Tuesday, March 16, 2010

Why would the Tea Partiers actually want change?

When they're largely the beneficiaries of inequalities in the status quo?

In Praise of Shared Outrage:

"A recent CNN/Opinion Research poll found that these activists are predominantly male, higher-income, college-educated and conservative, with 87 percent supporting the Republican candidate for the US House. That's certainly not the profile of a broad and diverse coalition of haves and have-nots fighting systemic injustices that do particular harm to the least fortunate among us."

Nope. It's a coalition of haves fighting to keep what they've got because order is more important to them than justice.

-- which is too bad since they could have both if they wanted both.



Kevin Scheunemann said...

Here you go. Politics of envy in its full religious glory.

Somebody worked, saved, and produced something... and you want to take it.

What's the incentive to work, save, invest, and produce if you are going to come along to take it?

This is why socialist countries destroy wealth vs. create it.

John Foust said...

I'd be slightly more impressed with the teabaggers if they had a plan and a platform. It's one thing to claim that government is spending too much and too wastefully, it's another to show how they'd dismantle it.

I'd be much more impressed if they showed the maturity and wisdom to understand that their proposed cuts would have an effect on some people, and that they were compassionate enough to be concerned with exactly how their cuts would be carried out as to cause the least damage.

Better yet, I'd be more impressed if they at least examined the foreseeable consequences of their cuts, and thought several steps ahead to understand what effect it would eventually have on themselves as a consequence of it having an effect on someone else.

Free Lunch said...

Once again, Kevin engages in the politics of condescension and provides more evidence that he knows nothing about economics.

Kevin Scheunemann said...

Free Lunch,

If I didn't know better, I think you came close to saying government generates wealth...

Ordinary Jill said...

Kevin, many poor people work, save and produce also. They are just compensated at a far lower level and prevented from making the free market work for them by anti-competitive practices put in place by the capitalist oligarchs that run this country. A minimal social safety net is necessary to keep this country from looking like the Philippines. Do you want to live, work and play in a gated community 24/7 because it's unsafe for the privileged to venture among the great unwashed? I don't. Our for-profit healthcare system and largely employer-sponsored health insurance system have become an unsustainable bubble. Something needs to be done. Massachusetts has been experimenting with an insurance mandate for a few years now, and it hasn't resulted in the end of civilization as we know it there.

Kevin Scheunemann said...

Ordinary Jill,

Have you been keeping up on the financial disaster the "universal" health care in that state has been?

It's way over cost estimates and there is already talk of cutting off certain health care services to the public (aka rationing).

What power do you have when a single entity has unilateral control over your health care...none. In the MA system, the average person is a peasant to the government health care plantation.