Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A large portion of Americans seem to be against social programs even though it may be for the common good. When there is talk of the (on average) much better social programs in many European countries the general response is "well, they have to spend more on taxes". To which I ask.....so? If it meant far better health care, far better maternity leave, etc. isn't that worth it? Do not the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one?
Because the Bible says that if you don't work, you can't eat.
1) Genuine ignorance. You cannot underestimate the stupidity of the average person, American or otherwise. This includes people on Medicare and Social Security who do not know that those are federal programs.
2) Racism. "This should only go to the /right people/--"
They get to decide who the right people are.
3) Religious extremism. "Under the /right circumstances/--"
This is an American classic: claim extreme religious beliefs, scream about them being violated, claim you are being discriminated against.
4) Extreme racism. "So that none of those goddamn (black, brown, Hispanic, non-brown-but-mistaken-by-Americans-for-being-Mexican, Mexicans, legal Mexican immigrants, anyone who doesn't look like me) get it."
Many Americans would genuinely live in the acid-drenched effluvia of industrial runoff beneath waste pipes if they thought other people wouldn't even get pipes over their heads.
5) Short-sighted hatred born by inability to feel empathy. "Because only I deserve it."
America is too diverse a nation to ensure that things like welfare programs only benefit the white Christian population. Welfare for anyone else is a "hand out"; welfare for them is a "hand up".
So nobody should have it, because it might benefit a colored person.
can't rep you enough.
Much of this is because we allow propaganda to influence weak thinkers into believing social safety nets are communist and take directly from them. People are lied to daily by FOX, crazy Radio and websites that fool them into believing Europe is awful and that people there live on death panels etc. The truth is national healthcare systems are great and they cater to all income levels. Having good social programs does not mean turning into a weak debt ridden country it merely means a more progressive tax system.
And despite the fake charts in this thread, we do NOT have a progressive system as it stands, and i know because make a lot of money, a have a lot more and pay very very little tax at all.
Trump's tax "plan" is a money grab, i would make a lot if it went through and someone has to pay for that you can't take a trillion out and not expect someone to make up that shortfall either through cuts or increased regressive taxes.
Definition of American Dream: the ideal that every US citizen should have an equal opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative.
Well, we don't all have equal opportunity to achieve. Some of us are born into poor families and live in poor neighborhoods with bad schools. Some of us are born with pre existing conditions.
Hard work, determination and initiative doesn't get many people the American Dream. What it gets them is a life full of hard work at unfair wages in a society that doesn't value their contributions. So much so that we believe its okay for Child A to have better advantages in society by virtue of birth vs. Child B who was just unlucky enough to be born in a poor rural area without access to good schools.
People equate hard work with success. I know plenty of people who work their asses off and they sure in the heck aren't living the American Dream. Between the cost of daycare, healthcare, being unable to take sick time or have family time - they are living the American Nightmare.
Like George Carlin said, "The reason they call it the American Dream is because you have to be asleep to believe it."
Notice how the people in favor of government social programs always frame others as greedy, selfish, or uncaring. It's just pure emotion and sentimentality.
"I want to help ALL the puppies in the world"
"Well you can't realistically help all of them..."
"So you're saying you just want them to die??"
"I don't want them to die, but.."
"I can't believe you don't want to help! What kind of person doesn't want to help puppies??"
You have to be rational. Of course if there was no downside to giving people stuff unconditionally we'd be in favor of it, but it isn't that simple.
Not to mention the most important part - you're using the government to force it on everyone else. *Politicians know it won't be sustainable, but they make it the law that you must help all the puppies, and then they're seen as heroes...they'll be long gone by the time problems arise*
My reasoning is entirely rational. A more egalitarian society is a more stable one. If wealth and power is slowly concentrated in a smaller and smaller group, those who have very little will grow in numbers. They will notice an abuse of power is being done to secure their wealth, and they will take action, almost always in the form of some radical leftist revolution. It's happened in many countries throughout the last few centuries. The French overthrew the monarch and you saw how that ended. The Russians overthrew the Czar and you saw how that ended. Is this really a path you want to even risk? I don't. Which is why I feel a democratic (or republican; let's not debate the difference right now since we all should be smart enough to know what I'm saying) system is best preserved when policy is made that allows those with less an actual chance to get ahead. It's not saying "**** the rich" or "fix all your problems." It's saying those with more can pay a little bit more so that those with less have an opportunity to make something of themselves.
My reasoning is entirely rational. A more egalitarian society is a more stable one. If wealth and power is slowly concentrated in a smaller and smaller group, those who have very little will grow in numbers. They will notice an abuse of power is being done to secure their wealth, and they will take action, almost always in the form of some radical leftist revolution. It's happened in many countries throughout the last few centuries. The French overthrew the monarch and you saw how that ended. The Russians overthrew the Czar and you saw how that ended. Is this really a path you want to even risk? I don't. Which is why I feel a democratic (or republican; let's not debate the difference right now since we all should be smart enough to know what I'm saying) system is best preserved when policy is made that allows those with less an actual chance to get ahead. It's not saying "**** the rich" or "fix all your problems." It's saying those with more can pay a little bit more so that those with less have an opportunity to make something of themselves.
Egalitarian means equal social status and equal opportunities. It doesn't mean equal results.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
