Today is Labor Day in the Unites States, so it seems appropriate for me to talk about something relevant to the holiday – but what? Hmmmm….
Hey – have you noticed – there is a lot of debate these days about the proper role of government in administering social service programs? Hmmmm…. does that have a tie in to Labor Day? Let’s explore it….
Many people believe that the government should play at most a minimal role in social programs – that we should let the free market reign. Any additional social needs should be addressed through volunteerism and not through government programs.
It is often stated quite bluntly – like this: “I have worked hard and I deserve the money I have earned so why should I be forced by my government to give something back to other people?”
Here is a far more reasoned way of saying essentially the same thing: (quoted directly from the blog Hot Days and Neon Nights)
“With the health care debate raging on I keep hearing this term of “social justice.” Every time I’ve heard it used it’s had somewhat of a different definition but I think I can summarize the concept as being “equality.” These people seem to think of government entitlement programs and social welfare programs as a means to “equality.” More then that, there seems to be a deep loathing for the successful people of this country because they are, in some way, the source of this “social injustice.” The concept seems flawed to me.”
OK – there is the tie-in to Labor Day. Why should the hard working laborer (or entrepreneur) be required to give something back to society?
Because your society is partially responsible for your success.
Think about it a second. You have worked hard all of your life – in school, in your job, running your business. Yes – you deserve to be rewarded for that hard work. But none of that hard work would have meant anything if you didn’t live in a society in which hard work could actually pay off.
And how does our society pull this off – what does our society do to help you obtain success?
Is it the free market? Yes – partly – but there is a lot more to it than that.
Your government provides many social programs which support your success – be it as a student or a laborer or as an small entrepreneur or a Fortune 500 CEO.
Does your education contribute to your success? Probably. Did you attend a public school? Did you receive a subsidized student loan? Or a Federal scholarship or grant?
Do you use the Post Office as part of your work? Do your customers use the Post Office to send you payments?
Do you use public transportation to get to work? Do your customers use public transportation to get to your business?
Do you use public roads? Interstate highways? Do your customers use these? Do you ship your products on these roads? Do you receive your raw materials via these roads?
Do you rely on the police to protect you and your business? The fire department?
Is poverty a problem in your community? Does poverty in fact detract from your ability to operate a successful business because of increased risk of crime or because of declining property values? If people currently in poverty had a little more to spend might they spend some of that money at your business? Would social programs designed to ease poverty actually help your business?
Is good health important for your business? Do you lose money when employees are sick? As a laborer, do you lose money when you are sick and unable to work? Would having affordable health insurance and quality health care help you as a business owner or as a laborer?
If you have managed to get this far without answering to “yes” to any of the questions – well – then I have one last question. Are you living in a cave?
“American Prosperity” and “The American Dream” are indeed a product of hard work and entrepreneurial spirit. But never forget that these dreams are only possible because we live in a society that provides a social infrastructure that makes success possible.
Why should you have to give back to society? Because your society gives so much to you.
Didn’t Kennedy say something like that?
Tags: Business, conservative, democrat, Labor Day, left-wing, liberal, political, republican, right-wing, wordpress-political-blogs
September 7, 2009 at 11:53 am |
Most of the people who claim they’ve worked hard and don’t want to give anything back, haven’t achieved much. Their idea of working hard is going to some sh*t job everyday and just being a number on some company’s payroll.
Those who have gone to college and have actually made something of themselves don’t mind giving something back. Personally, I wouldn’t have been able to get through college without the help of government grants, scholarships, and loans, so I don’t mind paying a little more in taxes so others can have the same help.
September 7, 2009 at 2:08 pm |
RE:Why should you have to give back to society? Because your society gives so much to you.
Didn’t Kennedy say something like that?
Yea – I think it was “And so my fellow Americans, ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.”
I believe he was referring to volunteerism. To that end, on March 1, 1961, President Kennedy signed an executive order establishing the Peace Corps.
However, it had nothing to do with volunteerism to give back to American society.
Speaking of “giving back” … who decides who should give back and how much? Our government?
Shouldn’t the individual have the freedom to decide on their own?
September 7, 2009 at 2:49 pm |
Ben – not quite sure what to make of your comment. Both the Peace Corps and Americorps are programs run by the US government – and although they do call their employees “volunteers” they are in fact paid for their services (albeit not very much). So – no – Kennedy (and Clinton for Americorps) were not establishing pure volunteer programs – they were establishing Federally-run service agencies – which in fact I think is a good thing.
Yes – the Government is indeed one of the organizations who get to decide where and how much we give back to the society. Its in the constitution, in fact – to provide for the general welfare…
– hippieprof
September 7, 2009 at 3:05 pm |
Ben–
“Speaking of “giving back” … who decides who should give back and how much? Our government?
Shouldn’t the individual have the freedom to decide on their own?”
That’s why we elect representatives.
Ultimately, the government is us.
September 8, 2009 at 7:27 am |
Excellent, excellent post!
