I posted this picture because it made me chuckle, I didn't really give it much thought. But it resulted in a string of comments I'd like to continue (reproduced below).
- Rich Kramer You just don't stop, do you!! I'm going to start posing all of my Views on here too, Eric!
17 hours ago · 
Samantha Bishop-Strand Or just seeing things right! Once I convert Rich my obligation to the liberal party will be complete! Ok I'll be good now. :-)
17 hours ago ·
David Ferber Actually, He made it a miracle by creating something from nothing to support the multitudes around him who weren't working but expected someone else to ...oh, wait, He's the 1%... ;)
15 hours ago ·
Samantha Bishop-Strand Cute Ferb, good try! But the multitude, both then and today expected nothing. The knee-jerk human reaction was to send them away to fend for themselves. But He used the contributions of a few to feed the crowd.
14 hours ago ·
Mike Schnell It is not socialism because it is a private individual, not the government who is feeding the masses. That is the difference that most people don't understand. Conservatives do not want to see people suffer but they believe that private individuals or private social organizations do a better job solving the problem than the government.
2 hours ago · ·
2
David Ferber Nice Mike! And your point has been proven over and over again, just as the liberal point is being proven again (and yet, again) in Greece, Europe... (Just show me the successful socialist countries with our standard of living and freedom, and I'll convert...) Merry Christmas! ;)
2 hours ago ·
In response to Schnell and Ferb:
Yes, we do understand that conservatives don't just want people to starve to death and they give to private institutions. I agree that government waste is rampant, but I would counter that government reach and capacity for helping is greater. It would be easier for me to sympathize with conservatives if whenever the discussion of government redistribution of wealth didn't instantly decline to insinuating that the people who would most benefit from such a measure are sitting on the ass watching cable TV and waiting for a handout. Do those people exist? Of course they do, but they are a minority.
Ferb, Sweden is a pretty good example of a country that is managed under a social democracy and they have one of the highest standards of living and are one of the most industrialized countries in the world.
Also, I'm curious - do you think the current system we have in place is working? It seems household income is stagnant if not down from years before, unemployment remains high, the middle class is rapidly shrinking. Do you think these things aren't happening? (I am not being antagonistic, I am genuinely interested to know if you think these things are happening or they're some type of social darwninism or what ...)
Leave your responses below! Be warned however, quotes from Glen Beck will be counted as an automatic surrender.
If we are able to reduce the size of our government to Sweden's pre-1970 success, perhaps there might be a case. However, Sweden isn't so sweet... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENDE8ve35f0
ReplyDeleteAlso, I don't remember the U.S. ever devaluing its currency like Sweden did (except for the current fiat frenzy) in an attempt to look better.
Additionally, their system says, implicitly, that 'Government' can make better decisions about spending money than can citizens. Sweden allows their government to spend over one-half of the nation's GDP, an obscene and, essentially, unconstitutional possibility in America.
Is our system working? It's the worst one in the world, except for all the others. When politicians (of both parties) favor one industry and shield it from free-market competition, when almost half of the income earners don't pay into the system BUT castigate the producers in what appears to be only class envy and laziness, when bad teachers or employees are protected by unions who are only in it for their dues, this is a system that can be improved.
I am also curious about the Swedish example, and have a genuine interest in the thought process. Do you think that government, confiscating 6 of every 10 dollars you earn, could make better purchasing and investment decisions than you?
Thanks for putting this up!
At least we can agree the system isn't working. I think you hit the nail on the head with reducing the government size, but not in the way libertarians espouse. I think the states should have more power than one central government.
ReplyDeleteI don't know if the government could make better purchasing and investment decisions than me. I do know from personal experience that money in my pocket is awfully hard to pry out of my fingers. I've seen this on both sides, as someone who knows I could afford to donate more but I just don't want to because I REALLY want those shoes I saw and someone else will make a big donation anyway ... and as a fundraiser who asked for money from businesses and individuals who metered it down to what they could get.
When government takes the money before we have the chance to selfishly blow it more good can be served. Left to our own devices, we humans will always leave it to "someone else" to solve.
I already hate seeing the amount of taxes taken out of my paycheck, so I get the point you're making. The government should be more accountable so we can all get a warm and fuzzy feeling for forking over our own money. That said, even though the government has their hand in my wallet, I'm still able to pay my bills and buy those new fancy shoes and donate to charity. So I guess I'M willing to make that sacrifice so other people can just get by.