In his
State of the Union speech, Obama proposed universal preschool. Liberals are
suckers for nice-sounding programs.
There are two ways of interpreting Obama’s motives. The most
charitable reading is that he views this is an issue of fairness. It’s unfair
that some kids have access to preschool, but other kids don’t. Liberals have a
cookie-cutter view of fairness.
The less charitable reading is that this is a calculated
effort to weaken the bond between parents and children. Effectively make all
kids wards of the state. Another move to empower the almighty state. Make
everyone a pawn on the statist chessboard, except for the ruling class, which
gets to move the pieces.
Children between the ages of 3-5 don’t need preschool. They
need parents and grandparents. They need unstructured playtime. They need the freedom to explore the world on their own.
However, preschool is appealing to working parents because
it’s “free” babysitting. Of course, you still pay for it through the backdoor.
Liberals have a wonderful circular scam. They make the cost
of living so high that both parents must work outside the home. That, in turn,
requires childcare by someone other than the parents. It makes parents
dependent on gov’t to supply an artificial need which gov’t created in the
first place.
Are you opposed to all government education or just preschool?
ReplyDeleteI'm pretty much opposed to all gov't education–except for the military.
DeleteSorry this is nothing to do with the post, but I didn't know how else to ask you this question. Is This Joyful Eastertide no longer available? The links aren't taking me to it.
ReplyDeleteThe links to those books to the right seem to be working now. However, my copy of This Joyful Eastertide which I downloaded years ago says "Revised Edition, November 2006" on page three. The one that's available at the link only says it's copyrighted 2006 (like my copy), but it doesn't say it was revised. Maybe there were two version at 2006 and the one at the link is the earlier one.
DeleteI hope all the files that are linked to the right are the up-to-date versions.
If anyone wants to compare the two, I've uploaded my copy at deposit files here:
http://depositfiles.com/files/fzlqq8j2l
Hmmmm, yeah it's working now. Thanks, Annoyed Pinoy. Not sure what the problem was. I didn't realize it was in the sidebar and I followed a link from the index. Maybe that would work now, too, though, if I tried it now.
ReplyDeleteIs it liberals making the cost of living so high or conservative businessmen not paying adequate wages? It wasn't the govt that gradually took away my pension, converting it from defined benefit to cash balance, then reducing the percentage, then doing away with it and leaving me with just a 401(k) plan. It's not liberals that outsource jobs to India. I'd say there's plenty of blame on both sides if you're being honest. Corporate America doesn't seen to be the friend of the average worker.
ReplyDeleteOutsourcing cuts both ways. We've benefited from insourcing too. A brain drain from Third World countries to the US.
DeleteWhat makes you think liberal CEOs don't outsource jobs?
What makes you think businessmen are conservative? Are Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, &c. conservative?
DeleteRegarding your pension, I think that's a breach of contract. Corporations should be required by law to honor their pension plans. That is, or ought to be, a contractual commitment, which they don't have the right to unilaterally rewrite. So there's a loophole in corporate law.
DeleteBut that's been going on for years, under both Democrat and Republic presidents, Democrat and Republican Congresses.
Corporate America includes Hollywood and TV networks. Is that conservative? Corporate America includes Silicon Valley. Is that conservative? Corporate America includes Wall Street. Is that conservative?
Liberal policies have been raising prices on commodities.
DeleteTraveling abroad, however, I see that our standard of living is exceptionally high. That has an impact on the cost of living in what we expect to have in order to be like everyone else in our society. If you want to blame business for anything, it's not that businesses don't pay people what they are worth, but that they have gotten very good at advertising to sell luxuries that we simply don't need. But Steve is right: there are about as many liberal businesses as there are conservative ones. In fact our society's biggest and most savvy advertiser is "Hollywood" and I wouldn't call them a bastion of conservatism. Unfortunately, they are also selling a political ideology: rich liberals telling everyone else that they are poor because we don't have what they portray is normal for us to have. That raises the cost of living by raising our expectations.
A few responses:
ReplyDelete1) Most businessmen are conservatives. Sure there are some liberals but I'm talking about the majority and I think you know that. It's common knowledge that the Republican party is seen as the party of businessmen and corporations. I'm surprised you're not aware of this.
2) Under pension law companies can generally unilaterally change the terms of pensions going forward. They have to compensate you for the pension earned up to the time of the change but they can change the plans at any time.
3) You lament that it takes two incomes to support a family. Yet conservatives generally oppose increases in the minimum wage or concepts of a "living wage" that would help people as interference in the markets. Understood but then what is the solution? If markets are not allowing some people to make a living even if they work full time, then you're left with govt support through other means.
i) You're equivocating over "conservative." There's no correlation between being a businessman and being socially conservative or hawkish on foreign policy. At most it means "conservative" on economics.
DeleteLikewise, is a libertarian conservative? Depends on the issue. Depends on your definition.
ii) I didn't deny the status quo on pension law. I said what out to be the case, and I pointed out that this is a bipartisan failure.
iii) Raising the minimum wage is a tradeoff: a choice between higher employment at lower wages or lower employment at higher wages.
Likewise, if you hike the minimum wage, that hikes the cost of goods and services. Good for employees, bad for consumers. And, of course, since employees are also consumers, they themselves are paying for a higher minimum wage when they have to buy something. You're ignoring the hidden costs of your favored policies.
Yet conservatives generally oppose increases in the minimum wage or concepts of a "living wage" that would help people as interference in the markets.
DeleteThey oppose it because it would hurt people, as it has in the past.