September 8, 2009 at 8:55 am |
I looked at a couple of your posts and found them interesting. Just to chime in on this one though. I get hints of something a tad worrisome in this post. Does the government exist for the people or vice versa. I think in no small way that’s the line that is the wall between the prevailing ideologies in the USA.
September 8, 2009 at 9:13 am |
Alfie….
Interesting observation.
Personally, I would say that in a representative democracy the government is the people. The people choose their representatives to do exactly that – represent their views on the larger stage.
How well this works is of course another question.
I do believe that the government tends to have a bigger picture than a smaller community – and thus the government is perhaps able to make some better decisions on how to allocate resources than the community does.
– hippieprof
September 8, 2009 at 9:57 am
Alfie–
I would agree with HP on this.
As I see it, the divide is between people who believe that government IS the people acting as a group for the common (although not always the individual) good, and
people who see the government as some sort of external entity separate from the people who elect it — some sort of enemy (see Grover Norquist).
September 8, 2009 at 9:53 am |
[...] read the rest of Labor Day Reflections to learn the many ways that society contributes to our success, and why we all have a [...]
September 8, 2009 at 10:02 am |
Is the individual’s freedom to decide for their personal welfare to be handed over to government for them to decide?
September 8, 2009 at 10:54 am |
Ben – we don’t hand our freedom to the government – we elect the government to do things we don’t have the perspective or expertise or resources to do for ourselves.
September 8, 2009 at 11:03 am
hippieprof – In your opinion, do you believe a congresswoman such as Sheila Jackson-Lee is qualified to make those decisions for me?
September 8, 2009 at 11:13 am |
Is she in your district?
September 8, 2009 at 12:09 pm |
We had a congressman who (I felt) did not do a good job of representing my interests; whose decisions I disagreed with.
I worked very hard for the election of someone who I felt would do a better job, although I did not agree with all of his positions.
This is the way a representative democracy works (again, the common welfare). If you do not want any abridgment of your freedom of action, then you are looking for anarchy — you might try to former Soviet Union, though I suspect that you would find that your freedom of action was more limited by the Russian Mafia and a corrupt government.
Each individual cannot pick and choose what limits they wish to hand over to the government; that must be a group decision made by elected representatives.
September 8, 2009 at 10:30 pm |
This always brings me back to privilege. Those privileged enough to have been handed the resources to become successful are lucky. Their privilege, of course, comes at the expense of someone else. Many people work hard and feel like they deserve everything they have, but have little insight to what role luck and privilege have played in their success. It is up to the people with privilege to recognize these structures of oppression and do their part to fight it and being willing to give up that power. And who would be willing to give up power?
September 10, 2009 at 1:48 pm |
Hippie Prof
Good post, thanks for sending…and I have no idea what blogwhoring is!!! So no worries.
I think there is a wonderful role for government….of the people, for the people, by the people. Not sure I have my prepositions in the right order.
However, in almost any case, the more power you give, the more liberty you give up.
And, unfortunately, human nature being what it is, the less “skin in the game” one has, the less important one tends to think something is.
Having said all that. I think I have a right to the money I earn. And I think that I have a responsibility to the community. I exhibit and act on that responsibility in numerous ways. I act within the laws, I provide a good product at a good service level at a good price. I do that, with competition all around me, with regulations that I adhere to, etc.
So, paying taxes for social programs, is not the only way that I help the community or give back to the community. Actually, if I employ someone or if I help someone in need on my own of if I teach someone a new marketable skill, i have given back to the community and….if that other person makes something of value out of that, for themselves, then I have served them and the community.
You see, I want the right to decide, for myself what to do with my money, for me and for my community. And the beauty of our system is that, most of the time, (NOT all the time) large groups of individuals making those decisions for themselves ……is much more efficient and much more fair…..to ALL, then any government rule, bureaucrat or officer making that decision.
Also, when individuals are left to do that, as things change……it all works because the system is flexible.
Also, (back to my human nature mention above) when individuals are left to do that….there is less opportunity for corruption, less opportunity for someone to take advantage, to beat the sytem, etc.
Please, take a look today at the undercover video released today about an ACORN office in Baltimore. Please, take an open minded view of the corruption built into the system.
So, do I love my country? Yes! Do I love my labor? Yes! Do I think I should have the chance to decide how to help my fellow man? Yes! Do I need to support the society as a whole? Yes! Do I think I should do that in a number of ways? Yes! Should I pay my taxes for schools, for roads, for defense, for the post office…? Yes! Should there be a safety net? Yes!
BUT……when does it stop. We have so many problems unfortunately caused by mandated, governmental “solutions” to other problems.
In my view, a society is stronger with more respect for the individual, more respect for personal responsibility and property and less belief in a “government” answer because a government answer usually means taking from others by rule.
I am not good at discussing this or debating this. I know how I feel about such issues, but feel I do a poor job expressing it or sharing it so others can understand. Above all I respect the individual, whether he or she is rich or poor, black or white, male or female, gay or straight, first generation or tenth generation. None of that matters to me. The beauty of this country is the freedom given to the individual and how that freedom creates opportunity for him or her and then how that is magnified when it reverberates through others.
