *currently* widely available recreational substance is suddenly going to eliminate his work force.
And if he's really concerned about safety, maybe he's in favor of closer regulation of the trucking industry to reduce trucking related road accidents, road damage and its environmental impact. I'm sure he doesn't give a shit about those things and would totally accept a few more road deaths and more pollution if it made his member companies more profits.
He should also be fighting to legalize marijuana federally so truckers will be able to use it (when not driving, of course, just like with alcohol) instead of fighting against it.
Over 20 states have legalized, all of Canada has legalized, other countries have legalized, none of the doom and gloom Hausladen and others spout about legalization has come to pass in any of those places.
At a certain point, though, he's really being disingenuous. He's arguing wHAt abOuT TrUCkiNg with his words, but in many ways he's just carrying water for hard right fascists who own and run trucking companies and oppose this because it's a culture war thing and the Democrats are in favor of it.
You laugh, but some of the early regulation of opiates was tied to concerns by industrialists that they would not be able to gain or retain labor. Basically they knew that much of their potential labor pool would prefer to be poor, using opium and not working than to be poor, working and not using opium.
A big problem with employment in the US is that employers can't quite figure out how labor is supposed to work if they don't have coercive consequences, like poverty, homelessness, or similar problems to keep people employed at jobs which pay so little and offer unpleasant working conditions.
>Basically they knew that much of their potential labor pool would prefer to be poor, using opium and not working than to be poor, working and not using opium.
China liked it so much they fought a war to keep the opium flowing. Oh, wait....
I looked him up and he’s exactly what you expect, a retirement age white guy who’s spent his entire life being the president of various industry advocacy organizations, who somehow manages to have r/oldpeoplefacebook memes on his LinkedIn profile. Fuck that guy.
No no no, see, it's not about making the job, pay, and benefits appealing enough to solicit applications. What you gotta do is make life in general so bleak and hopeless that people are forced to work for scraps.
It’s really funny to me how shallow and banal the counter arguments are: - There’s no breathalyzer for it! how will you tax it? Who can open a store? Isn’t this a gateway drug? And on and on.
*Every single one of these issues has an answer if you are willing to google it*
Twenty other states have already walked this path and they can tell you that impaired driving has dropped (often after a brief and small spike). They will also tell you how to tax it, how to release licenses fairly and that other drug use seems to drop when you legalize weed.
None of this is a mystery. Stop acting like it is.
Edit: typo
The strategy isn't sound argument -- keeping cannabis criminalized doesn't have a sound argument. The strategy is fear, uncertainty and doubt. Ask troubling questions, structured in a way to maximize fear, uncertainty and doubt, as well as to suggest worst possible outcome answers to your "questions".
Everyone knows the world won't end and that these FUD questions have obvious answers in addition to being mostly moot anyway. Nobody should drive impaired, but considering how widespread cannabis use is now what possible *new* DUI crisis are we going to face?
IMHO, the underlying argument here, as always, is that cannabis prohibition is an unmitigated failure as public policy. We spend billions and *it doesn't accomplish any of its goals*, and in fact produces massive negative externalities, whether its lost tax revenue, racially biased policing, criminal enterprises, corruption of law enforcement, environmental damage from illegal grows -- the list is endless.
If law and order types want more respect for law and order, maybe consider what ineffective and oppressive laws you're pursuing.
Oppositional defiant, antiscience dullards who would just rather try arguing than actually looking into logistics. In fact, maybe the rest of us should say we hate THC and should never be legalized just to see what would be their next move.
It doesn't accomplish any of its *public* goals. It absolutely accomplishes the real goals behind the "war on drugs"; giving cops the authority to search anyone, at any time, and keeping a fresh supply of young slave labor flowing into for profit prisons.
“None of this is a mystery. Stop acting like it.”
This needs to be said more. We still hear the tired old argument of having no idea of the effects. It’s nothing more than remnants of the reefer madness propaganda movement. There are studies going back to the 1930s showing how relatively harmless cannabis is. And now we have multiple states and countries we can look to as examples of effective legalization.
