And of course the majority of progressive-liberal policies simply haven't worked. The idea that handouts help the poor, very popular with the Obama administration, despite a half century-long war on poverty that's yielded no results. Or the concept that public schools just need more money, despite some of the most well funded, and worst performing schools, right in the very bastions of liberalism.
Conservatism in D.C. and our southern states isn't the cause of the extreme poverty, terribly performing public schools, or budgetary and fiscal woes found in the heart of New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Detroit. Not to say there isn't poverty in Republican states, but if liberal policies worked, then poverty would only exist in red states, meanwhile blue states wouldn't be facing the financial and educational issues now confronting them either. Would the educated statists have us believe that somehow George Bush is to blame for the lifestyle or quality of public school education for residents in New York or Los Angeles' worst neighborhoods, despite decades-long liberal Democrat control (Anthony Wiener and Charlie Rangel to wit)?
The truly educated rely on facts and logic, and I believe most tenets of conservatism are likewise based on facts and logic. However, often progressive-liberal positions are plainly based on deceit.
The notion that the rich don't pay their fair share is commonly touted by the liberal left as if the science is settled. Yet the fact is that nearly half of America's working populace pay no federal income taxes at all; and it's not the rich half. Yes, lower income Americans may pay other taxes; so too, do the rich, along with punitive federal, capital gains and estate taxes as well. On top of this, the very term rich, and millionaires and billionaires, refers to people making $250k or more a year (less if they are single). All of this is so out rightly deceitful, and yet despite the fact that the richest 1 percent of Americans pays nearly 40 percent of federal income taxes collected (a share that's grown considerably over recent decades), teenagers squatting in the parks are screaming that rich people pay less taxes than the secretaries they employ.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Arch Conservative
Thank you Obnoxious, for penning the best article I have ever read on BC.
Now all we have to do is wait for the resident BC moonbats to begin to swarm around your brilliant article like so many useless, purposeless flies on a mound of poo neath' the hot July sun. No doubt they will have a plethora of justifications for the modern leftist mindset as savior of humanity.
2 - Glenn Contrarian
Boy oh boy oh boy.
1 - LIBERALS are uneducated? If one disagrees with 96% of all the world's scientists about anthropomorhic global warming, is one more likely a liberal or a conservative? If one believes that evolution is a crock, that the world is only 6,000-odd years old, is one more likely a liberal or a conservative?
OAR, if you'll do some statistical research, you'll find that generally speaking, the educational level of the populations of red states are LOWER than that of the populations of blue states.
=============================
2 - You said "Fact is, anyone who is truly educated in the goings-on of the world, anyone who has any knowledge about the way people and organizations work, knows full well that progressive liberalism or statism, cannot work."
Gee, OAR - can you show me ANY first-world nation that doesn't have a leftist social safety net? No. Can you show me ANY first-world nation that operates on the small-government ideals that America's conservatives want so badly? No. But I can show you LOTS of nations that DO have the kind of small-government, mostly-unregulated, business-'friendly', union-'hostile' environments...and they're ALL third-world nations.
So if our oh-so-leftist way of governance can't work, then why do ALL first-world nations (outside of the oil-rich Middle East) get along just fine with those very same leftist ideals, whereas there are many more nations that DO operate with your conservative ideals...and they're ALL third-world nations?
Why is that, OAR?
==================================
3. BTW, one of your major mistakes was equating leftism with collectivism and marxism. That's like equating conservatism with fascism.
And you're assuming that the OWS movement is somehow related to ignorance of the pitfalls of communism. You're flat wrong. The OWS movement is a rather mild result of what happens when income inequality reaches beyond a certain point. When the standard of living of the general population stagnates for decades while the income of the wealthy skyrockets, you're going to get social unrest. Read a bit of history and you'll find this again and again and again.
====================================
4. You said, "Not to say there isn't poverty in Republican states, but if liberal policies worked, then poverty would only exist in red states, meanwhile blue states wouldn't be facing the financial and educational issues now confronting them either."
Oh? Again, if you'd do some statistical research, you'd find that generally speaking, poverty rates, education rates, teenage pregnancy rates, obesity rates, violent crime rates, murder rates, birth mortality rates, health insurance coverage rates, and life expectancy rates are ALL worse in red states than in blue states.
So if blue-state governance is SO bad, they why is life in red states generally worse despite the fact that red states generally receive more in federal funding than they pay out in taxes????