I want the government out of everyone’s body! out of everyone’s bedroom! I am a Christian, but I want no part of any religion in any governmental building or program. Let the individual BE! Let him or her create whatever they want for themselves…as long as it does not hurt or diminish others!
May I suggest you google Dr. Walter E Williams on this (labor day, economics, etc) and other subjects? Just a thought! Thanks for the chance to converse!
Best,
Sockit!
September 10, 2009 at 2:26 pm |
sockit2me – The core elements of your thinking match mine.
I want to exercise my freedom to decide for myself how my hard earned money is applied back to the community. Sometimes it even takes the form of no money at all but is measured in time through volunteer work.
The bottom and unarguable line for me is that since I decide how my time and money are applied back into the local and national community I take an active role in shaping it. If I leave it up to government then they decide for me and it is shaped in their vision of what should be, not mine.
September 10, 2009 at 3:20 pm |
Sockit….
Blogwhoring is when you try to drive traffic to your own blog by posting links to it in other people’s blogs. It is considered OK if the link is relevant but is frowned upon when it is not. This link was certainly relevant – but I always try to be careful..
(this is a response to Ben too – though I have told him all of this before) I believe in liberty and freedom and American values just as much as you do and I agree the government should stay out of our lives as much as possible. However:
1) In a representative democracy we ARE the government – so it is really a false dichotomy to draw the distinction between “me” and “them.”
2) Volunteerism is great but it always fall short of need. Volunteerism also acts best when applied locally but often the communities in most need of assistance don’t have the resources to support local volunteer efforts. Government can and should help the gap.
3) There a lot of people out there who just take from their community and don’t give back a thing. In other words, they are greedy. I would even go to say that they essentially steal from those of us who do support the community because they benefit but don’t give in return.
– hippieprof
September 10, 2009 at 3:24 pm |
Quick response to Ben – and Paul said something similar earlier…
In any representative democracy you obviously don’t get everything you want – but that seems to be your argument – the government is bad because some times they spend my money in ways you don’t want it spent. Hey – I know – I wouldn’t have put a cent into invading Iraq if it were up to me.
But consider the opposite – if indeed we try to have a system in which everyone would get what they wanted every time the result would be absolute anarchy.
– hippieprof
September 10, 2009 at 3:40 pm |
Hippie Prof
3) There a lot of people out there who just take from their community and don’t give back a thing. In other words, they are greedy. I would even go to say that they essentially steal from those of us who do support the community because they benefit but don’t give in return.
RE above..do you mean like the great example from our Vice President?
$369 to charity on average,…when income averaged…. over $319,000. By my math that is less than .001%.
SO…the key thing is there are wonderful people and there are greedy people……..but that is no reason for the government to TAKE!
and remember the CORRUPTION almost inherent in government enterprises..
see… http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-09-12-biden-financial_N.htm
September 10, 2009 at 3:53 pm |
RE: 1) In a representative democracy we ARE the government – so it is really a false dichotomy to draw the distinction between “me” and “them.”
Yes, I know full well, but that works right up to the point where government stops listening to the people. As we can see, that has already happened.
RE:But consider the opposite – if indeed we try to have a system in which everyone would get what they wanted every time the result would be absolute anarchy.
Of course, having a system were everyone gets everything they want every time is impossible.
For the anarchy you speak of, it implies several and very ugly steps toward it have been taken.
I’m left reminded that our government exists at our convenience.
September 10, 2009 at 5:07 pm |
Ben–
is listening to the people, and trying to give them what they ask for, which is usually not possible (you can’t get something for nothing, which is what people want.
The problem is that the government (if indeed there is such a single entity
A really unpopular government gets voted out of office.
Beware of saying “what the people want” when you really mean “what I want.
September 10, 2009 at 5:12 pm |
Paul -
Ah, but the government isn’t listening. If it were listening it would be hearing that the people do not want HR-3200. They want reform, but they do not want HR-3200.
http://rightamerican.wordpress.com/2009/09/08/congressmen-supporting-hr-3200-face-repercussions/
It would appear a large segment of this really unpopular government is headed for the door.
September 10, 2009 at 5:20 pm |
Ben – Democrats were elected by a substantial majority in both legislative and executive branches. Health care reform was a major plank in the platform – and Obama outlined his plan relatively clearly pre-election. Just 7 months into the term democrats have been trying to do what they were elected to do – they ARE listening to the people. They were elected to enact sweeping reform and frankly I wish they would have the guts to do it. After last night I am thinking they just might.
The fact that public opinion polls had dipped somewhat in the face of an unprecedented disinformation campaign means essentially nothing. In fact, I am a tad angry at my guys for being swayed by it all.
– hippieprof
September 10, 2009 at 5:37 pm
hippieprof – Here’s the correct sequence of events.
