Makers and Takers and… Someone We Forgot!
I’m going to write one more post about the election and then knock it off and go back to writing about the culture and about politics from a broader perspective.
One of my personal rules in life is this: whenever I start feeling a satisfying swell of righteous certainty, I begin to suspect that I might be wrong. You may not always be in error when you begin a sentence with, “Well, sir, if you would just read your Constitution…” or “the Word of God clearly says…” but the odds in favor of your making a pompous ass of yourself are, trust me, astronomical.
So I should have known we had a serious problem when I felt that righteous surge at Mitt Romney’s now infamous 47% remarks:
There are 47 percent of the people who will vote for the president no matter what. All right, there are 47 percent who are with him, who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. That that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them. And they will vote for this president no matter what.
I did not agree with this — but I did agree with what I thought he meant: there are too many takers and not enough makers nowadays. And even as the Democrats beat the words like a drum, I defended Romney’s comments to my friend E.J. McMahon at the Manhattan Institute’s Empire Center. E.J., one of the savviest political observers I know and one of the best predictors of political outcomes, told me almost the moment these words were made public — not that they would cost Romney the election, but that they represented the sentiment and approach that would, in fact, cost him the election.
He was right. I was wrong. I owe him dinner.
"Forgotten Man," by John McNaughton
Many commentators on the right — many I truly like and respect — are reading this election as a tipping point: Tocqueville’s nightmare come to life, when the voters realize they can use their franchise to pillage the public purse. Again: more takers than makers.
This might be true if the world were, in fact, divided into makers and takers. But, of course, it’s not. There is a group that far outnumbers either of these and it’s this group the Republicans have failed to reach: the workers.
For every entrepreneur who wonderfully creates six jobs, there are six guys and girls who set their alarms every morning and show up to do those jobs. They drive trucks, they hit keyboards, they make appointments, they lift boxes. When dynamic movers and shakers dynamically gather in the boardroom and act dynamic, they’re outside in the cubicles, or in the storeroom, or in the halls vacuuming the carpet. And they’re struggling. To raise children without a spouse. To keep their homes. To pay their bills.
In the old days, they had marriages and went to church and believed in the verities and could be reached by way of their values. But that is not so true anymore: a lot of them are not married and don’t go to church and have never even learned what the verities are. And, yes, that’s part of the reason they’re in trouble — and it’s something that must be addressed long term — but it doesn’t make their current difficulties any less and it doesn’t make them any less our neighbors, fellow citizens and children of God.
Now, before you say something in your comments you’ll regret — or should regret — this is not to endorse the freedom-killing and economy-destroying solutions of the left, which only create a nation of rulers and dependents. Barack Obama has been a disaster for the poor and the working class and, I believe, will continue to be so. But to pat a worker on the head with your cigar hand and say, basically, “Don’t worry, little man, an unfettered market lifts everyone,” is not going to win you his confidence or his vote. Reagan never did that. (Read the excellent WaPo piece by AEI’s Henry Olsen at the link.) Reagan always stood up and spoke up for the little guy. He identified with him and explained why his policies would help him. Many of today’s Republicans have lost that knack and given the game away in the process. That’s why the polls showed people shared Romney’s values but thought Obama cared about “people like me.”
It’s largely conservative policies that help the working guy and girl, but you have to let them know that and make sure they understand that government cares about them and will not abandon them if they fall off the bottom rung of the ladder. When one candidate is saying, “Tax the rich,” and the other is calling half the people moochers, both are wrong… but only one will win an election. We already know which one.
Beautiful article!
The main problem with arguing for self-reliance is that it seems cold nowadays.
Well,It is not!
Republicans have to be better at showing empathy towards the working man without offering a Handout. It is not that easy though.
Maybe, they should focus more on the integrity of the working man and corrolate it with self-reliance.
Yes, the one thing greatly overlooked is the fact that most workers look at business, even small business, with the same eyes they look at all business, as a step up in life’s hierarchy. Workers and business owners are a world apart in their thinking and mentality but for some reason lumped together in politics.
I agree but do not think any republican, or socalled democratic liberal does actually care about the people who provide the fuel for the engines of the nation. Why should they?The social and political culture of the past half century mitigate against.
It has become infra dig to be a worker blue or white collar. The desire is to “have class”.
Why else the love affair with university/college that teaches less even, and much of that institutionally false, than earlier generations learned in public high schools. And indenturing the students and graduates for years afterwards?
