Debunking Conservative Talking Points – A New Series
If there is one thing that drives me crazy, it is right wing conservative talking points. I have to hand it to these people, they have mastered the art of boiling complex answers to complex questions down to a single sentence that can get a rise out of people. Unfortunately, for most people, it doesn’t matter how far fetched or dishonest these sound bites many of these sound bites are.
I want to take some examples of these talking points, classic and modern, and give my explanation as to why I disagree. This will be a new running series.
Inaugural Talking Point #1: The problem with Liberalism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.
This one is a modern classic. Let’s deconstruct what this talking point implies.
The very first part of the statement is “The problem with Liberalism…”. This implies is that liberalism is a problem or has many problems. Either way, it condemns the opposite view point and comforts those who share the view point. It is simply divisive, and it creates the “you’re either with us, or against us” mentality.
The second part of the statement is “…is that you eventually run out other people’s money.” The key to this statement is “other people’s money.” The purpose of this statement is to make people feel that their money is being stolen from them. What is the mechanism used by the government to “take” your money? It is taxation, of course. This is an anti-tax and anti-social program statement.
From what I understand, there are 2 common objections to taxation. The first is a moral objection, and the second is an economic objection.
The moral objection comes from the view point that the government is spending money on initiatives or programs that they do not approve of. The most frequent cited example is the religious conservative who does not want their money to go towards paying for an abortion. Another common example is any type of governmental assistance for illegal immigrants. It appears that nearly all of the moral anger is fixated on social programs.
I am thoroughly of the mind that many of the people who condemn social programs are suffering from a severe lack of empathy. How many moral objectors have ever faced some of the dire circumstances that many of these social programs help to remedy? I definitely agree that some social programs either need to be overhauled, scrapped, or simply administrated more effectively, but I don’t agree that they should be scrapped entirely. A discussion of solutions will have to wait for another post.
Free market advocates are often the proponents of the economic objection. They believe that taxation is equivalent to theft and that it is the free market that should guide spending. Let me explain the problems with capitalism and why markets may not be as rational as free market advocates think.
In an ideal Ayn Randian world, capitalism and individualism are king. However, any of us who have read Ayn Rand know that her romantic view of capitalism is not the reality we live in. The 20th century has turned into a perversion of capitalism. Capitalism is good because it promotes growth and competition. It is survival of the fittest. The individuals or groups individuals that offer superior goods or services get to make money as long as they stay innovative and competitive. Those that fall behind fail. It sounds great! However, capitalism has its flaws (like any economic system, be it socialism, communism, fascism, insert-ism). After a certain point, some individuals or groups of individuals (let’s call them huge mega corporate conglomerates!) can grow so powerful that they use their capital to exploit rather than innovate. Monopolies can become impossible to break. Workers can be paid less than a living wage, forced to work long hours, and their safety can be ignored. Politicians can be bought to change the “rules of the game” to perpetuate the capitalists’ power. Eventually, all of the money flows to the top.
Markets are not always rational because people are not rational.
