I was just reading an article that someone sent me the link to. It actually made me both sad and mad at the same time. Mad, because of the broad-brush characterizations (especially in the comments!) and sad because I know it to be true of some conservatives, and especially of conservative politicians. It's an interesting read.
The article was basically an interview with Paul Krugman (author of "The Conscience of a Liberal") by Mark Karlin, and the title of the interview was (cringe) "Why do Right-wingers Mock Attempts to Care for Other People?"
He makes some valid points in some areas, as do some of the commenters. They are right in that most conservatives (especially conservative Christians) come across as unloving, uncaring, and unconcerned about the hardships of others (usually unintentionally or because they have been blessed to the point of not knowing hardship the way someone in poverty does). The point was made that no one cares about how bad a politician is for the middle class as long as he parrots the words that he is pro life. I've been saying as much for years. Some politicians seem to use that to get votes, knowing that morally we'd never vote against someone who is against abortion. We need to look at their whole record!
The thing that gets me though is the idea that being against social programs is a lack of generosity. Social welfare is generosity with other people's money. It's easy to be helpful and even extravagant in your aid if you are not the one paying the bill. Don't you think those who pay the bill would want some say in how it's spent? How many one income families are thrilled to pay taxes to pay for the daycare of working mothers? How many of us like tightening our budgets, to the point of doing without air conditioning, only to hear that our tax dollars are buying those who are choosing not to work air conditioning?
I was totally offended by the implication of racism. Couldn't be less true (at least up here in the North)
But, getting back to the point....
Call me a cynic but I have noticed that the only thing liberal and conservative politicians can agree on is raising taxes and voting themselves pay raises. They just raised our taxes here in Michigan after Gov. Granholm shut down the government when they couldn't' balance the budget. If I balanced my books the way they balance theirs, I'd be in trouble!!! Maybe they should all take Accounting 101 again. Or read "Budgeting for Dummies".
The way I see it, Liberals tax us to death to give handouts to those they think deserve more. The conservatives give tax breaks to the rich and cancel social programs. Both groups are bone heads. LOL
I'm not too crazy about social programs because I don't think it is a good thing to always have your hand out, and the whole Robin Hood thing is still stealing even if the money goes to "a good cause". There's also a lot of restrictions that make it difficult if not impossible to get out of the poverty cycle once you are in there. I've watched this with my neighbor who lost benefits for being a good steward and putting a little bit into savings. Besides that, no one asked me if I wanted to support crack moms who can't keep their legs together, pay for daycare for working moms, and in some cases, pay for abortions or abortifacent drugs through medicare. Mr. Krugman acknowledges that conservatives only want to help the moral. Well, sort of. I don't like my money going to someone who is going to smoke it, snort it or waste it any more than I like it going to some politician's fancy new house on Martha's Vineyard. When I help people (and I've done it QUITE A FEW TIMES), I try to do more than give them a band aid. I try to really HELP. I give money, food, and so forth, but I also give guidance in budgeting, guidance in starting a business, guidance in having a garden (I've even given garden space!), and tried to help the one who needs help not to get back in a bad spot again. It's that whole "teach a man to fish" thing. Giving the fish is easier, cheaper, less time consuming in the short term...but teaching them is much more beneficial to them and society in the long term.
However, the way things were, as Mr. Krugman points out, before the New Deal were not rosy either. There are plenty of people who have no friends, family, or support system willing or able to help them during hard times. Life happens, and sometimes there are those who lose jobs, or fall on hard times for other reasons need a little help. Just removing the safety net all at once while not making other changes is not exactly helpful to hardworking families.
Universal health care is another one that I wrestle with. I've been without health care and that isn't fun. On the other hand, I used to live in Austria, where I got to experience the wonders of socialized medicine. And you thought HMO's were bad!?!? Instead of getting care with a big fat bill attached (As is the American model), everyone gets the same poor-to-mediocre care, unless you are rich enough to buy yourself the care you want. Taxes are so high it is hard to get ahead. Up until 3 months ago, I had no insurance either. It's no picnic, but at least we still have the freedom to choose what to do about it. The time is coming where we will be fined, as they are in Massachusetts, for not having health insurance, or when we will be taxed into poverty to pay for health care whether we want it or not. But hey, health care would be free, right?
I think the bottom line of my weird little ramble here is summed up in a few points:
1. Liberals and conservative people both want to help others but differ on the best way to do it.
2. Politicians are totally out of touch with the working class and thus have no clue how to help real live families. When family values becomes about things like gay marriage, instead of about helping in a practical way the majority of working class households (and not discriminating against those households where someone stays home and raised the children)...it becomes a campaign slogan not a conviction. Personally I long for the day when politicians are not allowed to earn over the poverty level, so as to help them think through better solutions to our nation's problems.
3. Generosity is important--but be sure to only be generous with your own resources, and not everyone else's.
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Its really the liberals who are cold hearted. They don't care about a person's sense of self respect. Making a person dependent on the goverment creates a form of mental slavery. Plus many of their programs don't work but sound compassionate. So the liberals can pat themselves on the back and feel superior. Yet the people they tried to help often aren't really helped at all.The people who enact these types of programs only care about feeling good about themselves. This is a form of selfish egotism.(Hopefully that made sense)
Exactly, Deb. It's a sort of self-righteousness.
I have a liberal relative who says things like, "well at least liberals are doing something..." (in ref to pointing out the failures of social programs), but most of the time it isn't "long-term useful" to the people they are helping--and in many cases hurts them! It is very illogical...but, hey, it sounds good (just like "free health care" sounds good, especially if you are buried under med bills).
I read something somewhere that showed most people who identify themselves as conservatives have higher personal charitable giving than those who identify themselves as liberal, and many (self reported) helping individuals and families personally in the last six months. This would definitely jive with my own view of charity, and how I have helped others when I've been able. When you are personally helping someone you rejoice with them instead of pulling away help if they start to put money into savings, for example. You help them make wiser choices instead of help them be dependent for life.
When we were out of work, my dh worked some odd jobs, and many church friends and homeschooling friends brought us baskets of food or grabbed one bill for us and paid it. Others we know who were more liberal only "helped" by telling us where to go get hand outs and pointing out to us that this is why social programs exist...though thankfully we didn't need them--we had friends (which admittedly, not everyone has).
Post a Comment