I believe a solid portion of the population is waking up to the reality that the hyper-individualistic system we were born into is actually what’s dangerous and extreme.
I can’t help but comment on the phenomenon of Bernie Sanders in American culture.
Some people love him, and others appear outright frightened by his ideas.
I think what most interests me however, is the misconception that Bernie Sanders and his ideas are somehow radical or extreme. There’s nothing radical or extreme about these kinds of ideas in America today.
A wide range of Americans share Bernie Sanders’ concerns and his ideas, without finding them radical or extreme. In fact, I believe a solid portion of the population is waking up to the reality that the hyper-individualistic system we were born into is actually what’s dangerous and extreme.
And more than being dangerous and extreme, I believe the average person is beginning to view the current system as being fundamentally unfair.
When I listen to the ideas of Senator Sanders, I find less and less of his ideas to be radical. Instead, his ideas seem to represent the hopes and concerns of most of the people I know in real life.
The full article is available here
Friday, February 12, 2016
Wednesday, February 3, 2016
Fact Check: 'New American Way Of Life' Meme - Snopes
As is often the case with e-mail polemics focused on purported welfare abuse and taxpayer outrage, the "New American Way of Life" offers an implausible, far-fetched scenario to condemn those who use public assistance to make ends meet.
A "New American Way of Life" scamming scheme that laments a generous welfare state in America is largely off-base.
While this trope asserts that the complex welfare hustling plan described here is "perfectly legal," several aspects of it involve defrauding the system in an expressly prohibited (and largely criminal) fashion.
Were any family to hide assets or lie about household income on application forms, they would be subject to severe penalties and prosecution should their perfidy be unraveled. The scheme also rests upon the (fallacious) notion that access to assistance programs is easy to both maintain and retain.
As is often the case with e-mail polemics focused on purported welfare abuse and taxpayeroutrage, the "New American Way of Life" offers an implausible, far-fetched scenario to condemn those who use public assistance to make ends meet.
The full article is available here
A "New American Way of Life" scamming scheme that laments a generous welfare state in America is largely off-base.
While this trope asserts that the complex welfare hustling plan described here is "perfectly legal," several aspects of it involve defrauding the system in an expressly prohibited (and largely criminal) fashion.
Were any family to hide assets or lie about household income on application forms, they would be subject to severe penalties and prosecution should their perfidy be unraveled. The scheme also rests upon the (fallacious) notion that access to assistance programs is easy to both maintain and retain.
As is often the case with e-mail polemics focused on purported welfare abuse and taxpayeroutrage, the "New American Way of Life" offers an implausible, far-fetched scenario to condemn those who use public assistance to make ends meet.
The full article is available here
Monday, February 1, 2016
Flint Water Tragedy: Running Government Like Business & Austerity - Jeremy Mohler in Common Dreams
The tragedy in Flint is a symptom of a larger shift in American political economy. Today, it is normal to blame government deficits for society’s problems, and to scoff at raising government revenues to fund much-needed investments in critical infrastructure and social programs.
In February 2015, almost a full year before the news of widespread lead poisoning in Flint, Michigan, gained headlines, the world’s largest private water corporation, Veolia, deemed Flint’s water safe.
They were hired by the city to assess the discolored water that many residents had been complaining about—a General Motors plant had even stopped using Flint’s water because it was rusting car parts.
Running government like a business is to blame. Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder is a former corporate executive and venture capitalist with little government experience prior to being governor. Snyder talks about “outcomes” and “deliverables,” calls residents “customers,” and has sought to “reinvent” Michigan to make it business-friendly.
The ethos of austerity is also to blame. The tragedy in Flint is a symptom of a larger shift in American political economy. Today, it is normal to blame government deficits for society’s problems, and to scoff at raising government revenues (taxes) to fund much-needed investments in critical infrastructure and social programs.
The resulting philosophy is: markets good; government spending bad. Which really means: market competition, which favors the already powerful, good; democracy, which has the potential to help everyone, bad.
The full article is available here
In February 2015, almost a full year before the news of widespread lead poisoning in Flint, Michigan, gained headlines, the world’s largest private water corporation, Veolia, deemed Flint’s water safe.
They were hired by the city to assess the discolored water that many residents had been complaining about—a General Motors plant had even stopped using Flint’s water because it was rusting car parts.
Running government like a business is to blame. Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder is a former corporate executive and venture capitalist with little government experience prior to being governor. Snyder talks about “outcomes” and “deliverables,” calls residents “customers,” and has sought to “reinvent” Michigan to make it business-friendly.
The ethos of austerity is also to blame. The tragedy in Flint is a symptom of a larger shift in American political economy. Today, it is normal to blame government deficits for society’s problems, and to scoff at raising government revenues (taxes) to fund much-needed investments in critical infrastructure and social programs.
The resulting philosophy is: markets good; government spending bad. Which really means: market competition, which favors the already powerful, good; democracy, which has the potential to help everyone, bad.
The full article is available here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)