An alternative to popular faith
Perhaps it began with President Reagan, who said, “[…] government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” Or maybe it began long before that, when brave, heroic, self-sufficient individuals populated this land, doing everything for themselves, and asking help from no one.
I don’t know when it started, but somewhere along the line, it has become quite knowledgeable and oh so chic to express hatred for big government and big business.
These days, to demonstrate how clever we are, we parrot the popular faith that socialism, deficits and tax increases are bad. Yes, we like Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, but we hate big government, taxes and deficits.
We like having a strong army, a national highway system, being first to go to the moon, flu vaccine, smallpox eradication and ecologically friendly cars, but we don’t want that big, bad government telling us what to do.
We want federal help when we are hit by floods, tornados, hurricanes, volcanic eruptions and blizzards, but please no big government, taxes or deficits.
We want someone to inspect our food, take a census, protect our savings, build our dams, supervise our courts and maintain our prisons. But, not big government.
Yes, we love Yellowstone, Grand Teton, Grand Canyon and the other 389 national parks. And sure, we also appreciate the many national monuments, seashores, recreation areas, historic sites, military parks and battlefields maintained by the government, but remember this: We hate big government.
Sure, protect our borders, our airports, trains, bus stations, subways, and cities from terrorists, but please do it without big government, tax increases or deficits.
Most recently, we’ve criticized all suggestions for improving health care, because they involve big government, or big insurance companies, or federal spending or tax increases, all of which we hate. And of course, doctors are overpaid; hospitals charge too much; pharmaceutical companies gouge us, and the poor don’t deserve our help, so we hate them all, too.
We join groups like the Tea Party, so we can be with other people who prove their understanding of the world, by hating socialism, big government and big business. You see, the federal government is wasteful, inefficient and stupid. And because small business can’t compete with large foreign businesses, they need to grow, but when they become large, they get greedy. And unsuccessful large companies go out of business, firing millions of people, so yes, we hate them. And we especially hate them when the government bails them out, so they don’t have to go out of business and fire millions of people.
We just wish someone would take care of things for us. But no more taxes, no more deficits, and by all means, no big government or big business.
Is magic available?
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com
#Monetary Sovereignty - Mitchell 
Nice post pointing out the “differences” between Republicans and Democrats. There is none. The next question to ask is why are people so duped? Perhaps there are those that want us to continue fighting amongst each other. Due to this fighting we can never understand about real financial and monetary reform. The kind of reform that puts Free Money in peoples hands and not in the hands of bankers.
By the way, for your next post, do the same treatment of Democrats who insisted that Bush’s Patriot Act was illegal, that both Iraq and Afghanistan were useless wars, or that Wall Street was in bed with the government. Oh, yeah, I forgot. Now that their guy is in office we need all of these things.
###
LikeLike
The problem is not with the political parties; the problem is with the voters. Having grown lazy, they just want simple solutions to complex problems, and simple solutions tend to evolve to extremism.
This forces politicians to pander to the extreme elements. A middle-of-the-roader doesn’t stand a chance. Blame the voters. Politicians are just being realists.
A health care plan to cover all Americans no longer was a luxury; it became a necessity for the greatest, most powerful nation in the world.
Like all big plans — like Social Security and Medicare — the new plan offers benefits but needs changes. While it offers insurance to many people who don’t have it, payment continues to be a problem. But its a worthwhile start.
Rather than saying, “Now that this this thing is on the books, let’s try to refine it and make it a great program,” the Republicans went into 100% political spite mode, with their “repeal and replace” mantra.
They have the votes neither to repeal nor to replace, but they don’t care. John McCain has said “There will be no cooperation for the rest of the year.” So there! (This, from a man who claims to love his country.) He believes this is what the country wants to hear.
As for fiscal reform, this usually means reducing the deficit. If you have read many of the posts on this blog, you will see that is the worst possible step. If you haven’t read the blog, see https://rodgermmitchell.wordpress.com/2009/09/07/introduction/ for a quick summary.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
LikeLike
“the problem is with the voters.”
“Politicians are just being realists.”
Have you any experience in government? Have you participated in your local party organization? Have you gone to monthly meetings of your precinct, county, or state? Do you have conversations with party officials on a regular basis?
If you have, like I have, you’ll recognize that these people of the party are only interested in 2 things. Power and Power. Power to keep their position of political power. And power to keep their position of money and class. Government creates winners and losers with every action they take. And after getting to know these people, I don’t trust them, and neither should you.
So, I disagree that it is the voter’s fault. They don’t have a chance. They’ve mostly just given up since they don’t see anything changing. Howard Buffet, a Republican Representative from Nebraska (Warren’s Dad) once asked how a person is supposed to vote against war when both the Republicans and Democrats support war? He’s right. And he said this back in the 50’s and 60’s. Nothing has changed.
The Tea Party movement will die and fade out just like any other populist revolt. Until these people enter into their local party and replace the people in power at their local level, will the national level politics change.
There is way too much money stacked up against the little guy from running for Congress or even for President.
Maybe instead what we need are ideas like this: http://thirty-thousand.org/. Thirty-thousand representatives telecommuting from their home districts to run this nation. Surely a guy like yourself won’t complain about this being too expensive. Do you think this will help engage the voter and return the power back to the people? Can you imagine how many lobbyists would be needed to cover thirty-thousand districts!? Is this an idea that you can embrace?
###
LikeLike
TripleHash,
At one point, 50% of those polled were opposed to the health insurance plan and another 35% favored it. Few of those 85% knew enough about the plan to have a rational opinion.
Politicians look at two things: Polls of all voters, and polls of extreme voters. Then they vote accordingly. The voters, who answer these polls, are at fault if all candidates want the same war.
I don’t see how having 30,000 representatives will solve anything. On balance, the Senate, with only 2 members per state, wildly disparate on population, seems to do saner job than does the House.
Your 30,000 representatives is just one step away from eliminating the House altogether, and allowing people to vote directly on bills.
Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
LikeLike
No argument from me on this topic.
LikeLike