you know what I'd love to see? A side by side graph of people who don't drive private vehicles, and people who do, and how much people who don't drive financially subsidize people who do.
I hear from some urbanism circles that each new suburban development subsidises road repair from the prev ones, but it's a cycle they can never keep up with
Huh. Interesting. Neither description seems to quite fit government assistance driven by an emergency—now circumstantially acceptable to the middle/owning classes. But then many willing to accept that assistance might swallow the bitter pill of “welfare” to themselves: more deserving than the poor.
I'm afraid I must once again blame Reagsn, the Ganondorf of the American conservative movement. he wasn't the first to shit on "welfare", but he certainly did it with enough ferocity to make his version of the concept last to this day
Or apply Newspeak definitions to existing terms:
Entitlement now means something to which we, and especially “they” _feel_ entitled, but apparently _are not_ entitled—such as the wages we earn and pay into Social Security.
I do think there is a little nuance here, but the nuance is itself cruel and poor logic. Its the difference between helping someone who is "trying their best" and giving freebies to a lazy bum.
and more and more we find lazy bum means ‘depressed’ or ‘needs medical help’ or ‘is missing a diagnosis they need’, ‘doesn’t fit in’, ‘just needs someone to help them’ -I shudder over what I was raised to think laziness was.
I agree. If somebody tries and fails, and then has no assistance to prevent that failure from being total ruin, they're likely to just give up. Society has failed them. Is it right, then, to continue to deny them assistance? I say no, that is not right.
Precisely! Until the assistance that they need, that they can respond to, becomes available to them and is made accessible and they are getting the help they need, we are failing them.
Well, think about the fact that they managed to demonize the word 'welfare' so effectively in the first place. They've almost got there with 'woke'. They are very good at this sort of thing.
but, but, but..
what have you done with my facts, you {okies hey.. my grandma says i definitely need to insert a slur here}
something something ronald reagan
This feels at least as much about ronald reagan-types being effective marketers of anti-"welfare" ideas as it's about people being unintelligent or whatever
Direct cash assistance to poor ppl is good (& UBI + CTC is better) but I can see ppl making a distinction between that and “assistance to the poor” (Medicaid, housing subsidies, municipal WIFI, etc…)
We knew this; it's all about language, optics. Ask Americans how they think of the AHCA and they approve, but start calling it "Obamacare" and they have a laundry list of complaints.
A surefire way to get Americans to hate a thing is to associate it with a black person, and Repubs know this.
