Mindful of LB's criticism of my last post (and I mean that seriously) let me just say that I disagree completely with Paul Ryan's roadmap for a smaller government and Yglesias points to evidence that suggests it would result in Higher Taxes for 90% of Americans, Less Revenue for the Government.
Not intending to be snide today (cloudy and my mood has darkened as well) but as I mentioned to a friend of mine, I think that most conservative's belief in "smaller government" is based on 90% mythology--that somehow a smaller government and reduced taxes will result in keeping all the things that conservatives like but don't realize are a result of government choices. Somehow, the market will keep rivers free of flames, rain free of acid, and infrastructure free of collapsing bridges.
It is a paradox of success, perhaps, that government programs that have worked to reduce poverty, child labor, industrial accidents, environmental health hazards--are so well accepted that conservatives believe they occurred because of the free market. That is certainly true of the middle class--something that is disappearing before our very eyes under conservative economic policies, but somehow I am supposed to believe that it will rebound once we further reduce taxes and regulations and stop government from intruding in their lives.
This is best exemplified by the aforementioned conservative charge that Obama is trying to impose government healthcare that will reduce Medicare--or by the very Red states who receive more in federal aid than they send in tax money. A friend of mine suggested he could run for office here in Oklahoma pledging to pass legislation requiring states to receive only what they send to the federal budget. He is pretty sure that Oklahoma Republicans would love the idea not realizing that would mean a cut in assistance for roads, or help for the poor or education.
No comments:
Post a Comment