What else is a culture which dismisses a history, the provenance, of the nation without actually teaching truthfully as the records allow? With all the human error in America as nation she was THE model of the dream of humans to become the best they can become.
Until these new age philosophers, compassionate liberals in politics – ALL PARTIES decided to “fundamentally transform” that model, that identity. “Educating” the children.
Ronald Reagan the only President within living memory who proclaimed his pride in being American. Contrast that with the present man in the White House who told Americans and the world he “was ashamed of the country”, this country of his 57 States.
A culture that literally and figuratively spits as a sign of “class” on men considered heroic within that history? The “workers”, those who “protect and serve” and those exemplified by the white stones in Arlington National Cemetery as well as countless cemeteries in Europe.
Citizens have eagerly fallen into line and marched to their pipes and drums. Citizens of all parties, colours, and philosophies have accepted their restrictions on the history and principles of the nation BEGINNING with their abrogation of the First Amendment of freedom of thought word and deed with their political correctness. Politicians, citizens accepted and went along to get along.
And, evidenced by this most recent example of the socio-psychopathy embedded in the culture, people who never held a proper job in their lives are selected to represent the people – your workers – of the nation. BY those people. As if they prefer corrupt royals to conscientious and principled people to represent them. In sinecures of governance in both houses of Congress and Executive.. Most powerful and most protective union for quasi royals in the nation.
“Our leaders are the best of men, and we elect them again and again”.
Yes, Devlin… don’t argue self-reliance.
It’s quite simple really. Like the other side, you appeal to their hearts and to their emotions… and their heads and their votes will follow.
You argue the American Dream; the upward mobility, the security, the dignity and the increased freedoms of a better future for you and your loved ones.
And then you drop the bomb.
You let them know that the other side has been and still aims to take that dream away, only to buy your votes and rule over you. And then you go into a few simple details in “people speak” to illustrate how they go about stealing from you.
All we need are a few good and articulate candidates… candidates who can help us all dream again.
But for starters, I’ll take one at the top.
The people referred to in this article struggle to be self reliant every day. The forces that constantly kick at the base of that ladder they’re trying to climb make them very leery of anyone who wants to make the holes in the public safety net a little larger. When the Rs say reform the safety net, this is what they fear. Couple that fear with watching the ladder kickers shaking hands with the R party and you have the perfect recipe for this election outcome.
Everything the Dems have done to screw up the country, the Repubs have had chances to correct and they didn’t. This appears to be why the Rs got large gains in ’10 and swatted in ’08 & ’12. Rs got elected in the legislature to come through on promises to secure the ladder and would up kicking the other leg or just standing by, helplessly.
The working man says to himself that at least the Ds won’t let me starve.
One candidate was saying, “I’ll slow the train but I promise not to stop it.” The other is saying, “Full speed ahead!” I think a lot of people said, “What difference does it make, where’s mine?”
I think a lot of people said “who cares, there are none so blind as those who will not see.” 15 years from now, 30 somethings who are paying the price for their parents’ willful ignorance might decide to become more informed voters. My son called the day after the election cackling with glee. He is an engineering student with impressive math skills. I explained to him how the debt has grown the past for years (reddit doesn’t have many postings about the debt.) Then I asked him what happens when the prime rate goes up even just a point and a half from current historic lows. And then I pointed out that high income earners like engineers always pay a disproportionate share in the US. That sobered him up.
That surprises me, because my experience with the College of Engineering at the bluest of blue University of Michigan was that it is a bastion of conservatism, at least on fiscal policy, national security and energy. The professors, while not necessarily religious (some are, some aren’t), are at least not hostile to religion.
UT Engineering is pretty conservative. I’ve always been liberal and my kids are afraid I’m becoming a “crazy old right-winger” because I have become so cranky about the economic ignorance of our current President.
That’s great to hear. But I’m on the faculty at the business school at the University of Michigan and they’re all hard-core Obama supporters, even in the finance group. I’m pretty confident the same is true in the economics department, but I don’t know for sure
Nice to hear there’s more sanity in engineering.
Better get mine before they are all gone.
Better get a disability check and do odd jobs for additional cash, no taxes, no yucky bosses. Better stay home and play with the kids than to get up at 6:00, fill a gas tank with half a paycheck, pay FICA, Medicare, and income taxes to net less than a govt. check. A life of leisure, an American Dream.