The people voted Obama as president and given a mandate.
The Democratic Party then presented HR-3200 written and/or sponsored by Mr. DINGELL (for himself, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. STARK, Mr. PALLONE, and Mr. ANDREWS) to the people.
The people are rejecting it and telling congress to go back to the drawing board and to try again.
Don’t Americans have the right to reject first thing congress presents?
Shouldn’t congress be willing to accept the fact they don’t always get it right the first time, be prepared to listen to the people when they don’t and be fricking humble about it?
Don’t we deserve better?
I believe the answer to every one of the above questions is “YES!!”
September 10, 2009 at 7:15 pm |
Yes, many people have concerns about HR 3200, or at least what they think or have been told it contains.
But no, I don’t think that a majority of the population has rejected its basic thrust to the extent that there’s a mandate for starting over.
It’s easy to confuse a few loudmouths with a majority.
September 10, 2009 at 7:20 pm
And no, there is no Constitutional mechanism by which the citizenry can reject an action of Congress.
They can ‘vote the rascal’s out’.
That’s how a representative republic differs from a pure democracy (mob rule).
We elect people to represent us.
If we don’t like what they do, we elect someone else.
That’s why House members face election every two years.
September 10, 2009 at 5:26 pm |
Hp
I am not going to argue with your rose colored view. Just be prepared for disappontment, major disappointment!
Sockit
September 10, 2009 at 5:41 pm |
Sockit….
I have experienced disappointment after disappointment for the last 8 years – so – hey – I can handle a few more. But, I suspect I won’t have too many UNLESS the disinformation campaign succeeds to scuttle reform….
– hippieprof
September 10, 2009 at 6:08 pm
I hope that when you mention the disinformation campaign you realize this president is not immune to engaging in some of his own.
Mr. Obama is fond of pointing out that opponents of Democratic health care proposals have no plans of their own.
To address that point of Mr. Obama’s misinformation campaign, Rep. Tom Price, head of the Republican Study Committee, planned to attend the speech carrying a copy of H.R. 3400, the Empowering Patients First Act, which Price, who is a medical doctor, proposed in July.
Other Republicans planned to carry H.R. 2520, which is Rep. Paul Ryan’s Patients’ Choice Act, and H.R. 3218, which is Rep. John Shadegg’s Improving Health Care for All Americans Act.
Some of the GOP proposals focus on improving elements of the existing health care system, such as Medicare or Medicaid or the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), while others are more comprehensive in scope. For example, some plans would allow private insurers to offer affordable basic plans or exempt taxes from insurance bought in the individual market.
But none of the proposals has gotten a hearing, and none has much chance of getting passed since Democrats control Congress and the agenda.
No wonder Obama’s seemingly conciliatory statement that his “door is always open” draws skepticism.
Rep. Charles Boustany of Louisiana, a surgeon and the lawmaker who delivered the Republican response to the president’s speech, agreed that it wouldn’t take much for the president and the GOP to get on the same page.
“If you put tort reform in the bill and you get the government-run plan out of this bill, then now we’ve got room for some compromise,” Boustany said.
Since May, when Republicans first introduced a Patients Choice Act, GOP lawmakers have expanded on several of their proposals, few of which have caught the attention of the president.
The following is a summary of just a few others on the table:
Patients’ Choice Act
Introduced: May 20 by Wisconsin Rep. Paul Ryan.
Summary: This plan offers refundable tax credits of $2,290 to individuals and $5,710 to families to pay for health care. It would create marketplaces to offer insurance choice and make more private insurance options are available to consumers without creating a public insurance system. It would create independent health courts to resolve malpractice disputes outside the current system.
Health Care Choice Act
Introduced: July 14 by Arizona Rep. John Shadegg.
Summary: This plan allows consumers to purchase health insurance in other states.
Empowering Patients First Act
Introduced: July 30 by Georgia Rep. Tom Price.
Summary: This plan would extend tax deductions on health care premiums to the individual market and offer a low-income tax credit of $2,000 to individuals, $4,000 for couples and $5,000 for families. The plan would also allow employer to offer discounts for healthy habits.
Access to Insurance for All Americans Act
Introduced: July 31 by California Rep. Darrell Issa.
Summary: This plan would allow consumers to enroll in the same health care plan for lawmakers and federal employees. It also allows employees to transfer their coverage when they change jobs.
Patient-Controlled Healthcare Protection Act of 2009
Introduced: July 31 by Texas Rep. Louie Gohmert
Summary: This plan provides incentives for consumers to purchase private insurance with a high deductible while paying into an unlimited Health Savings Account.
Click here to get to a list of all the House Republicans’ proposals for health care reform.
September 10, 2009 at 6:12 pm |
Sorry – I left off the “click here” link:
http://rsc.tomprice.house.gov/UploadedFiles/RSC_Health_Care_Bills_Compilation–Sept2009–FINAL.doc
September 10, 2009 at 6:20 pm |
Before you accuse me of believing the Republican Party is also immune, believe me, ferreting out the truth from both sides keeps me busy.