(Note - there really is a reason, and it's got ZERO to do with political leanings...but how about I give you some time to think on what could possibly result in the disparities I listed above....)
==============================
5 - You seem to think that the rich are paying quite enough and the rest aren't paying enough. Thomas Jefferson and Adam Smith - both strong proponents of a progressive tax system - would have disagreed with you. TJ in particular noted that it is only right that those who benefit the most should rightly pay the most.
Furthermore, it appears you may need to familiarize yourself with American tax history in the 20th century, because when taxes were higher, were there any headlines about the rich going to soup kitchens? No. Even in the 1950's when the top marginal tax rate was 90%, did this drive America into a depression? No. Instead, we had budget surpluses, paid off most of the WWII debt (which was significantly HIGHER in today's dollars than the one we have now), and we BOOMED economically.
Now, however, conservatives would have us believe that to raise the tax rate from 35% to 39% would drive us down to the depths of economic purgatory.
And while we're on the subject of taxes, DO bear in mind that while we have the highest NOMINAL corporate tax rate in the developed world, we have in reality the second-lowest EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate in the developed world...only that economic powerhouse Iceland has a lower effective rate. Germany, which despite Europe's woes is still doing quite well economically, has one of the top five effective corporate tax rates.
Yeah, I know, I'm just a silly hardly-edjimicated librul....
=====================================
6 - You said, "Sure, the symptom of the problem came out in failures in the credit markets, but this stemmed from one thing - liberal policies encouraging lenders to loosen standards so that more people (i.e. those less qualified) could borrow. No mortgage backed security ever caused someone to foreclose (unless that person traded in said MBS), but plenty of forclosures are what caused the credit markets to seize. Yet progressives commonly blame the downturn on a lack of deregulation by Bush or Reagan depending on who you talk to."
Actually, OAR, if you'll listen to progressive pundits, you'll hear them blame CLINTON for agreeing to go along with conservative economic policies and deregulation. BTW - it was only after Glass-Steagal was repealed that banks could really start gambling with peoples' money - that's when 'derivatives' really got going.
And if you'll look, at the beginning of the housing bubble, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac combined only had a minority of the subprime mortgages. If you want to look who was pushing those subprime mortgages, you need to look at companies like Countrywide and ASC et al who were pushing those subprime mortgages like there was no tomorrow. That was not government regulation at work, OAR - it was the lack thereof.
==================================
7 - You said, "Lastly, while the educated should be tolerant, Liberals also tend to be the least tolerant people in existence.
Really? Didja know the founder of the white supremacist site stormfront.org endorsed Ron Paul?
And while we're speaking of tolerance, who's more tolerant of LGBT's? Conservatives? Really?
And what about people of color? Are you aware that in April of 2011, 46% of Mississippi REPUBLICANS stated that they STILL thought that interracial marriage should be banned?
And who are more likely to support legalization of marijuana? The libertarians do...but what about the Republicans?
And let's not forget the perpetual efforts by Republicans to pass 'anti-Sharia' laws and require creationism to be taught in schools.
Yeah, but it's really the LIBERALS who are SO intolerant, huh?
FYI, OAR - I grew up strongly conservative...I've lived both sides of the coin. Your accusation that liberals are the 'most intolerant' is nothing more than showing your ignorance of the LIBERAL belief that YOUR freedom ends where MINE begins.
====================================
8 - You said, "This is plainly evidenced by conservative media outlets such as FOXNews or the Wall Street Journal, which routinely take pains to show both sides of the story.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!! That's FUNNY! You've GOT to be joking!
Oh, wait - you're NOT joking????
Tell you what - look at this list of Fox News Channel inaccuracies, manipulations, and outright lies. I really don't suppose you will, for if your stated opinion is any indication, your eyes would likely glaze over as soon as you realized the site lists several thousand such failures of journalistic integrity on the part of News Corp's flagship channel.
=================================
So in conclusion, OAR, this ignorant, deceitful, and intolerant liberal would like to ask you again about the reason for the general disparity between the overall living standards of red states and blue states. You see, I wrote an article about it...and got my logical ass handed to me on a plate by Clavos when he pointed out my logical error. If you take the time to read the comments to the article, you'll find that I admitted my error and agreed with Clavos that the living standard disparities were NOT the result of red-state or blue-state governance...
...and then I give the real reason why. It's surprising, and something I didn't see coming.
