A poverty of ideas

[questionmark]

Liberal pundits have deplored for many years the stale or entirely nonexistent GOP policy agenda — with some justification. Since 2008 the predominant message coming from Republicans at the federal level was anti-government and hostility toward anything that smacked of “compassionate conservatism.” (Perish the thought that Republicans should want to improve the lives of the poor and vulnerable.) But a lot has changed in the last year or so. The GOP’s critics might want to take another look at each party.

Much as it annoys far-left and far-right pundits, the wonkish center-right is having an intellectual feast these days. Suddenly, everywhere one cares to look, speeches, ideas, proposals and essays take on issues like poverty, upward mobility and even happiness. Think tankers, pundits and politicians on the right seem to have simultaneously figured out that conservatism and governance are not mutually exclusive.

Read more

[supervike]

This is an interesting article. But, despite what the think tanks and speeches say, when will this type of thinking make it into legislation or bypass partisanship?

That is where the rubber will meet the road.

[F3SS]

"Perish the thought that Republicans should want to improve the lives of the poor and vulnerable."

Besides the 'things for votes' ideology the left wing politicians use to encourage folks to do less for more and what exactly is it that they do that improves the lives of people? The New Deal and Great Society programs have been in full effect for somewhere around 60 years and the communities that benefit from this generosity are in complete and total disarray. Show me a community made prosperous by these life improving policies.

I identify with middle to conservative ideas, aside from religion. My philosophy is to teach and not to give, to help but not support and by choice opposed to by force. Is someone's life improved by giving them more for less or is it improved by teaching skills needed to acquire what's needed?

The usual suspects will almost as a guarantee revert to bash me with something similar to the quote above but will not concede that teaching is better than supporting. Beats me.

[questionmark]

"Perish the thought that Republicans should want to improve the lives of the poor and vulnerable."

Besides the 'things for votes' ideology the left wing politicians use to encourage folks to do less for more and what exactly is it that they do that improves the lives of people? The New Deal and Great Society programs have been in full effect for somewhere around 60 years and the communities that benefit from this generosity are in complete and total disarray. Show me a community made prosperous by these life improving policies.

I identify with middle to conservative ideas, aside from religion. My philosophy is to teach and not to give, to help but not support and by choice opposed to by force. Is someone's life improved by giving them more for less or is it improved by teaching skills needed to acquire what's needed?

The usual suspects will almost as a guarantee revert to bash me with something similar to the quote above but will not concede that teaching is better than supporting. Beats me.

You mean to tell us that, on average, people are worse off in 2014 then they were in 1934, or 1924 or 1914?

[Jeremiah65]

I am not against social programs that actually work...which generally is at the smaller, more local levels.

We are social animals, there is absolutely nothing wrong with looking out for your family, friends and neighbors...it's part of being "civilized".

But, problems always seem to raise up...from corruption to greed...(or corruption that springs from greed...both applicable). Just look at the aid we give to third world countries that never makes it down to the level of the people.

I am a fan of letting people do whatever it is they do best to take care of themselves and I really don't care much what that is as long as it is not hurting another human being against their will.

Poverty will always be with us. There will always be "The haves and the have nots". It springs from our most primal tendencies of self preservation...to protect our own food, water, shelter and mate. We hoard up for ourselves and if someone outside of our circle is in need...well for many people ....the attitude is...."sucks to be you".

[F3SS]

You mean to tell us that, on average, people are worse off in 2014 then they were in 1934, or 1924 or 1914?

No not at all. My point was show me the great societies. You know which ones.

[preacherman76]

You mean to tell us that, on average, people are worse off in 2014 then they were in 1934, or 1924 or 1914?

In some ways yes they were.

[Harte]

"Perish the thought that Republicans should want to improve the lives of the poor and vulnerable."

Besides the 'things for votes' ideology the left wing politicians use to encourage folks to do less for more and what exactly is it that they do that improves the lives of people? The New Deal and Great Society programs have been in full effect for somewhere around 60 years and the communities that benefit from this generosity are in complete and total disarray. Show me a community made prosperous by these life improving policies.

I identify with middle to conservative ideas, aside from religion. My philosophy is to teach and not to give, to help but not support and by choice opposed to by force. Is someone's life improved by giving them more for less or is it improved by teaching skills needed to acquire what's needed?

The usual suspects will almost as a guarantee revert to bash me with something similar to the quote above but will not concede that teaching is better than supporting. Beats me.

This is true. But, as a teacher, I must say that teaching is MUCH harder than supporting.

Harte

[F3SS]

This is true. But, as a teacher, I must say that teaching is MUCH harder than supporting.

Harte

Also true but what does hard work do? It pays off.