September 10, 2009 at 7:08 pm |
Ben–
Boustany’s reply also called for allowing the purchase of out-of-state health insurance, which would gut state regulation of health insurance. The result would be insurance companies setting up branches in low regulation states and then peddling those policies nationally.
Sort of like the credit card companies operating out of Delaware and N. Dakota.
So much for state’s rights!
In general, the Republican proposals sound like a great deal for insurance companies.
In general, the Republicans seem to be asking the Democrats to give them equal say in designing health care system reform, despite the fact that the voters have shown a preference for the Democrats.
Bipartisanship is not giving the minority equal say — that’s why we have elections.
September 10, 2009 at 7:24 pm |
That’s fine. But for the Dems to invite bi-partisanship and challenge the Reps to produce alternatives only to be slammed and humiliated in public as not providing same is disingenuous at best.
So much for trust.
September 10, 2009 at 6:28 pm |
I am enjoyung reading comments from my post as secretary at a state tea party meeting
9-12 DC here we come!
September 10, 2009 at 7:11 pm |
Wait a minute… let me get this straight… you mean there is a group – presumably liberals – who are banding together under the moniker of “Tea Party” to protest… er … rally FOR the passage of a bill causing more taxes?
Keeping the spirit of what the original Tea Party was about, your group can’t really call it a Tea Party?
You guys should think up a new label or something…. maybe “Come Tread on Me” or something like that.
September 10, 2009 at 10:50 pm
In fact I wish democrats would get off their butts and mount something equivalent to a tea party – perhaps a sit in in front of FOX news until they fire Glen Beck – while simultaneously hurling hankies for his crocodile tears at the building – and maybe empty booze bottles to remind him of his past. We could throw pills at Rush Limbaugh too….. hmmm…. this would all be great but it would just give them more attention and give Glen more reasons to cry….
–hippieprof
September 10, 2009 at 11:02 pm |
Sockit sez: I am enjoyung reading comments from my post as secretary at a state tea party meeting 9-12 DC here we come!
Hey – I say bring it! Send em’ over here so I can have at’ em!
September 10, 2009 at 7:13 pm |
Sockit2me is a proud Reagan conservative!!!!!
September 10, 2009 at 7:17 pm |
Apologies are due for I thought I read the author as being HP. Der.
September 11, 2009 at 6:42 am |
HP…
interesting that you want to silence Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh!
GB and RL never put anyone in jail. They never took someone else’s money and redistributed it to someone else. They never sent someone to war,…..and on and on.
I thought you wanted Freedom and Liberty …and freedom of speech!
I absolutely loathe a few of the folks on the radio (even some conservatives) and TV, especially MSNBC. But you know what, I do not want them fired. I want them to be heard!
I find it so interesting how many from a liberal point of view so often want to silence dissent.
Please…..stick to your principles!
Sockit
September 11, 2009 at 7:17 am |
Sockit – I trust you recognized that my tongue was planted firmly in my cheek….
Note also I wasn’t actually calling for them to be silenced in any way relevant to the Constitution – even if stripped of their media jobs they would still have the right to speak out just as I am speaking out now. Nothing in the constitution says you have a right to a job on FOX…..
I also believe they need to show a bit more responsibility. They are getting very close to the “shouting fire in a crowded theater” type of speech. Their words (in many cases blatant falsifications) are feeding anger in their listeners – and that anger could well boil over into violence. The secret service reports that death threats against Obama are up 400 percent – now at an unprecidented level – and I believe that is very dangerous.
— hippieprof
September 11, 2009 at 7:46 am |
NO rational person wants any death threats, let alone anything bad to happen to OUR President Obama.
However, RL and GB have not come near the level of incitement of violence generated by MANY people….toward OUR President Bush.
Bush even had to live with a film being made about his assassination!
Hippieprof: Where was your righteous indignation at that???
Principles my friend! Principles!
September 11, 2009 at 7:58 am |
sockit – I wasn’t blogging when Bush was in office – but I have always been quick to call out my own side when I think they have crossed the line. On occasion I would hear friends say “he is not MY President” and I would remind them that they are incorrect until such as a time as they officially resign their citizenship. So – I do try to be consistent.
I also think it is crossing the line when Beck claims that Obama hates all white people. Not only is that obviously false to anyone with half a brain – but those are fighting words to those with less than the half of a brain required to recognize the statement is false. I think that is dangerous.
– hippieprof
September 11, 2009 at 8:17 am
RE:I also think it is crossing the line when Beck claims that Obama hates all white people. Not only is that obviously false to anyone with half a brain -
I have half a brain so I feel qualified to comment on this one…
GB’s statement can be classified as hyperbole, especially if taken out of context. No one, not even GB can know what resides in the heart of men.
In the end we need to recognize it’s his opinion. Having half a brain, I can recognize that and then dismiss it and move on to the real issues.
