Author:
Tea Party Propaganda
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 11:37:11 02/17/12 Fri
In reply to:
Raylan
's message, "In response to the entreaties of a willing slave..." on 00:43:19 02/17/12 Fri
Once again, I appreciate your romantic thought of let the chips fall as they may but in a civilized society we have the capacity, as a nation, to not let systems or industries collapse. And we do that, not for political reasons, but for humanitarian and economic reasons. If we were to have let GM fail, the systemic result would have been millions of jobs lost at a time when job losses were up there with the worst times in our nation's history. Can you imagine the cost of unemployment insurance alone that the tax payers would have had to absorb? Not to mention the decrease in tax revenue from millions in the rust belt out of work and not paying taxes. (or spending) Sure you could argue that there will be someone to step in and fill the void but how many years, or decades, would that take. How long would people have to suffer before another GM steps in? And we would be left with the same problem of systemic risk because the one who steps in would be another giant, one who has the capital to get the industry moving again. Instead, government steps in temporarily, saving the industry and billions of dollars for the tax payer. Just like the bank bailout, (started by a republican administration and continued by a democratic one) it had to be done. No one likes the idea but letting the entire financial structure of the world collapse would have been catastrophic. The system needs to be changed but letting it collapse is not the answer. Financial regulation that attempts to avoid the same disaster was fought against so hard that it barely passed the congress.
You also referenced health care and religion. Unfortunately, the two don't go together in this country. Christians arguing against a single-payer government run health care system might as well, themselves, be nailing our savior to the cross. WE ARE THE ONLY COUNTRY IN THE CIVILIZED WESTERN WORLD THAT ACCEPTS THE IDEA OF PROFITING FROM SOMEONE'S ILL-HEALTH! WWJD? What would he think of an insurance company denying medical care to a child with cancer simply because they can make a few extra bucks and increase their short term stock price? Is that the "free" market you want? And as far as choice goes, we won't have any when a privatized health care system has Wellpoint, Humana, Anthem, etc. eventually owning doctors and hospitals with corporate profits driving health care.
And your broad, generalized, simple statement of the big government left enslaving us in dependancy might as well come directly from the propaganda of talk radio. I am not dependent on the state and I'm assuming you are not either. Why?... we don't choose to be. But if giant industry is left to its own devises we will always be slaves to them.
Enough hypotheticals; what are potential solutions? Number one is progressive tax policy. Billionaires and corporations should not have more and more incentives to make trillions. When we reduce the exponential growth at the top, it grows the middle class. Sure it may slow growth, but that is exactly what we need before that exponential growth at the top erodes the middle class enough that the whole structure collapses in on itself. The more you make, the more obligation you should have to the system that has allowed you to live the life of a king. And this isn't a radical idea. Much higher tax rates for the wealthy have existed in this country in the past and have been very beneficial. But when money (greed) gets its dirty paws in governmental policy it has only one goal in mind: make more money. And that is ultimately what is fostered the most when we elect right-wing extremists to public office whose main simpleton goal is to reduce the size of government. Money is the problem. The size of MONEY is what needs to be reduced. One last time, letting the individual reign supreme is a beautiful fantasy but as a righteous argument it slaps the logic of reality in the face. The individual is NOT free to NOT stop for traffic signals or drive at whatever speed they feel. We the people decide what is best. I know we are an individualistic nation but the first words of our constitution are not "Me the Individual", it's "We the People".
It is time to tone down the anti-government rhetoric and focus on the most serious challenge of our time; getting the money out of our political process, which will greatly increase the voice of the individual. That is the only way we are ever going to have a serious conversation about our political system.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
|
Feedback: 