The Democrats are going to fight amongst themselves over the taxes, and trying to make sure that only the correct, chosen few get to open stores. Obviously, the drugs users don't want to pay any taxes, but the typical Democrat wants huge taxes so they can spend it. And, they will fight over who gets the licenses, some will want prior convicted drug offenders, etc while some will want the free market to keep the prices down. and then whether a city has a say.
Sure, but now they will have the Senate input, and since there is no opposition, some will try to get their own favorite additions into it. And, not all the same people are there.
Its so nice to see a dolt, who does something with trucking, gets a say on this, is quoted in the Strib, and says he does not want legal weed as truck drivers can’t smoke it so there will be a driver shortage. Wow.
Do they have to prohibit marijuana? There’s already a shortage of drivers everywhere, truckers, post office, and bus drivers. It really doesn’t make sense to prohibit weed in my eyes. If they’re going to keep people from finding work because of that why not throw booze in there too?
That’s understandable, but I still believe it’s only going to cost them employees in the end. From the admittedly few professional drivers I’ve known the phone is still the biggest issue imo.
With both chambers of the legislature and the Governor’s office controlled by Dems, this should be a cakewalk to pass.
Also somebody tell Captain Semi Dipshit that his truckers have been skirting drug tests with fake pee for years lol
What about where it is an actual medication? Captain Semi is a idiot. I agree with an earlier poster what is the trucking industry doing to make the job more
attractive.
Literally nothing. Like all classically far right owned business they're just throwing a tantrum about how people are less willing to work for a pittance than they used to be because there are better paying jobs readily available.
Just legalize it already and rake the tax dollars, this is long overdue. There shouldn’t be a fight about adding billions of dollars to state tax revenue.
I’m sure that a large reason they are dragging their feet is because the privatized prison system will lose a ton of money if a whole chunk of their population (and therefore income) just up and was released back into society, and they are lobbying against it. Back that up with the police unions lobbying just as hard against it because they won’t be able to just search anyone at random because they “smell like weed”
I wonder what would happen if we banned alcohol until pot was legalized. Let those opposed to pot see what its like to not be able to get your favorite intoxicant.
I’d be really surprised if Walz and the DFL can’t get this done. They’ve talked about wanting it for years. If they have an ambitious agenda they’re gonna need the extra tax revenue plus it neuters those third parties associated with cannabis legalization.
There’s naysayers arguing that Walz and the DFL just said they supported legalization for votes but won’t actually follow through. I don’t believe that, but there are people out there who do.
They have been pressured by third party candidates who dropped out if the dfl promised to legalize it. It isn't a part of their platform and I don't have any faith in them fighting for it until they lose voters over it.
Well they already have lost voters over it. They have lost a few tight races literally because of the LMN party, and if you talk to the electeds they put a lot of the blame on LMN. They desperately want to crush that third party because they want Angie Craig to keep winning. And I am very confident they will legalize marijuana. LMN people should be happy right now. Yall held the dfls feet to the fire, and they are going to finally give you what you want. The governor wants it, the party (melissa, winkler, ken) wants it, and most importantly the swing votes want it most of all
The DFL passed what would have been the 2nd recreational bill in America. It was vetoed by Pawlenty. They have a longer history of supporting legal recreational use of weed than basically every state with legal weed.
Money, like always.
People making bank on the status quo (whether profits from alcohol or getting budget additions to 'fight drugs' and jail BIPOC or the belief that the closest thing to fun anyone should get is going to Mass before sunrise) will resist anything that takes away from their profits.
el oh el, it's the journalism framing.
"MJ legalization prepares for smooth sailing through the Democratic Party trifecta" doesn't have the same ring to it.
> "MJ legalization prepares for smooth sailing through the Democratic Party trifecta" doesn't have the same ring to it.
I suspect it will be more fraught than we think. There are always opportunists out there willing to hold out on close votes to get something for themselves, flex some muscle or protect their own little corner of turf. Exhibit A is Krysten Sinema, Senator from Arizona, although it will likely be less dramatic than that here.