Certainly those with less than half a brain who you claim gravitate to fighting words are incapable of turning on a TV,
A few now-famous movie lines come to mind…
“Stay on target, stay on tar – get!”
“These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.”
September 11, 2009 at 11:53 am |
HP
Glad you think that the economy is recovering!
So far, my wife has been out of work for 13 months and I have been out for six months! My job was obamanated in March.
I have applied for over sixty jobs and got one interview! And no offer!
Why do you think I have so much time to blog!
Question: Are you tenured?
Question: Do you work at a public or private university?
As one who attended his first protest last April 15th at a Tea Party, and as one who is now involved in one such organization going forward….I can tell you that people are involved because yes, health care brought them forward, but I doubt it would be nearly as big a deal had healthcare not followed Cap and T(ax)rade, Stimulus, etc.
I think (maybe I just hope, but I think it is more than that) we are witnessing the turning point….the end of the liberal trend that has engulfed our government for so many years.
September 11, 2009 at 12:10 pm |
Wow – I thought I coined the term “I’ve been Obamanated” when I was laid off last Thursday.
Having been “Obamanated” is the reason I can engage in blogwhoring for most of the day which was religiously reserved for off-hours. Not anymore.
Isn’t this change thing just fricking awesome?
(Bumper sticker idea is the sole property of Ben and may not be used in whole or in part unless permission is explicitly expressed. Bumper sticker may be obtained for 4.99 plus shipping and handling. Act now and receive 2 bumper stickers for 8.99 plus shipping and handling. Operators are standing by.)
September 11, 2009 at 12:11 pm |
Sockit…
First – I am sincerely sorry to hear about your employment situation. Please understand that whatever opinionated partisan bickering I do in no means suggests that I am not understanding about all of the economic pain that is out there.
Yes – I am tenured at a private university – so my job security is relatively good. I don’t have complete security – private universities are losing students in this economy and eventually that will result in some job losses – but I am personally thankful that we are far from that point. I do recognize how very lucky I am.
As you know, employment is a trailing economic indicator – and I am indeed hoping that it will turn around soon.
I am curious, though, how you can blame this economic downturn on liberals? When Bush took over the economy was thriving – and the policies of his administration directly resulted in the steep economic decline.
– hippieprof
September 11, 2009 at 12:44 pm
Thanks for the support but to this —> “policies of his administration directly resulted in the steep economic decline.
” and to borrow your favorite colloquialism “Get real” I offer up the following evidence to the contrary.
http://rightamerican.wordpress.com/gse-meltdown-time-line/
Read it if you will, but if you do, you will see why you will have to reclassify your statement as rhetoric at best.
September 11, 2009 at 8:49 pm
Ben – I did read your article and left a comment on your blog. As I said there, your analysis is interesting but oversimplified. You seem to praise Bush for some speeches he gave but fail to mention that he failed to push through significant reform legislation despite controlling both houses of congress.
Lots of hands were dirty in the mortgage crisis – including Democrats and including Bush’s.
– hippieprof
September 11, 2009 at 12:21 pm |
RE:I think (maybe I just hope, but I think it is more than that) we are witnessing the turning point….the end of the liberal trend that has engulfed our government for so many years.
Back in 1995 the Republican Party won control of both houses of Congress for the first time since 1954.
The Republicans had an opportunity advance their brand of conservative policy making but blew it. Their time was short-lived.
Thing is, the Republican party was then and remains now populated with too many left-leaning moderates. I think they call them R.I.N.O.s
September 11, 2009 at 12:50 pm
@ Ben re: RINO’s….
As opposed to the DINO’s who populated the Democratic party.
There’s only one true progressive (Russ Feingold) in the Senate, and bugger-all few in the House (calling Pelosi a Liberal is a laugh).
The whole political spectrum has shifted to the right, and what are now called ‘moderate’ Democrats would have been Republicans twenty years ago (or Dixiecrats 40).
I was reminded of this when former Senator Dave Durenberger (R MN) participated in Tim Walz’s (D MN) town meeting.
Their positions were virtually identical — Durenberger was considered a moderate when he was in office.
September 11, 2009 at 1:09 pm |
Hello again HP!
I can see you have gotten together quite the debate going!
RE: when you said “I am curious, though, how you can blame this economic downturn on liberals? When Bush took over the economy was thriving – and the policies of his administration directly resulted in the steep economic decline.”
I tend not to give credit or blame to any President for economics…good or bad. There are so many forces at work. And, my term, or at least I thought it was my term that day months ago – obamanated- was a rib at two things
A) corporate America and the whole “job elmination” process that I have been through a number of times at different places – which is just the nature of the beast and
B) the fact that my job was in a creative field which relied heavily on companies which do work in the real estate market. …..the policies (noted above) going back to Jimmy Carter….created the seeds of the bad events that caused the housing and real estate market to downturn. There was plenty of R and D blame to go around, but – at least- during the Bush administration there was an effort, led by Rs to bring some sanity to the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacle. And Barney Frank and Chris Dodd declared all was right with those worlds, which was a lie.
