I have spent a lot of time trying to fully understand this over the years. Never got it growing up, but I think now, I get it pretty clearly. It's rather simple. You work really hard for something. Get up early, make sacrifices to get ahead, save, do what you got to do. You value your money. It's a reflection of your hard work. Doesn't matter if others helped, you would have been ok regardless - because you succeeded by working hard. That's what it takes. These hard working people Republicans often live in the suburbs and exhurbs, away from cities and other places. Their interactions with minorities are usually that of fast food servers who move too slow, of shoddy work on their lawns, and of TV & media images of poor people - minority poor people loitering about. They see women who gets pregnant by having sex as their problem they brought upon themselves. The believe the reason people are in a bad way and don't succeed is because they don't work hard. Therefore - they feel, if I worked hard for my money, why should I give a single penny to someone who doesn't work hard so they can have a nice TV and be lazy. Unemployed people are lazy. Food stamp people scam the gov't. Welfare is all lazy folks. The fallacy of course is that the poor do work hard. And the jobs they have pay so little to survive on. Most single working mothers really try to provide for their babies, often without a father. Most people on welfare and unemployment would love a job - one that has a pathway. Working hard for $7 and hour when a guy with a college degree can get a job that pays $50k a year with benefits. Basically, a few bad apples spoils the bunch for Republicans. It's not overt racism, but they do associate some minorities as lazy for whatever reason. And it;s why many asians vote Republican as well - the hard work ethic thing. And because most Republicans live away from cities, they don't actually get to work with people who are really struggling to eck out a living. They don't see that suffering. They just see the stereotypes. How do you bridge that? Not sure but I think accountability would help a lot here. I think handouts need to be restructured as loans that have a very very long lifetime to pay back at 0%. I think the education system needs better accountability and that's why the support no child left behind. It's not that Republicans want to see the poor suffer or anything, the just believe they are lazy and they shouldn't have to bail them out.
I love how you decry their arguments as fallacious, and then proceed to make hasty generalizations and stereotypes. The beauty of the D&D, and why I hate partisans from both parties. I hate Republicans and Democrats.
I'd say about 15 years of listening to conservatives isn't hasty. And I am not attacking, it's you who is just taking it in that way.
Fifteen years listening to them and you're still naive to the fact that the factions that dominate American politics are actually one in the same?
I really do think that is mainly a matter of unawareness for may of the conservative GOP voters. However, their unawareness is actively reinforced by cynical members of .1% who use their unawareness to get them to resent the poor and vote for increasing tax breaks for the wealthy who they call "job creators". Though the majority of the GOP middle class voters have limited awareness of the poor they have virtually no contact with the really wealthy who feed their view of the poor.
This would make a lot more sense if it weren't for the fact that a lot of Republicans (like many other Americans) are extremely generous with their own money when they're given the opportunity to donate it how they choose. Did the thought ever occur to you that some people just have a problem with being compelled to give?
I tend to agree with this which is why I do not care to be classified as either a Democrat or Republican. However, the recent emergence of Tea Party did add a little flavor to one party while alienating some of its own members.
I think it takes a review of the policies that have allowed such stark income inequality in the first place. Once you start raising a wall that divides the 'have's' and 'have not's' then it becomes easier to ignore the plight of the other side.
Read up dear Lou. The global elite & the real issue[I posted this a couple threads down]: http://www.taxjustice.net/cms/upload/pdf/Price_of_Offshore_Revisited_120722.pdf Just like MoonDogg's pic & Glynch's statement. We're all being duped.
There are so many ways to approach your premise. 1) People are stupid and/or self-interested in their donations - What makes more sense from a practical standpoint: donating $100,000 to an animal shelter or having $100,000 in taxes go towards infrastructure improvements like new roads and bridges? As much as starving children in Africa and local Philharmonics need money, governments need money to fund less sexy but inarguably more relevant endeavors. 2) The idea that they're being 'compelled to give' - this itself is a philosophical issue that can be addressed many ways. Taxes are not there to strong arm anyone. They are a necessary part of a civilized society. Paying taxes is part of being an American; some would say its privilege. I bet you the first time an immigrant pays income tax, he's damn proud to be contributing to a country that he wants to be a part of. 3) A follow-up on being 'compelled to give' - would it make it better if the government had welfare recipients mail handwritten letters of thanks to wealthy people paying taxes? Seems to me a lot wealthy people are put off by having to commit money to causes they don't believe it. I think the idea is that there needs to be better understanding and connection of government money in/out.
Wrong. Republicans believe in not forcing their views on others (it's called freedom). Most believe in giving your brother a helping hand (unlike Obama) they just wouldn't force someone else to live by their beliefs. 'To each his own', 'let bygones be bygones', etc....
The reasons and purposes for habits are always lies that are added only after some people begin to attack these habits and to ask for reasons and purposes. At this point the conservatives of all ages are thoroughly dishonest: they add lies. - Nietzsche
stance on abortion has to do with speaking-for/defending someone who cant speak-for/defend themselves (the baby). Speaking-for/Defending those who can't speak-for/defend themselves is universally agreed amongst all political ideologies as a role of government (except anarchy obviously). stance on gay marriage has to do with liberals demanding everyone live under one definition of marriage. Neither contradicts my statement. In fact those examples show how liberals do wish to force their views on others (the baby and their fellow citizens). Not sure what other stances 'etc' is referring to. What other stances were you confused about?
Which is why Republicans have been known to push for a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman...
