Extravagent Precedents.

Listening to the television news, I've just heard someone (a trade union official, I suspect) saying that if the government can afford to bail out the banks, it can afford to sort out the post office. The logic is questionable.

Extravagant expenditure does not justify further expenditure; quite the opposite it often makes it necessary to economise. It would be more sensible to argue that because the government has spent so much on the banks, it can't afford to sort out the Post Office as well.

Modest expenditure may create a precedent; over lavish expenditure does the opposite it, making further expenditure harder.