Finally, I have a sense of humor so I got a kick out of that name.
Do I blame my singular job loss on Ds or Obama? No, lots of forces are at work with one person.
Do I blame the continued lack of recovery on Ds or Obama? Yes, because markets and business owners are ALL looking for some stability, are horrified at government takeovers and bailouts ( I was against the Bush one!) and are scared of new mandates, new regulations and new taxes which will all cut into their already thin margins.
You DO think it is okay for a business person – who invests time, money and passion into a risky investment…to make a margin? Don’t you?
America is wonderful. Capitalism is the greatest manna from heaven, but you know what, competition is tough, and it is worldwide and consumers have and make choices………….and many government policies and bureaucrats…have NO idea!
Do I want to be employed? You bet! Have I invested in that? Yes, including investing in a small new business for me, by myself, which likely will not Break Even (please tell me you know what I mean) in maybe two years…and will MAYBE return me to the kind of compensation I was making…….in about three plus years!
And when I make money…I spend money and I invest it….and that means a lot more people make money…etc. Right now…..that ain’t happening.
BTW…you never retorted about the fact that I brought up about Joe Biden and his wife giving $368 dollars to charity….when they raked in over $360,000 in one year. That, from the man who says it is my duty to pay more taxes! …..Do you see the injustice? the cowardice? the hypocrisy? PLEASE RETORT!
on my way to create my signs for the 9-12 event tomorrow! I will be the one with the funny signs with a message!
September 11, 2009 at 8:58 pm |
Sockit….
I am glad you don’t only blame Dems for the mortgage crisis – as I just mentioned to Ben many had dirty hands.
I am a bit curious about this statement though:
“Do I blame the continued lack of recovery on Ds or Obama? Yes, because markets and business owners are ALL looking for some stability, are horrified at government takeovers and bailouts ( I was against the Bush one!) and are scared of new mandates, new regulations and new taxes which will all cut into their already thin margins.”
All of the leading economic indicators suggest that in fact we are in recovery already – so you are essentially blaming Obama for something that does not even exist. Employment is unfortunately a trailing indicator – so even though the economy is improving it will still take a while unti we see significant job growth – but we are getting there. I know this does not really help much for someone in your situation – but indeed it looks like the economy has turned.
You state: “BTW…you never retorted about the fact that I brought up about Joe Biden and his wife giving $368 dollars to charity….when they raked in over $360,000 in one year. That, from the man who says it is my duty to pay more taxes! …..Do you see the injustice? the cowardice? the hypocrisy? PLEASE RETORT!”
It indeed seems skimpy – and if it is accurate it seems hypocritical. It seems *so* low it almost seems like it might be inaccurate – but who knows. Also note that he could be doing some charitable pro-bono work, which would not be rreported – or may even not be repoorting some. But – I don’t know.
– hippieprof
February 4, 2010 at 4:13 am |
I usually don’t ordinarily post on many Blogs, nevertheless I just has to say thank you… keep up the amazing work. Ok unfortunately its time to get to school.
September 10, 2009 at 10:03 pm |
Ben said: hippieprof – Here’s the correct sequence of events.
OK – here is my alternative sequence of events….. (from memory – some events may be slightly out of order)
The people voted Obama as president and he is given a mandate (we agree on that one). Obama had in fact campaigned based on a vision for health care very much like the one he has presented – so that is indeed a portion of his mandate. The people also gave Democrats a substantial majority in both houses.
Obama and the Democratic congress manage to pass a sweeping stimulus bill – mostly without Republican support – but with three key Republicans crossing party lines to pass the bill. Tea Party protests are organized, but fail to kill the stimulus. This makes right-wing Republicans very nervous.
Arlen Specter changes parties – so Democrats need fewer crossover votes.
Al Franken is seated – again making the task easier for Democrats. Democrats now have a filibuster-proof majority even without crossover votes.
Frightened Republican operatives use their extensive undercover spy network to infect Robert Byrd and Ted Kennedy with life threatening illnesses essentially taking two votes from the Democratic column. (OK – so perhaps this last is a stretch – but it would make a great plotline in a John Grisham novel….
)
Obama announces that health care reform is the next thing on the table.
The health insurance industry is suddenly very nervous – Obama managed to get the stimulus passed – and now has an even larger majority in the Senate. Reform could very well pass – which would greatly curtail the super-normal profits the industry currently earns. The industry begins pouring huge amounts of money into defeating reform – and in fact does this before HR 3200 is even drafted. The flow of money from insurance special interests is in fact well documented – this is NOT conspiracy theory. Part of the plan includes an unprecedented disinformation plan – following the model of the attack used against Clinton in 1993 but now including FOX news and conservative talk radio as mechanisms. The aim – as with the campaign against Clinton – is to scare key constituents away from reform – seniors in particular.