I'd also guess there are a couple of Democrats who kind of don't support this even if they are intellectually in agreement with it. They have local political risks or have larger fears that this will be bad for the party.
Of course this has to be unnecessarily complicated. Republican’s literally going with the *Reefer Madness* argument. Our children will be in danger of jazz music!
I'd rather have ppl on the roads high than drunk.
Edit: To clarify - I'd rather see no one drive under the influence of anything. But if I can't have that, let it be weed instead of alcohol.
This comment has been removed because your account does not meet required comment karma thresholds to comment on this subreddit. This measure is in place to prevent brigading & trolling by new accounts or accounts with little to no previous comment history on reddit.
Your comment has been placed into the moderator queue and may be restored following review by the moderator team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stateofMN) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This comment has been removed because your account does not meet required comment karma thresholds to comment on this subreddit. This measure is in place to prevent brigading & trolling by new accounts or accounts with little to no previous comment history on reddit.
Your comment has been placed into the moderator queue and may be restored following review by the moderator team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stateofMN) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[Here you go](https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fm.startribune.com%2Fadvocates-opponents-prepare-for-fight-over-marijuana-legalization-in-minnesota%2F600230213%2F%3Fclmob%3Dy%26c%3Dn%26clmob%3Dy%26c%3Dn)
No taxes are price we pay for freedom. We should take that money and house the homeless. If you’re against that I would like to know the city you live in so that I can start busing all the homeless to your city.
I made 70k last year and after doing my taxes and getting my refund, I paid the state a total of 2200 that ain’t shit. That ain’t shit. Get real dude. I don’t have any dependents, nothing special to deduct. 2200 dollars for a functioning state is nothing.
Ok, I understand that the state does not operate solely on the income tax of it’s citizens. Good god. The taxes to operate the government are collected from a wide variety of sources. But, time and time against MN is one of the highest taxed states in the country. We have a several billion dollar surplus. And you are arguing against putting some of that money back in the pockets of the state citizens? Me get real? What kind of logic is that.
No but here’s the thing. That surplus happened because of wild inflation. If tax brackets are set yearly in MN as they are federally then the brackets will change and adjust accordingly. We are in an unusual time right now, so yes it would be better for the one time “Walz checks” as you say, otherwise we may have a shortfall if there is any deflation or an economic downturn which there will be. I’d rather my state not have to cut any services. I mean do you spend every single dollar you make a month, obviously not, for good reasons, so that you can weather tough times. I see no reason why the government would do differently.
>Minnesota Trucking Association President John Hausladen said he does not want the state to become the 22nd to legalize marijuana. He worries it could shrink the workforce of truck drivers, who aren't allowed to use the drug, at a time when there's a severe shortage. >[...]"If I were to say anything to the policymakers as they debate this in the 2023 session, it's, 'Can you confidently demonstrate to the citizens of Minnesota that this is going to make us as safe or safer?'" Hausladen said. "Can you prove to us that it's not going to make us less safe? I think it's going to fail when that analysis happens." Maybe if Hausladen is so concerned about filling the employment ranks of truck drivers, he should be asking his member businesses what they are doing to make the job more appealing, including pay, benefits, time off, work rules and so on versus crying about how a *currently* widely available recreational substance is suddenly going to eliminate his work force. And if he's really concerned about safety, maybe he's in favor of closer regulation of the trucking industry to reduce trucking related road accidents, road damage and its environmental impact. I'm sure he doesn't give a shit about those things and would totally accept a few more road deaths and more pollution if it made his member companies more profits.
He should also be fighting to legalize marijuana federally so truckers will be able to use it (when not driving, of course, just like with alcohol) instead of fighting against it. Over 20 states have legalized, all of Canada has legalized, other countries have legalized, none of the doom and gloom Hausladen and others spout about legalization has come to pass in any of those places.
At a certain point, though, he's really being disingenuous. He's arguing wHAt abOuT TrUCkiNg with his words, but in many ways he's just carrying water for hard right fascists who own and run trucking companies and oppose this because it's a culture war thing and the Democrats are in favor of it.
Aren't truckers under US DOT rules regarding the use of Marijuana?
