@Mikehotel152; I hear your economic arguments. I totally accept that for some companies and aircraft types (e.g. Boeing) the lack of F/O taxiing is simply cost based, and I have no issue with that (except sadness that offering ever cheaper tickets to passengers prevails over properly equipped fleets and proper pilot training).
However, when anybody says that a qualified F/O is not capable of, or not safe to taxi an aircraft, then my hackles rise. If an F/O is not capable of taxiing a modern jet safely and correctly, then they should be sat on the jump seat, not signed off in the RHS.
Apart from anything else; saying that F/Os cannot or should not taxi is a tacit admission that F/Os are not really fully trained or competant at the time they get into the RHS for the first time. Taking this line of thought further suggests that undertrained F/Os are being allowed to "fly" aircraft because if anything goes wrong in the air, "well they won't hit anything straight away and the LHS can take over" !!. This is where I do have a problem. A number of horrific crashes involving servicable aircraft being stalled until they crashed by incompetant pilots* tells me that cost cutting in our industry has gone way too far, and that dangerously undertrained 'pilots' are flying some of the world's fleet.
*I don't necessarily blame those pilots for their incompetance: In my opinion lack of proper and thorough training is becoming a serious problem in our industry.