Heard on the radio

Here’s a couple (paraphrased) good points made by callers to a radio show that I heard on the way to work this week.

Caller 1 — About the sequester budget cuts:

They expected us all to take the hit to pay the extra 2% in payroll tax at the beginning of the year. Why shouldn’t we expect government to take a hit once in a while?

Caller 2 did a great job illustrating the silliness of false choices often presented by politicians facing budget cuts:

Let’s say I take home $1,000 a week in pay. The payroll tax increase kicks in and that costs me $20 a week. Who’s going to believe it when I say, “Now I won’t have lunch money for my kids and they won’t be able to eat lunch.” Nobody…they’ll ask me if there are other expenses I could cut first. Why not cut back on the beer or Starbucks? They’ll tell me that I can make lunch for my kids to take to school.

But, why, when politicians use this tactic do people accept it as if there are no other alternatives.

Advertisements

3 thoughts on “Heard on the radio

  1. Caller 1’s question brings up a very subtle, but important point. Note that he views the government as an enemy whose interests are contrary to his own. When societies form governments, the purpose of those governments is to facilitate the goals of the members of those societies. In the USA, this centered around protecting the property (which includes the person) rights of individuals. Instead, because we now have a government that infringes on the rights of many productive individuals in order to win the votes of various special interest groups by handing them the fruits of someone else’s labors, we have a society where many members (rightly) view the government as the enemy.

    In response to Caller 2’s question, the obvious answer is that Obama isn’t appealing to productive voters like Caller 2, but to those to whom the government would redistribute Caller 2’s hard earned money.

    My question is, “Have we crossed the Rubicon?”

    • Not sure the first caller necessarily sees the gov’t as an enemy. He just recognizes that gov’t casually demands something of us that it seems extremely adverse to doing itself.

      I know productive people who accept false choices presented by politicians without much common sense pushback.

      Those are the types of points — I think — that can dislodge people from their reflexive thinking and get them to recognize some of the BS.

      I hope we haven’t crossed it.

  2. “But, why, when politicians use this tactic do people accept it as if there are no other alternatives.” Because we heard it on Fox News, therefore it must be true! 😉

Comments

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s