Why is it so hard to have a conversation and get to any agreement especially between one person of a liberal bent and the other more conservative? What makes us so different? I think I’ve cracked half the code 🤓
I have concluded there are two type of liberals in the US. The first are the elites made up of politicians and highly visible celebrities and some super wealthy. This group is liberal in name only. Their interests are not in sincerely helping others, but in feeding their egos and furthering their control and power.
The vast majority of average people who identify as liberal or progressive are compassionate, sincere individuals who care about social justice and individuals who have not gotten a fair shake in life. A small subgroup is individuals who merely seek more for themselves while feigning general concern.
The average group is dramatically affected by elite propaganda generalizing and simplify problems and issues. In their quest for justice liberals appear prone to misdiagnosing problems, discounting consequences, being unconcerned with immediate and long-term costs and liabilities and misreading human behavior while largely minimizing individual responsibility.
All liberals accept that government is the vehicle to solve virtually all identified problems. They frequently use the word “free” to describe this process as if government has an independent source of income unrelated to taxes. They also attack corporate profits as if our entire economy and every American does not benefit from growing profit across business.
Let’s look at a few examples:
A naively simple (non) solution to all of America’s health care issues ignoring costs, changes to the way health care is delivered, long-term liabilities and more. Making promises to Americans while failing to provide all the facts and consequences is simply unfair.
Instead of telling Americans the true fiscal state as clearly stated by the Trustees, the facts are ignored and calls are made for expanded benefits. Seniors are frightened and regularly mislead. In the meantime the situation grows worse by the day. Tell Americans what it takes to make Social Security sustainable within its intended purpose which was never the sole or even majority of retirement income
As with health care, the focus is not on the core problems, but on tuition debt similarly to focusing on insurance premiums and not the cause of those high premiums. The solution is more “free” stuff rather than looking at the educational process, the reason for debt, student preparedness and more.
This is the cliché of the decade. It is being used to divide, to promote class division, to deflect individual responsibility … and to strengthen the role of government in more aspects of daily life. The problem is not inequality of wealth, but our failure to recognize and adapt to the reality of changing economic forces. The simplicity of higher taxes on the wealthy is a substitute for telling citizens the truth and for discussing the hard changes necessary. Someone else’s wealth does not cause another’s poverty.
It is natural to focus on weapons proliferation as the cause of gun violence but we all know that’s not the real cause. You can put a weapon on a table in front of virtually every American and no violence will occur. That is not to say we don’t need to do a better job of controlling who obtains a gun, or two, or three or more. But largely avoiding the social drivers that cause abhorrent behavior in favor of gun control is a typical liberal reaction. One, by the way, that seems 180 degrees from what one might expect from the liberal, socially focused mindset. Ironically the ACLU will seek to protect individuals from the very actions necessary to prevent disturbed people from acting, people who cannot easily be classified as insane or mentally ill.
The solution to poverty is not more or expanded safety net programs and not higher taxes on some to pay for them as is often reflected in the liberal agenda. Understanding the causes of poverty like failure to graduate high school and female headed single parent households, why some minorities flourish and others don’t and zoning in on those and other factors is the key. Welfare does not reduce poverty.
A good case can be made for adjusting the minimum for inflation since the last increase and going forward thereafter. Again we are not told the truth about who earns the minimum wage and instead we hear about a living wage for American families. We are not told about the consequences of wage compression at $15 per hour or of rising prices offsetting such an increase. Or of declining eligibility for means tested programs such as Obamacare or SNAP. We ignore the fact that if a couple earned a minimum of $15.00, their household income would be greater than the US average today. Most important we miss the problem which is how to get workers qualified and motivated out of a minimum wage job.
The stated goal here is fairness because our laws are too harsh and applied so as to discriminate against minorities. The political goal is revenue as it is with lotteries. Is there no way to apply our laws fairly without giving tantamount approval for increased mind altering drug use while increasing the economic burden on mostly lower-income Americans?
In the simplest terms it comes down to how much of our income and wealth we want transferred to government, how much we trust the bureaucracy to redistribute that wealth and what aspects of our lives we want dependent on that distribution.