Tea Party
So with the recent election I got to thinking about the Tea Party.
If you take away the idiots like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bauchman and the few White supremists that show up at rallies and instead look at the real Libertarians like Ron Paul and his son Rand.
I want to ask what does the Tea Party really stand for?
Primarily it seems to be smaller less intrusive government. Right? That seems to be goal no 1.
What does that mean?
Smaller Federal government? Yes. I can certainly agree with a smaller bureaucracy. I can certainly agree with more state control of funds. Yet at the same time, every state in country receives a lot of Federal Aid. http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/fas-09.pdf
America could go the way of the EU and become a series of individual country/states. I might like that. But even if that were to happen, most states mirror the federal government in terms of style. If we didn't go that far but instead just returned State power to the States that would probably make a lot of Tea Folk happy. But a strong central government gives us, strong military, strong trade power, strong research abilities (why do you think only the former USSR and the USA have space programs). If we reduced that power as the Tea folk would like. Then food becomes more expensive, a lot of our science would get reduced, any state that had a natural disaster would be fucked. It would save money (and probably a lot) but that's about the only thing good that would come of it.
Smaller Military? Maybe not a bad idea, certainly Ron Paul thinks that. Yet if any Tea folk think that by voting in Republicans you're going to get a smaller military or smaller military complex. You are out of your freaking mind, you know that right? So you've already completely given up on that one.
Less Socialism? Is it really that horrible to pay taxes to help your fellow countrymen out? Is it that onerous to Tea folk to give up some of their hard earned money to help those less fortunate? I think this is where I have the biggest disconnect with them. I don't mind paying taxes to help the elderly with social security, or to give people health insurance.
I know socialized health care seems to be the thing that gets the Tea folk riled up the most. Why? It works in the rest of the world. Really it does. I've lived in different parts of Europe and while people complain about the cost there too, everyone has health care. People here compare it to Canadian health care and how 'scary' it can be. Do the Tea folk really think we would have to adopt every aspect of it. Our University's and Medical Centers are the best in the world, they aren't going to vanish.
Our health care system is bloated, expensive and often times ineffective. The argument that getting the government involved isn't going to make it better is somewhat valid. Yet most of the Tea folk are all in favor of Medicare. How many sign's do we see "Keep the government out of my Medicare!" (a tragic choice of words if ever there was).
Being required to purchase health insurance is the big problem? The SAME arguments were made about Social Security http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States) it even went to the Supreme Court. However it's estimated that Social Security keeps over 40% of Americans over 65 out of poverty. Is that really such a bad thing? Sure social security has problems and needs some fixing up but it's helped MILLIONS of Americans.
Health insurance isn't the exact same, but it is certainly close. Are the Tea folk THAT opposed to helping children get coverage when they have a preexisting condition? Old folk, out of work folk, ALL folk?
Tea folk are in favor of free markets?
Yes free markets certainly move resources in an effective manor. I agree with that, but people with money and resource have always gamed the system to prevent others from catching up. Regulating banks, commerce and trade is one of the best ways to allow SMALL business' to compete with huge corporations. So how in the hell do Tea folk think voting for Republicans will help here? The Tea folk that get voted in are going to caucus with the Republicans and no matter how you look at it, the Republican party is controlled primarily by huge corporations. This is exactly the opposite of this part of Tea Party doctrine.
Those are the only points I can think of that are true Tea Party stuff.
If we were to take them all.
We would all live and die by our own means. Ok not bad, maybe barbaric but me being a healthy white male could deal with it. The working environment would be where the rich had all the power and the poor had none. No safety nets, old folk without kids would starve, get sick and die unless they were wealthy. The planetary environment would be what Mexico or China are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_of_China . It isn't pretty (and really have any Libertarian or Republican ever been in FAVOR of conservation, or cleaning the environment?)
It certainly doesn't seem better to me.
So what do Tea Folk want?
I really don't know. More money? More personal...freedom? Freedom to do what? More people to suffer, so long as it's not them? More people to work harder? None of those seem like the answer except maybe Money. I just don't understand what they want? To walk their own way and succeed on their own....so long as the rest of the world walks the same path as them and succeeds the same way as them?
