From Michael Hiltzik writing for the
Los Angeles Times:
The anti-deficit lobbying organization "Fix the Debt"
staged a question-and-answer chat on Twitter Thursday. Its goal
presumably was to reach America's smartphone-savvy youth with its
message that Social Security and Medicare payments to their grandparents
are going to land them in the poorhouse a few decades from now.
It's
fair to say that "Fix the Debt" got more than it bargained for.
Twitterers from all over responded to the invitation with pointed,
tactless and downright impolite questions. Many of them aimed to discern
how paring social insurance benefits for the elderly and infirm will
make society stronger, which is the core of the organization's
worldview. Those so inclined can still post their thoughts at
#fixthedebtqa.
Among the choicer comments: "Can you explain why anyone chooses to be
born poor? Why should the rest of us be responsible for their flawed
decision-making?" (That's from Twitter user @jefftiedrich.)
A couple of good roundups of the dialogue thus far can be found at the Washington Post's knowmore site and at Liberaland.
The tweets at
knowmore site and
Liberaland really are funny.
12 comments:
I think this represents probably the biggest issue with the left. They believe everything is a "joke" or "funny" and that there no reason to be concerned about the future. Leftists live in the NOW, which is why many of them have no savings, no plan, want bigger government, need expansion of emtitlents and the such. They will be on these programs in the future! Why would they want them cut?
If every liberal loudmouth millionaire/billionaire put their money where their mouth is, they could put a big dent in some of the suffering they so loathe...but they don't.
a lot of liberal wealthy folks give currently, and many more (at least promise) to will most of their money away.
You have to remember Soros and other wealthy liberals feel obligated to spend on politics to help liberals get elected since two Koch brothers (among other wealthy conservative folks) like to drop so much money in political races (thanks again for Citizens United, SCOTUS!!!!!!).
Imagine all the good Koch's money could have done for everyone had it been spent on social causes or even just government debt, rather than spent on politicians to ensure their industries are more profitable.
Also, your argument that liberals are short-sighted is weak and cheap. One could make the same argument about conservatives--by cutting education, cutting benefits to the poor, etc., you sure may be keeping "business" going on strong forever (future-looking), but you're dooming a large block of the population to untold misery and suffering in doing so (short-sighted).
The poor and social programs may not substatiantially exist if the world's governments did not allow a relatively few people to become billionaires and multi- millionaires,sucking the wealth out of society. I'm a blue dog democrat,as i know it.
The Kochs don't advocate for the poor so why bring them up? My argument was about liberals not practicing what they preach, not conservatives turning into liberals.
Education is not valued by the poor. That's one of the reasons they stay poor. Public Education is free - take advantage of of it. It's a personal choice.
It is amusing that ANON 9:36 thinks Soros and friends are a response to the Koch brothers instead of the other way around. Soros was spending money on progressive causes (which he is perfectly entitled to do) long before anyone even knew the Koch brothers existed. The Koch brothers and other wealthy conservatives giving large sums of money to Republican/conservative causes are responding to the large sums coming from Democrat/liberal donors.
Democrats love the poor. Their policies always increase the number of the impoverished, both in spirit, ability, and finances. Don't forget the bright future promised by the democrats for today's children and grandchildren.
Agree with 2:28, the day I see a liberal policy or program actually DECREASE the number of impoverished Anericans will be the first.
some of you guys really need to take a class on distinguishing causes from effects.
I'm sure you're the ones who say that foodstamps have increased under Obama implying that he is giving SNAP benefits away and making people dependent rather than how it actually happened--the economy tanked, more people are poor now, and thus more people (are eligible for and) apply for SNAP.
Causes and effects, correlation and causation--things right-wingers really need to bone up on. But then, that would require mathematics or science, and we all know how they feel about those things...
If you don't have a solution, just say so.
Hey 2:48 social security was considered a liberal program which was railed against by the conservatives of the time. For almost 80 years it has succeeded in helping the elderly and transformed them from the most impoverished subset in the 1930s to an economically stable group over the past 80 years.
No it hasn't. If the average SSA benefit is $1,100/mo are they considered "poor"?
I'll concede that if beneficiaries have additional income, it may help them stay above poverty levels, the problem is, just like the liberals planned, people have become dependent on the program and can't imagine life without the govt providing income for them.
Amusing that far-leftist nuts, like Charles Hall, can't even see the 2x4 plank in their own eye (like this outrage increase in health insurance premiums, thanks to... not the Republicans). Instead, they like to look for the tiny speck in the other camp's eye.
Post a Comment