A simple mistake. Some in our society are dependent on the State for life itself while others are dependent on the State for their lifestyle. You might like to equate yourself with the weakest and most disadvantaged in our society but really you have chosen your dependency on the State. I have no doubt that your lifestyle would be severely impacted by higher taxes, - even a wealth tax, but I doubt very much that it could be compared to the withdrawal of essential health services, respite for carers, or learning support for disabled children.
If I have a minority view, that doesn't make it wrong.
I don't for a moment think that someone with a minority view is 'wrong'. I can see valid arguments for voting no and valid arguments for voting yes. I find it a little odd that you seem to think that choosing to work in the public service is 'choosing dependency on the state' but if you are arrogant enough to write off the complex and varying motivations of 300,000 people, there is not a lot of point in arguing the toss.
I'm not even going to address your comment about my personal/family circumstances in terms of tax and extent of our dependency on the public health service, because it is beneath contempt.
I asked a simple question - do you genuinely think that most of the 'no' voters are doing so because they think the state is spending too much on public service and welfare payments? And would they be happy with the result of a no vote being a massive entrenchment of vital public services and severe cuts in social welfare?
Nice attempt to twist things around and label people 'libertarians'.
Indeed you managed to tar 'no' voters as being SF and ULA too.
Blue Horseshoe nailed it earlier; a yes vote is a vote to continue spending at elevated levels, a wholesale denial of reality.
I am not 'tarring' anyone. I am simply pointing out that most Pinsters are arguing for a No vote because they want government spending to stop, but that almost every other political voice advocating for a No vote is doing so because they believe that governmet cuts have gone too far/affected to wrong groups in society.
Just take a look at the ULA and Sinn Fein posters. The slogal is 'austerity hasn't worked'. Do you think this means they are hoping for more austerity? Or really, genuinely, believe that a couple of percentrage points of the higher rate of PAYE is going to fill a 20 billion hole in the public finances?
Incidentally, one of the reasons I am voting Yes is that it will hasten the day that the political establishment are forced to face up to the fact that the deal under the Croke Park agreement that PS salaries can not be touched is unworkable and immoral. This is likely to directly impact negatively on my own income.