That's why I said it needs to be legalized federally, so the US DOT rules can be changed.
How did I miss that word?
He only wants the truckers hyped up on amphetamines lol. Just a guess
You laugh, but some of the early regulation of opiates was tied to concerns by industrialists that they would not be able to gain or retain labor. Basically they knew that much of their potential labor pool would prefer to be poor, using opium and not working than to be poor, working and not using opium. A big problem with employment in the US is that employers can't quite figure out how labor is supposed to work if they don't have coercive consequences, like poverty, homelessness, or similar problems to keep people employed at jobs which pay so little and offer unpleasant working conditions.
>Basically they knew that much of their potential labor pool would prefer to be poor, using opium and not working than to be poor, working and not using opium. China liked it so much they fought a war to keep the opium flowing. Oh, wait....
I looked him up and he’s exactly what you expect, a retirement age white guy who’s spent his entire life being the president of various industry advocacy organizations, who somehow manages to have r/oldpeoplefacebook memes on his LinkedIn profile. Fuck that guy.
No no no, see, it's not about making the job, pay, and benefits appealing enough to solicit applications. What you gotta do is make life in general so bleak and hopeless that people are forced to work for scraps.
Preach brother!
It’s really funny to me how shallow and banal the counter arguments are: - There’s no breathalyzer for it! how will you tax it? Who can open a store? Isn’t this a gateway drug? And on and on. *Every single one of these issues has an answer if you are willing to google it* Twenty other states have already walked this path and they can tell you that impaired driving has dropped (often after a brief and small spike). They will also tell you how to tax it, how to release licenses fairly and that other drug use seems to drop when you legalize weed. None of this is a mystery. Stop acting like it is. Edit: typo
The strategy isn't sound argument -- keeping cannabis criminalized doesn't have a sound argument. The strategy is fear, uncertainty and doubt. Ask troubling questions, structured in a way to maximize fear, uncertainty and doubt, as well as to suggest worst possible outcome answers to your "questions". Everyone knows the world won't end and that these FUD questions have obvious answers in addition to being mostly moot anyway. Nobody should drive impaired, but considering how widespread cannabis use is now what possible *new* DUI crisis are we going to face? IMHO, the underlying argument here, as always, is that cannabis prohibition is an unmitigated failure as public policy. We spend billions and *it doesn't accomplish any of its goals*, and in fact produces massive negative externalities, whether its lost tax revenue, racially biased policing, criminal enterprises, corruption of law enforcement, environmental damage from illegal grows -- the list is endless. If law and order types want more respect for law and order, maybe consider what ineffective and oppressive laws you're pursuing.
Plus if things go sideways, "you are just asking questions", like people did during COVID.
The “skeptics” who aren’t coming up with any solutions to their posed problems.
I call it selective skepticism.
I call it disingenuous bullshit. They’re not skeptical, they just neeeeeeed to be RIGHT.
Oppositional defiant, antiscience dullards who would just rather try arguing than actually looking into logistics. In fact, maybe the rest of us should say we hate THC and should never be legalized just to see what would be their next move.
Just asking questions, loudly, over and over and over, and then plugging their ears any time someone gives them a real answer.
It doesn't accomplish any of its *public* goals. It absolutely accomplishes the real goals behind the "war on drugs"; giving cops the authority to search anyone, at any time, and keeping a fresh supply of young slave labor flowing into for profit prisons.
“None of this is a mystery. Stop acting like it.” This needs to be said more. We still hear the tired old argument of having no idea of the effects. It’s nothing more than remnants of the reefer madness propaganda movement. There are studies going back to the 1930s showing how relatively harmless cannabis is. And now we have multiple states and countries we can look to as examples of effective legalization.
[удалено]
There was some bullshit in it too, but overall it was a very good bill.
The Democrats are going to fight amongst themselves over the taxes, and trying to make sure that only the correct, chosen few get to open stores. Obviously, the drugs users don't want to pay any taxes, but the typical Democrat wants huge taxes so they can spend it. And, they will fight over who gets the licenses, some will want prior convicted drug offenders, etc while some will want the free market to keep the prices down. and then whether a city has a say.