But seeing as how we liberals are ignorant, deceitful, and intolerant, I guess that means that you don't really need to read all that, that all I've done this entire comment is to lie to you...'cause you can't be wrong, and I surely can't be right.
BTW - did you ever finish reading the book on the Shi'a by Vali Nasr, and did you find the quote I told you about?
3 - Arch Conservative
OAR, while the picture of Krugman scratching his head implies some type of exasperation on his part and is a decent photo to accompany this article, I can't help but suspect that somewhere there exists a picture of the man in drag. Maybe from his college days, maybe a drunken Halloween party, maybe something more personal and disturbing. I'm almost certain that it exists. Your mission, if you choose to accept it is to find that picture of Paul-ette Krugman in flagranti and use it along with your next article addressing the incomparably soul crushing leftist ideology.
4 - Glenn Contrarian
Arch -
Try addressing #4 above.
5 - Igor
OAR and Arch are living in the 1950s when the rightists, after striving mightily, managed to convince a few Americans that ALL social democratic ideas were marxist communism at heart.
They neglected to see that it was corporate collectivism that threatened America with it's own idea of a New Soviet America.
6 - Costello
You couldn't link to one source, supporting your statements? That reveals quite a bit.
If you are going to call a group of people Uneducated, it would behoove you to learn about proper punctuation.
7 - Bill
We've come a long way from the fifties. Now we have a public sector that (with benefits) lives, on average, better than 85% of the private sector.
They all applaud you Glenn. Igor, do you do work for the government or live on a taxpayer funded pension too?
Public sector is too generous with my money.
8 - Arch Conservative
Bill, whatever gave you the idea that it was your money? Just because you get out of bed in the morning and go to a job for 8-12 hours a day whilst other able bodied men lounge at home all day in their hope and change t-shirts does not in any way give you the right to demand financial rewards for you toil.
Furthermore Bill, I can only infer from your previous post that you clearly do not recognize the value of our government employees. Sure they get something like 57 paid holidays (just a coincidence that they get a paid holiday for every state?) and they constantly demand pay raises even when the private sector employees that fund their salaries through tax revenue are getting laid off left and right, but think of the immediate and absolute state of chaos and decay our nation would fall into were it not for the government employee. Have you no sense Bill? Do you not realize that you and everyone you know is utterly incapable of functioning without the gentle hand of your friendly local and not so local government steward administering to your every need that would otherwise go unfulfilled if you were foolish enough to attempt to fulfill those needs yourself.
Was it your intention when you got out of bed this morning Bill to climb to the apex of folly and scream for all the world to hear " I am Bill." For that is certainly what you have done.
No sir! Not today will I stand by as you slander those fine, fine individuals that work for the government. For they are the picture of competence and compassion, without which you would not have been able to make your way to your computer to belittle them, much less do anything else today!
9 - troll
(for the record - oar had nothing to do with this pos - it's all toa's fault)
10 - Glenn Contrarian
Looks like Bill and Arch both need a little education as to WHY government employees should be paid well.
1 - With a very, very few exceptions, NOBODY gets rich working for the government. If you choose to work in the public sector, you choose a career where you'll probably live decently, but you'll never be rich. That's the price of working for the government.
2 - Do you REALLY want to pay people minimum wage for delivering social security checks? Do you REALLY want to pay people maybe $12/hour to police the streets, to risk their lives to put out fires, to assess the value of your property, to determine whether you've passed the driving test, and so forth? Do you really think that teachers - who normally spend two to four hours after every school day at work - should need to have second jobs in order to support their own households? Guess what - if they have to have second jobs, then they're going to do a WORSE job in teaching YOUR kids...and btw - 24% of ALL teachers in Texas are already moonlighting just to make ends meet.
HERE'S A CLUE FOR BOTH OF YOU - if you don't pay government employees a good living wage, then the level of corruption will rise significantly...as either of you would KNOW if you'd spent much time in a third-world nation. Either pay your government employees well (and hold them to high standards)...or be prepared to deal with a lot more corruption as a result.
YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR. Pay crappy wages, you get crap most of the time. Pay a good living wage (and maintain high standards) and you get good professional service most of the time.
11 - Clavos
...you get good professional service most of the time.
HAH!!
12 - Glenn Contrarian
Clavos -
You can laugh all you want to...but would you rather be pulled over by a reasonably well-paid American cop or a poorly-paid Mexican cop?