A summer of protests begin in which well-meaning citizens who have been duped by industry start yelling the untruths that the insurance industry has been putting out as talking points (again – this is documented – it is not some grand conspiracy theory). Understandably, some people who have not been following the issue closely begin to believe these false assertions – after all, if you repeat a lie often enough it becomes the truth, right? As a result of the disinformation public opinion polls start to turn.
Democrats – particularly “Blue Dogs” start to get nervous and start to waffle – Republicans sense this and push their advantage. It starts to look like the insurance industry might prevail again…. until…..
(this is my preferred ending to the story)….
On September 8th 2009 Barak Obama shows some leadership skills and rallies Democrats to get the job done. He rightly calls out Republican fear mongers and squarely places the blame where it belongs – with the insurance industry. Public opinion turns and Democrats summon the guts to act on the mandate they were given in November.
– hippieprof
September 10, 2009 at 11:01 pm |
Ben sez: I hope that when you mention the disinformation campaign you realize this president is not immune to engaging in some of his own.
I continue to maintain that the industry-funded disinformation campaign is unprecedented – except perhaps when we consider the same type of campaign they ran in 1993 the last time a serious attempt at reform occurred.
Telling seniors that they are likely to be euthanized by a panel of bureaucrats is a far more serious (and fear provoking) claim than the very minor distortions you mention – and frankly many of the ones you mention are debatable. None of the examples you mention are likely to invoke mortal fear.
I can imagine the fear in poor Margaret and Helen now: “Oh my Helen! The Republicans don’t have an alternative plan! I might die because of that! Lets organize a tea party protest and call Republicans Nazis and claim Sarah Palin was really born in Russia! We must stop these Republicans from not having a plan at any cost….”
Get real Ben – it isn’t even close to being in the same ballpark….
– hippieprof
September 11, 2009 at 7:49 am |
Disinformation is disinformation. To use his words, “calling out” Obama IS getting real.
RE:Telling seniors that they are likely to be euthanized by a panel of bureaucrats
I see it as hyperbole and choose to move on and focus on the words of the President himself.
RE:None of the examples you mention are likely to invoke mortal fear.
They are not designed to. The examples I chose to talk about are my attempt to stick with sources of inaccuracies and to present the facts. Fear has no place in this discussion However, speaking of fear….
“Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it the most. And more will die as a result.” Barak Obama, Speech given on September 9, 2009, to joint assembly of Congress.
September 11, 2009 at 8:06 am |
RE:On September 8th 2009 Barak Obama shows some leadership skills
There is a twisted part of me which actually entertains the notion he IS successful and the bill passes. If that were to happen, boy… if you think Tea Parties and irate citizens speaking their mind at town halls is any indication of the degree of dissent … then what we’ve witnessed so far will pale by comparison to what could happen next.
Remember, Obama’s leadership skills were honed as a community organizer. Clearly he’s in over his head.
The issues on which he attempts to create support are not like those he’s dealt with before. The fate of the bill is in the hands of the core supporters in the senate.
September 11, 2009 at 11:04 am |
Ben said: ” However, speaking of fear…. (quoting Obama) “Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it the most. And more will die as a result.”
I guess I don’t see that as fear mongering – I see it as accurately describing the truth. Obama is quite correct that everyone in the room knew exactly what will happen if nothing is done. Even conservatives don’t dispute that.
It is fear mongering when Beck says “Obama hates white people” – you and I know very well that what he is REALLY saying amounts to “watch out white America – the angry black man is going to come get you!” That is the absolute essence of fear mongering – especially despicable because it is racial fear mongering.
– hippieprof
September 11, 2009 at 11:17 am |
Ben invoked Star Wars by saying….. “These aren’t the droids you’re looking for.”
I am actually pleased you bring this up – because it nicely summarizes a point I have been trying to make….
Obi Wan goes on to say: “The Force can have a strong influence on the weak-minded….”
In my view “Darth Beck” (along with Darth Limbaugh and Darth Dobbs) is indeed using his mastery of the dark side to influence weak minds. As I mentioned in the last post – when he invokes the the image of “the dangerous angry black man” he is indeed inciting fear in those with weak minds – and perhaps even inciting violence. It is absolutely irresponsible for him to be doing that – and I seriously fear someone will be hurt.
– hippieprof
September 11, 2009 at 11:36 am |
Ben says: (regarding Obama/Democrats succeeding in getting reform passed) “if you think Tea Parties and irate citizens speaking their mind at town halls is any indication of the degree of dissent … then what we’ve witnessed so far will pale by comparison to what could happen next.”
Hey – bring it! Seriously – I have said from the start that I would be willing to sacrifice Democratic control of both the White House and Congress IF it meant we would have sweeping reform. In fact, I have repeatedly urged Democrats to have some guts stop being so concerned with reelection.
Actually, though – I doubt the protests would be nearly as intense if there was no specific bill to fight against. With the stimulus working as planned and the economy recovering there won’t be much motivation anymore. Perhaps when we tackle cap and trade we will see some outburst – but that is so much farther removed from everyday consciousness I frankly doubt it…..
– hippieprof