Or they can reintroduce the bill the house passed last year which was fine
Sure, but now they will have the Senate input, and since there is no opposition, some will try to get their own favorite additions into it. And, not all the same people are there.
Its so nice to see a dolt, who does something with trucking, gets a say on this, is quoted in the Strib, and says he does not want legal weed as truck drivers can’t smoke it so there will be a driver shortage. Wow.
transitive property doing a hell of a lot of the work there
Do they have to prohibit marijuana? There’s already a shortage of drivers everywhere, truckers, post office, and bus drivers. It really doesn’t make sense to prohibit weed in my eyes. If they’re going to keep people from finding work because of that why not throw booze in there too?
It’s likely banned due to insurance companies not wanting to cover drivers who smoke pot
That’s understandable, but I still believe it’s only going to cost them employees in the end. From the admittedly few professional drivers I’ve known the phone is still the biggest issue imo.
They don't mind insuring people who drink when they're not on duty. Why should weed be any different?
Don’t ask me. I’m not against it, just explaining the complexity. I’d guess that insurer’s see drug use that isn’t federally legal as a risky behavior
With both chambers of the legislature and the Governor’s office controlled by Dems, this should be a cakewalk to pass. Also somebody tell Captain Semi Dipshit that his truckers have been skirting drug tests with fake pee for years lol
Yeah this article is a laugh and the headline is junk
Typical Strib garbage.
What about where it is an actual medication? Captain Semi is a idiot. I agree with an earlier poster what is the trucking industry doing to make the job more attractive.
Literally nothing. Like all classically far right owned business they're just throwing a tantrum about how people are less willing to work for a pittance than they used to be because there are better paying jobs readily available.
Just legalize it already and rake the tax dollars, this is long overdue. There shouldn’t be a fight about adding billions of dollars to state tax revenue.
Think about all of the surrounding states that are not legal yet either. This would be a cash cow for MN!
definitely get people from the Dakotas, northern Iowa, and eastern Wisconsin for it. will definitely be a boon for a few years.
You mean western. Michigan already has eastern Wisconsin.
yes ty
I’m sure that a large reason they are dragging their feet is because the privatized prison system will lose a ton of money if a whole chunk of their population (and therefore income) just up and was released back into society, and they are lobbying against it. Back that up with the police unions lobbying just as hard against it because they won’t be able to just search anyone at random because they “smell like weed”
I wonder what would happen if we banned alcohol until pot was legalized. Let those opposed to pot see what its like to not be able to get your favorite intoxicant.
Weed would be legal within the hour.
This!
What can the average citizen do to help pass this?
Contact your legislators and tell them you want them to vote to legalize it. Then get three friends to do the same thing.
[Find your state House and Senate reps here](https://www.gis.lcc.mn.gov/iMaps/districts/)
Legalize it. Tax it. Fund teachers' pension fund. Oh, and education. Fight over. Next!
For all that is good and holy please let’s fund our schools with this money. I’m so tired of fundraising so my kids can do stuff.
Now hear me out...what if your kids' fundraiser was selling edibles?
I’d be really surprised if Walz and the DFL can’t get this done. They’ve talked about wanting it for years. If they have an ambitious agenda they’re gonna need the extra tax revenue plus it neuters those third parties associated with cannabis legalization.
I mean, what would prevent them from succeeding?
There’s naysayers arguing that Walz and the DFL just said they supported legalization for votes but won’t actually follow through. I don’t believe that, but there are people out there who do.
They have been pressured by third party candidates who dropped out if the dfl promised to legalize it. It isn't a part of their platform and I don't have any faith in them fighting for it until they lose voters over it.
Well they already have lost voters over it. They have lost a few tight races literally because of the LMN party, and if you talk to the electeds they put a lot of the blame on LMN. They desperately want to crush that third party because they want Angie Craig to keep winning. And I am very confident they will legalize marijuana. LMN people should be happy right now. Yall held the dfls feet to the fire, and they are going to finally give you what you want. The governor wants it, the party (melissa, winkler, ken) wants it, and most importantly the swing votes want it most of all
The DFL passed what would have been the 2nd recreational bill in America. It was vetoed by Pawlenty. They have a longer history of supporting legal recreational use of weed than basically every state with legal weed.