Would you rather your child be taught by a teacher who at least has the opportunity to stay after school hours to mentor kids and grade tests and homework, or would you rather your child be taught by a teacher who has to leave immediately after school to go work at her other job?
Paying people well and holding them to high standards does NOT guarantee they'll be professional...but it makes it a WHOLE lot more likely.
And you're not stupid - you KNOW this.
13 - Clavos
but would you rather be pulled over by a reasonably well-paid American cop or a poorly-paid Mexican cop?
The Mexican. I'll never get a ticket from him.
Would you rather your child be taught by a teacher who at least has the opportunity to stay after school hours to mentor kids and grade tests and homework, or would you rather your child be taught by a teacher who has to leave immediately after school to go work at her other job?
As measurably and provably bad as American education is these days, where high school graduates are often functionally illiterate, what's the difference?
Bad is bad...
14 - Arch Conservative
So you think teachers should be paid based on merit Glenn?
Oh boy, your friends at the teachers unions are not going to be happy with you.
The fact is that there is generally no competition for the services that the government provides. The lack of competition pretty much removes all incentive to perform better. Our United States Congress is the supreme example of how paying government employees well does not lead to any benefit for the citizenry.
I usually ignore your moronic rantings Glenn but that one was such a softball that I couldn't resist. Now I shall go back to ignoring your dumbassery.
15 - Bill
I see Glenn. So it's kind of a protection racket thing. Very honorable. In token, I can see why the government has taken the numbers racket from the mafia.
Also Glenn, as Clavos said, never a good idea for a liberal to throw American public education in our face in any positive light.
(Other than how science should be taught).
In times of hardship, the public sector needs to give more. We're drowning and everyone including government employees are pointing their finger at the rich to give more.
How about this Glenn. In lieu of arguing, if we were to go ahead and tax the rich a bit more, would it be okay to also infringe on the salaries and benefits of the public sector as well? You're both doing well.
I think you folks shouldn't have a problem with that. You're pension check would be a bit less. Are you willing to budge? I can think of 23 million people ,who if in your shoes, would do so gladly.
16 - Glenn Contrarian
Arch -
You probably didn't know this, although Clavos probably did, that I am certainly for merit pay for teachers. See the last name in my pseudonym? It's 'Contrarian'...and I keep that because regardless of what you and the rest of the BC conservatives think, it never was a matter of I love the Dems because Republicans are evil. It's a matter of who's right (most of the time) and who's wrong (most of the time). In fact, there's not a single election since 1984 where I haven't voted for at least one Republican. I used to vote straight Republican...until I woke up - but I've never voted straight Democratic.
For instance, if all of a sudden it was 1870, I'd certainly be a Republican, since their values were much more liberal than were those of the Democrats at the time. If it were the late 1950's, I have no idea which party I'd be - or if I'd be in a party at all - because (with the exception of a Democratic president integrating the armed forces) the Dems didn't truly embrace the civil rights movement until the Kennedys came along...and even then the worst racists in the nation were the Southern Democrats, as I've pointed out many, many times here.
I am a contrarian, Arch. I go with what I can see to be right...
...and at this time in history, the Republicans - by way of their denial of AGW, their "thou shalt not tax the rich" mindset, and the fact that no small portion of them want to bomb Iran (last night Perry said he'd take us BACK into Iraq!) - are bat-crap crazy.
When the Republicans start accepting science and stop making decisions obviously based on the degree that they need to compensate with Really Big Guns, I might well join them...but not before.
17 - Glenn Contrarian
Bill and Clavos -
Also Glenn, as Clavos said, never a good idea for a liberal to throw American public education in our face in any positive light.
That says a lot about your mindset - Thou Shalt Not Show Anything That [the unpopular person du jour] Does Right.
So if we can't point out to you what [the unpopular person du jour does that is RIGHT, when they actually do something good, how would you ever know?
You wouldn't...because all you'd ever hear in your echo chamber is how bad they were. For instance, all you EVER hear by the right-wing media is how bad the liberals and Democrats and particularly Obama are...and to a somewhat lesser extent, that's what you hear from the left-wing media bout conservatives.
Tell you what, Bill and Clavos - why don't one or both of you try something completely different - CHALLENGE yourselves to point out where liberals and Democrats and Obama are RIGHT, where they've done GOOD things for America...and do it without sarcasm or satire, but honestly.