And that matters – how? This election was clearly stolen. Every one from now on, will be stolen too. Doesn’t matter what anybody thinks or who we can persuade any more. Conservatives played by the rules. Nobody else did. Game over. We lost.
I respectfully disagree with you. Sure, there was some fraud in some places (perhaps Philly and Ohio come to mind) but more importantly, we gave it away. When McCain ran for the office with a limp dlck campaign, he received three million
votes MORE than Romney. In fact, Mr Excitement (McCain), garnered MORE votes from the Mormons than Romney did!
I liked and still like Romney. He’s a decent man. There’s no question about that. But when his campaign focused more on not raising taxes (however correct we KNOW that position is), who was arguing for the little guy? Who defended the counter guy at the auto parts house? Who worried about making sure parents could get their children into good schools rather than going off on school unions? It really doesn’t take much to make that little guy know someone is looking out for him. BUT! nobody bothered. Obama was going after his base plus the 47% and he made sure he got it. Who was Romney trying to corral to his side? Intellectually, we all (those who read PJMedia) knew who was write and who was wrong. But as important as this election will turn out to have been, to have NOT gone after Johnny Lunchbucket was a huge mistake. They would not have voted for Obama but they certainly would have voted for Romney had the Repulicans indicated they really gave a damn.
I do wish there was an edit function. That “write” should have been “right”. Sorry.
Perfect! The best article so far.
I walked into the parking garage this morning, said Hi to the Dominicans who take care of my car for the day and asked myself: would they ever be swayed by Romney’s capitalizing on Obama’s “You Didn’t Build That” gaffe? Why would they? They are employees– good, solid hard-working employees who quite likely have no expectations of opening up their own business. And what do the Republicans offer them vs. the Democrats?
We need to look at the basics– the American Dream. Even single childless females will respond to a goal of “a better life for your children,”
We should be selling the Dream directly to the parking garage attendents: “El sueño americano: Una vida mejor para sus hijos.”
I love this article, Andrew. I wondered about the constant stump speech references to small business. Small business is nice, but what about the rest of us, who have been working for a paycheck all our lives. Especially people who work with their hands. I have a small group of guys fixing a rotten wall on my house right now, miserable work out in the cold, and I am so grateful for their skills and integrity.
Final election results are in from 11/6/12:
Takers – 1
Makers – 0
I’m no longer sure it was even a valiant fight. In retrospect,(serious retrospect) the other side seemed not to have a care in the world as if they knew there was no way the R’s would win. No matter what. Kind of like uncle obies 1st debate actions. Why bother? Or his comment to medvedev about being more flexible once he was in his second term. Bhengazi? Majority don’t care. Patreaous, majority don’t care or think it is just fine. Had the CIA director been a “D” there is no way they would have resigned. It’s not what they do.
Count beat them, join them.
Can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em. Then destroy them from within.
Klavan points us to the unholy alliance among Republicans and Capitalists/capitalism. Buchanan reminds us of this in his diatribes against various free trade agreements. A tariff does not make us less free and blindly advocating “free markets” does not make us more marketable or more wise. Conservatives want to conserve the culture, which only until recently has promoted this idea of unfettered capitalism. We must remember that capitalists and capitalism will unrepentantly leave behind our culture if its coffers fill accordingly.
The responsibility of a capaitalist to make a profit.
The culture belongs to you and and every other individual that will then make millions upon millions of little choices as to what is acceptable and what is not.
Buchanan willingly worked for Nixon. That choice alone should make any of his ideas suspect.
Does anyone know how to effectively communicate that big government deficit spending and regulation are causing our high unemployment and cost of living?The connection isn’t intuitively obvious,yet the argument that big government is on the side of the “little guy” seems obvious.
I start with the idea that each regulation attaches more cost to employing someone, and each tax increase diminishes the gains from doing so. It is critical to point out that these costs apply to each and every potential employer. For high income earners, these costs will simply hold down their salaries. Which is all well and good for limousine liberals. Inexperienced or unskilled workers face the prospect of the value of their employment getting swallowed in the process and never hired. Worse, they never build up the necessary skills to eventually increase their incomes. Point out that the end result is to remove the bottom rungs from the ladder of economic opportunity.
It is tough sledding, I was trying to point this out for those upset by various service industry companies converting their entry-level workforce to part-time to avoid Obamacare mandates. The mini-med plans they once provided will be illegal, and the margins are too small to support the expensive, required plans. Still, many see all of this as an American serf behaving inappropriately, and want the solution to be more straight-jackets to force compliance, and that this is all fine because the limousine liberal can afford to pay more.
