Clearly someone we all wanted on our team.
On this issue Krugman can go FU(&$!! himself as he worries about who is entitled to what benefit which he and his buddies get to control delivery of.
This is really sad...
Bonds And Money
1 year ago
8 comments:
I find that guy to be the poster boy of the quintessential condescending liberal elite. He thinks his own views are so complex and tortured. I bet he spends many a nights up wandering his mansion in the miserable agony of his confused ideology. On the other hand in his eyes, his opponents are nothing more than xenophobes or industrial kingpins looking to exploit the immigrant worker as far as he is concerned.His contempt for them is palpable. How simple minded.
I would bet Mr Krugman does not know even one member of the Tea Party on a personal level. My aunt and uncle went to a Tea Party rally. He is a retired small town bank president father of four. He still lives in the same 2000 sq ft home he raised his family in although he and my aunt winter in Florida. He has spent a life time in community and charity work. He is is not anti-immigration or even anti-social safety net. Like many Americans he is just pro fiscal responsibility and for actually being able to pay for programs you have as well as ensuring immigrants enter the country legally as his parents did. He is just mad about the current state of affairs in this country. Peoples beliefs on the side Mr Krugman demonizes are far more nuanced than he paints them.
Even if they were not I would say they are still at least more honest then those of the likes of Krugman or Al Gore who spouts his global warming reports for the masses from his 30,000 sq ft home. "Do as I say not as I do" If Mr Krugman feels so tortured he should sell off his assets and contribute them all to the safety net he demands we all pay for. Where is it written we must "assure health care and a decent income to everyone"? Who exactly decides what that even means. He says we have to "do this for some but not all." Who gets to decide who we do it for? Him?
What a dick.
Sorry for my irritable tone on the above post. I must admit people telling me from their perch they are superior because they care about others gets under my skin.
No problem
... I actually assumed that you were irritable at Krugman (as was I but for different reasons).
If it is me then my apologies for seeming "superior".
I just get frustrated at this anti-immigrant agenda as I am most definitely not anti-immigrant.
I'm anti- "bad people" and I think there are plenty of native citizens that fall into this category.
I do think the issue of bringing elderly and/or ill/disabled immigrants into the US is a very difficult one that the pro immigrant community is very disingenuous in trying to ignore as it is a simple fact that people coming in the US in their 60s will use far more resources than they ever put into the system unless some limits are put in place.
So I agree with the anti-immigrant people in that I don't think it right this issue be ignored. Pretending it is not there or that it is racist does not make it go away and only engenders resentment.
But this issue can be addressed in a myriad of ways without such anti-immigrant vehemency. I even think it can be addressed in ways that a great many pro- or neutral immigration people would not disagree with and does not require they not enter this country.
The problem with welfare states is they create an evil on this issue I find offensive.
I'm not anti tea party if that is what you think
I think this attempt to de-legitimatize them by associating racist, angry white men, etc... with them will backfire.
They are a very diverse group.
Edwardo is very sympathetic to many of their views though he despises the racist elements he sees as fringe in their ranks. I sense even JP is sympathetic to many of their positions and I've never read anything in his comments to even remotely consider anything but honorable intentions for others.
Spokespeople like Sarah Palin are difficult for me as there is a great many things she and I disagree on (like evolution in schools for one) but I'm not "anti" tea party.
No Thai certainly not you at all.I am sorry if I was not clear. It is Krugman most certainly that drives my anger. Like you I suspect we are both pro-immigrant just not bad people immigrant. I just want people in this country the legal way. I agree with you in that as "cold" as it may seem to consider such issues, when considering who we let into this country we must consider what they bring and will cost. We cannot afford to simply take all comers.
I get very frustrated with organizations like the Catholic church which runs as a "not for profit" on donations and has more expensive art and real estate than any organization in the world when it tells me I must welcome with open arms anyone who comes across the border or I am a selfish prick.
I agree the welfare state is a great evil and it is ultimately a failure when it grows to such a degree as it exists. I too get frustrated when people take a position of moral superiority that involves me as an unwilling externality.
I do my best to keep my tone down in posts as I know at a certain point people stop listening to you. Both sides have this problem and we are going no place with it. I think the bubble will need to burst.
I agree about the Tea Party completely. It is hard for me to read a piece like Krugman wrote or watch MSNBC and listen to what they say. I look at my uncle who is a good and decent and charitable man. He is as far from fringe as you can get. How can people who come off as being so smart have such a poor understanding of these complexities?
It is unfortunate that people with such Tea Party ideals cannot find another spokesperson. Palin is an intellectual light wt and although I do not think engages the racist fringe element certainly does not verbalize the more compelling libertarian arguments which exist.
I would never call you a dick!!
I have kind of come to the conclusion that people are going to do what they are going to do and simply look for a justification/rationalization after they do it.
I'm not sure this is about compelling arguments
I actually don't mind people coming in who can't afford everything but I think they need to be realistic about what we can provide for them.
If you want to come here to be with your kids when you are 70, we might not be able to treat all your cancer, etc...
I'm not sure I don't want them to be with their kids, I just don't think it reasonable that if they do come they can have everything.
Having said this, if some people want to set up lost cost cancer centers, I'm all for it. If this means they can provide 80% of the benefit at 20% of the cost and the kids want to pay, I'm all for this.
But we can't do everything for everyone and I'm frustrated that we set some artificial standard as to what the "minimum" level of care should be.
I'm not sure that keeping people out of this country because we can't face this difficult issue is any more humane/moral.
The issue is what it is
Oops, typo
if some people want to set up LOW cost cancer centers
Post a Comment