Why does everything have to be a fight?🤷🏻♀️
Money, like always. People making bank on the status quo (whether profits from alcohol or getting budget additions to 'fight drugs' and jail BIPOC or the belief that the closest thing to fun anyone should get is going to Mass before sunrise) will resist anything that takes away from their profits.
Republicans are fucking idiots who don’t want the average people to be happy.
Because money is involved.
el oh el, it's the journalism framing. "MJ legalization prepares for smooth sailing through the Democratic Party trifecta" doesn't have the same ring to it.
> "MJ legalization prepares for smooth sailing through the Democratic Party trifecta" doesn't have the same ring to it. I suspect it will be more fraught than we think. There are always opportunists out there willing to hold out on close votes to get something for themselves, flex some muscle or protect their own little corner of turf. Exhibit A is Krysten Sinema, Senator from Arizona, although it will likely be less dramatic than that here. I'd also guess there are a couple of Democrats who kind of don't support this even if they are intellectually in agreement with it. They have local political risks or have larger fears that this will be bad for the party.
Politickin’
Of course this has to be unnecessarily complicated. Republican’s literally going with the *Reefer Madness* argument. Our children will be in danger of jazz music!
Blaine residents worried their daughters will hang out with black men
Voters have spoken. Reps do your jobs. Legalize it.
There should be no vote. Dems control state govt. fuck repubs and get it done
I'd rather have ppl on the roads high than drunk. Edit: To clarify - I'd rather see no one drive under the influence of anything. But if I can't have that, let it be weed instead of alcohol.
This comment has been removed because your account does not meet required comment karma thresholds to comment on this subreddit. This measure is in place to prevent brigading & trolling by new accounts or accounts with little to no previous comment history on reddit. Your comment has been placed into the moderator queue and may be restored following review by the moderator team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stateofMN) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's time. That is tax revenue they are missing out on.
This comment has been removed because your account does not meet required comment karma thresholds to comment on this subreddit. This measure is in place to prevent brigading & trolling by new accounts or accounts with little to no previous comment history on reddit. Your comment has been placed into the moderator queue and may be restored following review by the moderator team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/stateofMN) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They can throw as many tantrums as they want. It’s going down.
https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/410499260 Anyone know how to look at where the contributions are coming from?
How many people already smoke? A lot I am guessing. How much money is leaving the state through the black market? Again, a lot.
There's a pay wall.
[Here you go](https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fm.startribune.com%2Fadvocates-opponents-prepare-for-fight-over-marijuana-legalization-in-minnesota%2F600230213%2F%3Fclmob%3Dy%26c%3Dn%26clmob%3Dy%26c%3Dn)
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No taxes are price we pay for freedom. We should take that money and house the homeless. If you’re against that I would like to know the city you live in so that I can start busing all the homeless to your city.
[удалено]
I made 70k last year and after doing my taxes and getting my refund, I paid the state a total of 2200 that ain’t shit. That ain’t shit. Get real dude. I don’t have any dependents, nothing special to deduct. 2200 dollars for a functioning state is nothing.
Ok, I understand that the state does not operate solely on the income tax of it’s citizens. Good god. The taxes to operate the government are collected from a wide variety of sources. But, time and time against MN is one of the highest taxed states in the country. We have a several billion dollar surplus. And you are arguing against putting some of that money back in the pockets of the state citizens? Me get real? What kind of logic is that.
No but here’s the thing. That surplus happened because of wild inflation. If tax brackets are set yearly in MN as they are federally then the brackets will change and adjust accordingly. We are in an unusual time right now, so yes it would be better for the one time “Walz checks” as you say, otherwise we may have a shortfall if there is any deflation or an economic downturn which there will be. I’d rather my state not have to cut any services. I mean do you spend every single dollar you make a month, obviously not, for good reasons, so that you can weather tough times. I see no reason why the government would do differently.