When you tell people without jobs that your focus will to help make it possible to create jobs for them and they reject that offer you lose. The person who said I will take money from other people and give it to you with out you working won. I think that pretty much says it all.
Good for you, Andrew. If anything, the narrative needs to be turned around. The makers are not the people doing the work that earns a company its money. They are, in fact, the takers, and that’s not to denigrate their contributions to their business and their personal fortunes. The makers are, in fact, the several to several hundred thousand people who work for the takers, who are happy to work in exchange for fair treatment and reasonable pay. What has gotten seriously out of whack is the takers (owners, management) have manipulated the workplace — and moved so many jobs overseas — that the makers (working people) have found themselves going as long as a decade without raises, acknowledgment of their contributions, and continuing criticism for their inability to produce more and more and more.
Nobody owes you a job or a raise. a moderate is a liberal who doesn’t have the guts to admit it. Blaming a business for sending jobs overseas is a liberal position.
Sue wrote: “When you tell people without jobs that your focus will to help make it possible to create jobs for them and they reject that offer you lose. The person who said I will take money from other people and give it to you with out you working won. I think that pretty much says it all.”
Spot on…
My ‘Night Terror’ is not Barrak Obama.
Even realizing that he is an incompetent hack who’s sole talent lays in winning elections. I’ll grant him the courtesy of believing that he actually means well.
But what keeps me awake at night is the question, who or what comes next? Knowing that this administration is destined to screw the pooch so badly that what ‘Man On A White Horse’ is going to ride in to save the day? Caesar? Lenin? Robespierre? Bonaparte? Is there another Washington out there? Or is he a once in a national lifetime miracle? I don’t really believe that Obama is the Anti-Christ. But I’m afraid he may be the one who opens the door for him.
The scary part is that it may be that there is another Washington, Lincoln or Reagan out there, but we refuse to have him. We rejected Huckabee, Paul, Santorum, Palin, and many other solid conservatives. Our generals are now political hacks, and our bishops go unheeded. It may be that there are men and women willing and able to save the Republic, but the nation rejects them because the nation rejects God. They would rather believe the lie and perish than turn to God and live, and no politician can save such a nation, for he will either join the ranks of the wicked, or he’ll lose.
As citizens of this once great nation we are getting what we deserve. Our nation founders understood that educated citizenery was required to hold on to this republic. It is our personal duty as citizens to gain that education. Costs of neglecting that duty is what we have now. The STATE is not required to educate us in this duty, it is our obligation as free citizens to invest the time to educate ourselves. If the majority of voters refuse their duty, we have only ourselves to blame. That includes the forgotten man, it is obligation too.
No, it’s not about the 47%, or the ratio of makers vs. takers. It’s about losing the critical mass necessary to maintain a republic. So, to your other numbers you can add the ignorant and uninformed who don’t know what they’re voting for, and the apathetic who don’t vote at all. Romney received 60 million votes. That’s less than 20% of the resident population of this nation. This is how republics die.
Sue and others, I’ve talked to a lot of Obama voters since the election, and it looks like a lot of middle class women sincerely thought Romney was going to take their birth control and right to abortions away from them. They also really love gay marriage. I don’t really get it, since to me marriage it at base to raise and foster biological children. But they think it’s to express love, and they want gay people to be able to express love. I can tell them until I’m blue in the face that you express love through your actions and nothing else, but they simply do not care. They want gay marriage.
Trouble is, I don’t think we can sell our own base voters on that, so for every vote we gained from them, we would probably lose from our people. So I really don’t know what to do. I know the Republicans will never do a thing against abortion because it’s such a divisive and unrewarding issue, but try to explain that to others and nobody believes you, even though since the Reagan years to today not one thing has been done to retard abortion rights.
A nice black fellow I knew said, simply, that he would never vote for anyone who hadn’t had to eat Ramen noodles [a really cheap food] sometime in his life. Again, I’m not going to say I agree with this, but it’s an emotion that cannot be easily fought.
The interesting, and hopeful, thing is that I didn’t hear a word about government benefits from any of these people. It was about the social issues. I think one reason for this is that although government benefits are costly, they are of low quality. Most of the low income people I have contact with somehow manage to own iPhones or Android phones. The Obama Phone is of no use to them
.
