Sometimes, not only in English but in all languages, we want to emphasize certain situations. And then the language itself gives us devices that aren't always common, but we use them anyways, based on known and meaningful expressions.
I am very hungry
We can depict that the subject has surpassed the status of just "hungry" for they must have stayed a long time without eating. This is a known meaningful expression.
Murder is very illegal
From this, even if it doesn't make much sense in the binary nature of the word "legal", we can depict that "murder" is a crime that, morally or ethically, has surpassed the status of "illegal".
We can state that by looking at another not-so-serious crime:
Parking on the sidewalk is illegal
Yeah, we all know it is illegal and wrong. But it is a petty crime compared to murder. In some countries murder is penalized with life imprisonment, even with death penalty, while parking on the sidewalk gives you a fine and, in the worst of the cases, your car is towed.
We can still say that "Murder is illegal", of course it is, but in the sentence, the "very illegal" was made to emphasize.
This product is becoming cheaper.
means that, at this time, the price of the product is less than it was in the past, and the price may continue to fall.
This product becomes cheaper.
The simple present is typically used to express habitual, regular, or typical actions or situations, and in that light, the statement above is semantically incomplete. We would expect to find something like
This product becomes cheaper when it is purchased in larger
quantities.
This product becomes cheaper when it is purchased in conjunction with
an MSDN subscription.
Best Answer
Wouldn't (or would not) is the conditional form of won't (or will not).
Don't (or do not) is the negative form of do.
Essentially, the sentence
has the same meaning as:
In this context, the first part of the statement (the "hypothetical" half) is left out because we tend to understand the conditional phrase even without the "if" part of the sentence. Based on the context of the sentence, we infer the part that is missing.
Using "don't" instead of "wouldn't" changes the meaning of the phrase, but not greatly. For example, you could say:
There are other sentences you could make with that phrase—these are just examples. However, the important point to notice is that it changes the meaning from being a hypothetical situation to a factual statement. Also, "would" tends to have a polite or teaching suggestion tone to it, while "don't" is less polite. "Don't" can be harsh or simply factual based on the person's tone.
(This is based on my impressions of the two from English-speaking Canada.)