If you take away the idiots like Sarah Palin and Michelle Bauchman and the few White supremists that show up at rallies and instead look at the real Libertarians like Ron Paul and his son Rand.
I want to ask what does the Tea Party really stand for?
Primarily it seems to be smaller less intrusive government. Right? That seems to be goal no 1.
What does that mean?
Smaller Federal government? Yes. I can certainly agree with a smaller bureaucracy. I can certainly agree with more state control of funds. Yet at the same time, every state in country receives a lot of Federal Aid. http://www.census.gov/prod/2010pubs/fas-09.pdf
America could go the way of the EU and become a series of individual country/states. I might like that. But even if that were to happen, most states mirror the federal government in terms of style. If we didn't go that far but instead just returned State power to the States that would probably make a lot of Tea Folk happy. But a strong central government gives us, strong military, strong trade power, strong research abilities (why do you think only the former USSR and the USA have space programs). If we reduced that power as the Tea folk would like. Then food becomes more expensive, a lot of our science would get reduced, any state that had a natural disaster would be fucked. It would save money (and probably a lot) but that's about the only thing good that would come of it.
Smaller Military? Maybe not a bad idea, certainly Ron Paul thinks that. Yet if any Tea folk think that by voting in Republicans you're going to get a smaller military or smaller military complex. You are out of your freaking mind, you know that right? So you've already completely given up on that one.
Less Socialism? Is it really that horrible to pay taxes to help your fellow countrymen out? Is it that onerous to Tea folk to give up some of their hard earned money to help those less fortunate? I think this is where I have the biggest disconnect with them. I don't mind paying taxes to help the elderly with social security, or to give people health insurance.
I know socialized health care seems to be the thing that gets the Tea folk riled up the most. Why? It works in the rest of the world. Really it does. I've lived in different parts of Europe and while people complain about the cost there too, everyone has health care. People here compare it to Canadian health care and how 'scary' it can be. Do the Tea folk really think we would have to adopt every aspect of it. Our University's and Medical Centers are the best in the world, they aren't going to vanish.
Our health care system is bloated, expensive and often times ineffective. The argument that getting the government involved isn't going to make it better is somewhat valid. Yet most of the Tea folk are all in favor of Medicare. How many sign's do we see "Keep the government out of my Medicare!" (a tragic choice of words if ever there was).
Being required to purchase health insurance is the big problem? The SAME arguments were made about Social Security http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States) it even went to the Supreme Court. However it's estimated that Social Security keeps over 40% of Americans over 65 out of poverty. Is that really such a bad thing? Sure social security has problems and needs some fixing up but it's helped MILLIONS of Americans.
Health insurance isn't the exact same, but it is certainly close. Are the Tea folk THAT opposed to helping children get coverage when they have a preexisting condition? Old folk, out of work folk, ALL folk?
Tea folk are in favor of free markets?
Yes free markets certainly move resources in an effective manor. I agree with that, but people with money and resource have always gamed the system to prevent others from catching up. Regulating banks, commerce and trade is one of the best ways to allow SMALL business' to compete with huge corporations. So how in the hell do Tea folk think voting for Republicans will help here? The Tea folk that get voted in are going to caucus with the Republicans and no matter how you look at it, the Republican party is controlled primarily by huge corporations. This is exactly the opposite of this part of Tea Party doctrine.
Those are the only points I can think of that are true Tea Party stuff.
If we were to take them all.
We would all live and die by our own means. Ok not bad, maybe barbaric but me being a healthy white male could deal with it. The working environment would be where the rich had all the power and the poor had none. No safety nets, old folk without kids would starve, get sick and die unless they were wealthy. The planetary environment would be what Mexico or China are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_of_China . It isn't pretty (and really have any Libertarian or Republican ever been in FAVOR of conservation, or cleaning the environment?)
It certainly doesn't seem better to me.
So what do Tea Folk want?
I really don't know. More money? More personal...freedom? Freedom to do what? More people to suffer, so long as it's not them? More people to work harder? None of those seem like the answer except maybe Money. I just don't understand what they want? To walk their own way and succeed on their own....so long as the rest of the world walks the same path as them and succeeds the same way as them?