D
You might be right. A lot of the trolls on the conservative blogs I frequent seem to troll about social issues. They have this picture of Republicans as a group of theocrats obsessed with ‘what goes on in my bedroom’ or ‘what women do with our bodies’ or ‘trying to force their values on the rest of us.’ Not a word about our financial concerns, not a thought about foreign policy. The interesting thing is, they don’t seem to have any awareness of the flipside – that THEY are forcing THEIR values on US. No sense that it’s a struggle between competing visions. As far as they’re concerned, there’s only one correct side and they’re on it.
We don’t want this nation to turn into Sodom and Gemorrah. And that’s what will happen. A nation MUST protect higher institutions like individual freedoms, marriage and family. If the nation doesn’t protect these then at some point God will step in and do that himself (Sodom and Gemorrah being one example of that).
What do we have to offer? Really nothing except a solvent currency that has buying power. The Soviet Union died because of the Ruble and not soaring speeches about freedom. Since we do not know how to restore buying power (which is really providing the ability to receive value in kind from gainful work) we are not a good substitute for Obama. Like it or not we have to in some way be an alternate economy, we must be the way for people to opt out of the madness and immediately see how the different viewpoints work in daily life.
It is hard to beat propaganda. It is cheap, easy to produce, satisfies the receiver’s emotional needs (if done correctly) and creates a vacuum that is filled by more propaganda. Propaganda is offered for free so it is effectively priced as well.
We have now learned the hard way that a superpower can’t provide good jobs for all its people via a service economy alone–even if that service economy is a free capitalist economy.
In the 1990s, we were sold a bunch of bull–by both parties–that we had left behind all that dirty old industrial stuff, and we were now a “post industrial” service economy: “Let Asia manufacture steel, appliances, cars, clothing, industrial parts, etc. Let the Middle East and Canada produce oil and natural gas. America will import all that, and America would offer services in return.”
That hasn’t worked out so well for the tens of millions of Americans who aren’t cut out for a college degree and knowledge work.
We can’t have an economy that consists mostly of hamburger joints, caregivers, gambling casinos, bankers and financiers. Rosie the Riveter has been replaced by Rosie the Coffee Barista. That’s a job with less of a future, and it’s a job that doesn’t help build up the country.
We did not let Asia take manufacturing!
Your government compelled that transfer!
The government by the people and for the people allowed their government using the power of unlimited state so as to enforce environmental regulations, taxing regulations and thus allowing the courts to redistribute wealth during every class action complaint on product liablity.
We did it ourselves, some willingly, others not. Yet it is still a self inflicted wound resulting in slow death.
Spot on! I’ve been harping that point for years. America’s manufacturing might is what allowed us to win WWII and enjoy the economic boom that followed in the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s.
It’s sad really, the same morons the lament sending jobs to China are the ones demanding ever-more-restrictive and insane environmental regulations that make manufacturing here uncompetitive at best or impossible at worst.
I’m not a moron. And I have even helped move jobs to the far east that I know damn well are going to have major implications for us one day.
Yes, we have pc idiots running the factories out of here. But at the same time, there are plenty of people in big comfortable desks that are honestly surprised when the very next thing after shipping mfg over seas is that low and behold mgmt can be outsourced too.
Its not realistic to say ‘well the invisible hand requires we disembowel our economy because we haven’t got the advantages of poverty and corruption (yet).’ National security.
Just like arithmetic, its one of those things you cant ignore forever.
Well, It has begun!
WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO: Peacefully grant the State of Texas to withdraw from the United States of America and create its own NEW government. The US continues to suffer economic difficulties stemming from the federal government’s neglect to reform domestic and foreign spending. The citizens of the US suffer from blatant abuses of their rights such as the NDAA, the TSA, etc. Given that the state of Texas maintains a balanced budget and is the 15th largest economy in the world, it is practically feasible for Texas to withdraw from the union, and to do so would protect it’s citizens’ standard of living and re-secure their rights and liberties in accordance with the original ideas and beliefs of our founding fathers which are no longer being reflected by the federal government. Created: Nov 09, 2012
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/peacefully-grant-state-texas-withdraw-united-states-america-and-create-its-own-new-government/BmdWCP8B
irrelevant, totally. When state legislatures start to introduce secession into their chambers then it’s worth noting.
It is time for a charismatic populist Republican. I tend to think that there was one in the race – Herman Cain.
For every entrepreneur who wonderfully creates six jobs, there are six guys and girls who set their alarms every morning and show up to do those jobs.
Damn straight.