Can you do that? Sure you could, if you'd but try.
18 - Bill
Glenn, whatever great things our president has done, I don't care. I'm pissed about one thing. On average, the public sector lives far too much better than the private sector. It's hugely uneven.
Until that point is addressed and rectified I'll be pissed.
Glenn you're right about police, and a few other public sector jobs. Corruption would suck. Not all public sector jobs are even in the position to even be corrupt though. Firemen, Teachers... well …. I could give you a list of all the public sector jobs that I respect and wouldn't argue over any money issue. My beef concerns those who have positions that anybody could fulfill. There are millions. They are all represented by unions that have negotiated too well .
If you disagree with this, and still think that the rich, by giving more to government, will greatly impact the private sector's well being, there's no more to talk about.
Here's my analogy: The rich bake pies for all to eat. The public sector gets there and eats, leaving just a few slices. When the private sector arrives, the public sector says, "The rich didn't make enough pies."
Sincerely
19 - One Americans Rant
Glenn & others,
This was not by me or my sock puppet, so I want to set it straight that I don't agree with much, if any, of this article. I've been busy for the last week or so, but I will write something about the meat of this today.
20 - roger nowosielski
Gee, OAR, for a moment I thought you had morphed.
21 - Glenn Contrarian
Bill -
Not all public sector jobs are even in the position to even be corrupt though.
Name even one that isn't.
FYI, I've spent enough time building my home in a third-world nation to see first-hand that ANYone can be corrupt...and the greater the poverty, the greater the corruption. Even worse, the greater the corruption of the lower classes, the more such corruption becomes entrenched throughout the society.
We all complain about corruption in America, but anyone who's lived in a third-world nation should know that our level of corruption here is NOTHING compared to that of third-world nations.
You get what you pay for, Bill - and if you're not willing to pay good middle-class wages for government workers, then your government workers WILL show you just how corrupt things can get. That's not a threat, but simply an observation from someone who's seen what happens when government workers are paid a lot less than what they get here.
And Bill - if the public sector lives SO much better than the private sector, WHY are 25% of all teachers in Texas moonlighting on second jobs when - if they were being paid what they should be paid - they'd be doing what teachers have always done: spent hours after school every day grading tests and preparing for the next day's class.
Some in the public sector are certainly overpaid - no argument there! But the VAST majority are not overpaid...and we cut their pay at our society's peril.
22 - Glenn Contrarian
OAR -
I'm glad to see it. You're one of the more level-headed people on here (more so than myself, at least), and I was worried that you'd been fooling us all this time.
23 - Irene Athena
Don't trust an ignorant White Pseudo-Progressive who tells you that busing benefits blacks. Trust a Black mother, who continues to work on behalf of black students, to tell you what a failure mandated busing was and is.
The threat of being accused of racism can be a powerful disincentive to people who would take a stand for the truth -- and the more they hate racism, the more effective a disincentive it is.
This article, by the way, is obviously not written by a Progressive (pseudo or otherwise.) He does make some good points, but (length notwithstanding) he doesn't talk much about how failed social experiments have actually HURT blacks, and that's why I'm providing these links.
Too many true bigots can make arguments against those failed social programs. That's how the pseudo-progressives can use their "guilt by association" intimidation tactics against all those who oppose busing, but for other reasons.
I’ll consider the views of a sincere progressive, but not those of a pseudo-progressive. I won’t even waste my time reading what they write anymore.
24 - Irene Athena
As for some of what passes for "highly educated," there is a type of fellow who, having made his way to an upper management spot or government appointment through his Ivy League connections, could not exactly be called "uneducated."
His college experience, however, is not unlike the crash course in crime those in different social strata receive through spending time in prison.
After all, this individual has been admitted to an elite institution of learning (and that's difficult!) He has been graduated from it, too (but that's not as daunting as it sounds, if he's savvy about which courses to take.)
What's so difficult about getting into an Ivy League school? The high SAT score requirements ARE a bit of a hurdle to some, but not if they have the cash to PAY for those high scores.
25 - roger nowosielski
Seems like you're dishing it out in all directions, Irene.
In any case, I don't see why such a fuss about education. I've met plenty simple folk I could have quite an engaging conversation with, and then again, plenty of those with formal education I'd rather have nothing to do with.
Does education a person make? that ought to be the question. I suppose it all depends on the kind of person you start out with.
Sounds just about right to me.