6 ms·

I don't understand the conservative desire to centrally manage the lives of the poor, taking away choice and freedom in favor of centralized bureaucracy.

yummyfajitas 11y ago
In the explicit explanation I gave above, what specifically do you not understand?
- ThomPete 11y ago
  He doesn't understand your desire. I think he is noticing a certain tendency in posts like yours.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
Turing_Machine 11y ago
What? I assure you that the the meddling, micromanaging social services bureaucracies are not run by "conservatives". Far from it. A conservative or libertarian model would tend more toward a negative income tax or guaranteed basic income than what we have now. In fact, Milton Friedman was a big advocate of the NIT.
- TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
  Neither of which are examples of centralised bureaucracy? That aside, conservative politicians aren't famous for demanding that the poor be given free money. The current British conservative government seems intent - quite literally - on starving the poor to death. That seems to be more usual for conservatives than aggressive agitation for a guaranteed basic income.
  - Turing_Machine 11y ago
    "That aside, conservative politicians aren't famous for demanding that the poor be given free money." Milton Friedman is just about the most famous conservative/libertarian economist there is. Nobel Prize, even.
    - dllthomas 11y ago
      Arguably not a politician, though.
- chongli 11y ago
  What? I assure you that the the meddling, micromanaging social services bureaucracies are not run by "conservatives". Far from it. Yes, they are. These services are known as prisons and you will find no greater a champion of their construction and expansion than among the most hard right wing members of the Republican party.
  - Turing_Machine 11y ago
    "Yes, they are. These services are known as prisons" Nice attempt to shift the goal posts, but I'm not going to bite. We're talking about welfare reform, not prison reform.
    - chongli 11y ago
      Prisons are the largest form of welfare in the US. They provide food, clothing, shelter and medical care to millions and millions of people who would otherwise be out in the cold. You don't have to search very far to find tons of examples of ex-cons who deliberately commit crimes in order to be sent back to prison.
      - smtddr 11y ago
        >>"They provide food, clothing, shelter and medical care to millions and millions of people who would otherwise be out in the cold" That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that they entrap many people who don't deserve to be there and would be productive members of society if it weren't for some ridiculous punishment on a nonsensical law. I think it's unreasonable to believe that even half the people in an American prison would be homeless without it.
      - zaroth 11y ago
        FYI, corrections was about $70b in 2006 versus just social security spending was about $550b. You can get a subsidized housing, free food, free medical care, and direct deposit cash every month from the government, and you don't need to be a felon to do it. In fact, you must not be a felon to be eligible.
      - 11y ago
cookiecaper 11y ago
The desire springs from the idea that if someone is not self-sufficient, they need a manager to oversee their resource management and consumption until they become self-sufficient. It's delusional to say that there's not a large number of poor people whose economic status is directly related to their poor money management skills, poor employability, or other "real problems" that need fixed, not just band-aided by free cash. In the same way that conservatives want to "micromanage" the lives of welfare recipients, liberals want you to believe everyone's problem is that they don't have infinity money and that there's no such thing as an imprudent expenditure. Liberals usually do not put any weight on independence or self-sufficiency, so they're OK with a society where everyone is on the dole. By contrast, conservatives believe that people who are not self-sufficient need help to become self-sufficient. Conservatives believe this is micromanagement to the same extent that liberals believe gun control to be micromanagement. To each party, it's the obvious, common sense solution, and it's not about patronizing or babysitting, it's just about supervising people who obviously need supervision.

yummyfajitas 11y ago

In the explicit explanation I gave above, what specifically do you not understand?

ThomPete 11y ago
He doesn't understand your desire. I think he is noticing a certain tendency in posts like yours.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

Turing_Machine 11y ago

What? I assure you that the the meddling, micromanaging social services bureaucracies are not run by "conservatives". Far from it. A conservative or libertarian model would tend more toward a negative income tax or guaranteed basic income than what we have now. In fact, Milton Friedman was a big advocate of the NIT.

TheOtherHobbes 11y ago
Neither of which are examples of centralised bureaucracy? That aside, conservative politicians aren't famous for demanding that the poor be given free money. The current British conservative government seems intent - quite literally - on starving the poor to death. That seems to be more usual for conservatives than aggressive agitation for a guaranteed basic income.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  "That aside, conservative politicians aren't famous for demanding that the poor be given free money." Milton Friedman is just about the most famous conservative/libertarian economist there is. Nobel Prize, even.
  - dllthomas 11y ago
    Arguably not a politician, though.
chongli 11y ago
What? I assure you that the the meddling, micromanaging social services bureaucracies are not run by "conservatives". Far from it. Yes, they are. These services are known as prisons and you will find no greater a champion of their construction and expansion than among the most hard right wing members of the Republican party.
- Turing_Machine 11y ago
  "Yes, they are. These services are known as prisons" Nice attempt to shift the goal posts, but I'm not going to bite. We're talking about welfare reform, not prison reform.
  - chongli 11y ago
    Prisons are the largest form of welfare in the US. They provide food, clothing, shelter and medical care to millions and millions of people who would otherwise be out in the cold. You don't have to search very far to find tons of examples of ex-cons who deliberately commit crimes in order to be sent back to prison.
    - smtddr 11y ago
      >>"They provide food, clothing, shelter and medical care to millions and millions of people who would otherwise be out in the cold" That's one way of looking at it. Another way is that they entrap many people who don't deserve to be there and would be productive members of society if it weren't for some ridiculous punishment on a nonsensical law. I think it's unreasonable to believe that even half the people in an American prison would be homeless without it.
    - zaroth 11y ago
      FYI, corrections was about $70b in 2006 versus just social security spending was about $550b. You can get a subsidized housing, free food, free medical care, and direct deposit cash every month from the government, and you don't need to be a felon to do it. In fact, you must not be a felon to be eligible.
    - 11y ago

cookiecaper 11y ago

The desire springs from the idea that if someone is not self-sufficient, they need a manager to oversee their resource management and consumption until they become self-sufficient. It's delusional to say that there's not a large number of poor people whose economic status is directly related to their poor money management skills, poor employability, or other "real problems" that need fixed, not just band-aided by free cash. In the same way that conservatives want to "micromanage" the lives of welfare recipients, liberals want you to believe everyone's problem is that they don't have infinity money and that there's no such thing as an imprudent expenditure. Liberals usually do not put any weight on independence or self-sufficiency, so they're OK with a society where everyone is on the dole. By contrast, conservatives believe that people who are not self-sufficient need help to become self-sufficient. Conservatives believe this is micromanagement to the same extent that liberals believe gun control to be micromanagement. To each party, it's the obvious, common sense solution, and it's not about patronizing or babysitting, it's just about supervising people who obviously need supervision.