Conservative is a word Tea Party types, Sean Hannity and other talk show hosts use to describe themselves. In today’s world a conservative identity bolsters the self esteem of those who identify themselves that way. Talk show hosts make a living repeating conservative mantras while encouraging listeners to promote their own poverty. Conservatives and liberals both end up promoting socialism. Liberal rank and file support Democratic candidates who impoverish their supporters. Conservative rank and file support Republican candidates who impoverish their supporters. The rank and file are rewarded with high self esteem but get no political benefits.
Sean Hannity has memorized all of the arguments conservatives are expected to repeat. On the January 19 broadcast, he regurgitated the standard reasons not increasing taxes on the rich. That argument is that the rich already pay too much in taxes and the poor pay from nothing to very little. So, any tax increase on the rich is not going to increase tax revenue.
Hannity is either stupid or dishonest and it doesn’t matter much which it is. His listeners are mostly stupid or perhaps intellectually lazy.
First, the poor pay a huge tax burden. The tax burden of the poor is mostly not visible to the naked eye. Why think when you have memorized the answer you want? With these kind of things, what is actually happening, is never picked up on the radars of the willfully ignorant.
For anyone who is interested in thinking the following is the truth.
The rich, our upper 1% ,have the money and power to make government small, if small government is to their benefit. But, the rich prosper by rigging markets which is more profitable when government is large and growing. Every law that is passed, bolsters the income of the rich and government grows with each law that is passed. If government is to shrink in size it is necessarily to make government super expensive the those who make it grow for their own benefit. If government is expensive enough to the 1%, they will lobby to cut spending and reduce efforts to use government to rig markets. Government will never get smaller as long as the cost of using government as a tool is lower than the profit of using government as a tool. This a case of understanding incentives.
The poor actually pay a staggering tax burden. It just takes a little thought and reasoning to see how this is accomplished. First, FICA is a tax. Saying that it is not because it is flimsily defined as something else is does not change the fact that it is a tax. The portion paid by the employer gets past on to the employee also. Hardly a soul will take the time to understand how rigging markets so as to force the poor to buy products translates into taxation. The clearest example is ethanol being required in gasoline. Ethanol and corn producers write the check for the the taxes paid but consumers pay for the ethanol, which has no utility to society. Any poor person who buys gasoline indirectly pays a corporate tax. Even welfare mothers pay taxes indirectly by virtue of the rich using government to rig markets. Rigged markets are pervasive. The one that involves ethanol is just simple to explain.
Americans only suffer when markets get rigged. In third world countries, their citizens starve when the American 1% use government as a means of running up corn prices.
A few years back it was comical to point to sixties and seventies activist whom after four decades had not change one thought or opinion. That is impossible unless one completely stops thinking and rejects all new information.
In the thirty years since conservative talk radio started the entire political arena has changed. New incentives have emerged. When talk radio was beginning, the practice of central economic planning had not been normalized. Government as a tool was less developed than it is today. Today we have new information.
Euphemism Mountain is a Curbside Jimmy Favorite. It is about life as Americans insist it is.
“I was wondering, you didn’t address the intelligence of liberals. Are they smart? The obvious reason I ask is in the last 6 years the 1 percenter issues you saddled on conservatives have not only continued but accelerated with liberals in control.”
,
Maladaptive is a more of a polite word than stupid. Stupidity is the world’s most common cause of suffering, An individual might say “I am suffering, so what stupid thing did do to cause this problem?” It would be good if voters started to reason like that. If there is suffering because government does bad things, wouldn’t it be nice if voters started asking, “What stupidity do I base my political activities on that might be causing the suffering I am observing?” Suffering is caused by stupidity and suffering the only known antidote to the problems stupidity creates.
Both parties have legions of useful idiots. Certain politicians describe themselves as liberal or conservative but that is just to get the confidence of voters, the useful idiots. Senators, congressmen and presidents function completely out of self interest and represent those who are useful to them with respect to achieving personal goals and aspirations such as obtaining more power. The useful idiots debate with one another but have no influence over how their representatives vote.
This is the system the U.S. started out with and each year citizens have had less and less influence over their elected leaders. We have gone from very little influence to none at all. The masses of useful idiots see themselves as high in importance to the political process. The truth is, engaging in meaningless busy work keeps them out of their leaders hair. Liberals are no more or less stupid than conservatives. These are just terms they use to describe themselves. Both are irrelevant.
In a democracy or republic nothing is accomplished without coercion. The stupidity is in believing their opinions are important to someone. Other than outright warfare, government is the most ruthless and competitive activity in which mankind engages. To expect elected leaders to love and respect constituents is just silly.
Common Sense Economics is not smart, only aware. Anyone who studies people and institutions according to how they function rather than how they are defined will see the same things with complete clarity. It is as simple as looking out a window and watching what is going on, without euphemistic biases, of course.
In these respects, the problem goes back to antiquity. After studying the books of Kings, I became convinced the scribes understood all of this and explained history in ways readers might ask “What is wrong with this picture?” Unforunately few ever ask. Government will exploit the masses in anyway the masses will lolerate and their tolerence seems to be without limit.