I would argue there is a third. I'm open to taxes going up if the extra money is used effectively. Also what behavior are the funds incentivizing? If they are not used effectively or the incentivized behavior is not optimal then I am against them. For example cities like LA and SF give money to the homeless with virtually zero requirements so they are in effect incentivizing homeless people to move there and stay homeless. I am against this. I would be for spending money to clean homeless people up and get them jobs and provide shelter until they have acclimated back into society. The program would require actual proof of the participants trying to fix their circumstances. I am always for feeding and caring for homeless kids.