And they deserve something for doing so, it is not all the doing of the “job creator”, he can create all day long but without those six people, nothing gets done. Just using the phrase “job creator” is offensive. As is the actual economics of our nation over the past twenty years with CEO pay soaring 500% and average wages falling.
And they carry six votes.
Look, Obambus is clueless, he can rant about the middle class all he likes, but we all know he is the food stamp president. But, Romney is of that class that has sent 10,000,000 jobs to China, whether he did that himself or not. That puts Romney waaaaay behind the 8-ball at the start of the campaign, and he never really worked his way out from behind it or he would have lead by 10% and gotten 400 electoral college votes.
Obambus smartly, cynically, viciously, and effectively worked that dynamic. I don’t think Romney, as an individual, even meant to hurt anybody, and yet politics is politics. Romney’s only pro-worker comments were something about “China as a currency manipulator”. ZOOM! Right over the voters’ heads.
The term “job creators” should be reserved for the people who create a business with their own sweat and capital risk. In other words, with few exceptions, small businesses. Allow me to preface the following by saying I am as conservative as they come. In the case of many large companies, the top executives are merely members of the “club” and behave as locusts moving from one top seat to another taking unconscionable severance packages with them as they move on. These people did not create the company any more than obama created the United States. They merely suck the life out of a company to enrich themselves, and in many cases sit on the boards of their incestuous club members who enable each other in this process. In many cases these people could not even qualify to perform the jobs of the employees who are actually producing the product or service of the company. I am, thankfully, now retired from a highly technical and skilled profession. These are merely my perceptions based on observing the operation of many companies throughout my life. I do not wish to paint with a broad brush. I know that most companies are run by good people. But even in the case of the good ones (once again, large companies), the people at the top of the food chain generally are merely highly paid employees…they did not create the company or its associated jobs.
If anybody are the “job creators” in America, it’s those whiz kids in Silicon Valley like Steve Jobs, who started companies as small operations and built them into big companies employing thousands of people.
Apple, Adobe, Oracle, Google, etc.
And guess what? Nearly all voted for Obama in this election. They donated something like eight times more money to the Obama campaign than to the Romney campaign. Evidently the GOP’s “job creator” rhetoric hasn’t impressed them much.
The GOP talks constantly about “job creators.” But if you look at the bills they actually sponsor in Congress, all too often they’re about doling out favors to giant corporations with armies of lobbyists, rather than on encouraging entrepreneurship in high-tech small business.
Yep, the valley is universally culturally liberal. Work like hell. Private schools for the successful peoples kids.
It was really nice. But it seems new wafer fabs and hard drive lines seem to only be possible out of the state or out of the country. So all that is left is the software wiz kids.
Its pretty sad. Software at least wont attract those problems.
Amen Mr. Klavan. The GOP needs to drop the whole fetish over low capital gains and dividends taxes. The people who live off this income don’t vote GOP, 9 of the top 10 richest counties vote Obama, and the GOP gets to be cannon fodder for the class warfare rheoteric. It should support the 9-to-5ers who are getting hammered by income and payroll taxes. If that means taxing capital gains and dividends more akin to wage income then so be it. My Gordian Knot solution would be to junk the corporate income tax and treat all income exactly the same.
Saddly it has been studied and found that the tollerance for taxes on those earning capitol gains is very low, compared to those working for wages. Almost by a factor of 10. After all, if you have money and don’t have to work, but your money works for you, you have money to leave if the rate gets to high. If however you work for your money, you probably don’t have money to go anywhere else.
Personally I think it is regulation right now that is more problematic than taxes, that and the ideal that we have a retirement age of 65 contrived when life expectancy was only 62. If retirement age went up with life expectancy, we’d not beable to get SS until 78 or so. I’m early 40′s and I expect to work all my life.
You are right, Andrew, that the 47% remark did hurt Romney and it should not have if given real consideration. Without a doubt, 47% of the population expects the government to look after them to one extent or another though they may not be sucking the teat at this point in time. Romney’s words were crudely spoken and the lib spin meisters capitalized on it to infer he was speaking of a group already partaking of government largess. One lib talker even connected “takers” as being those that took a mortgage interest deduction!
You are also right in that he did not appeal to those in the trenches. He seemed to concentrate more on the guys who owned the backhoe instead of the guy that runs it and, even though many thank their stars for having a job and love their employers, a lot more resent them!
This from a man who spent most of his life in various trenches!
Mitt seemed to side with the boss and not to the workers even if his argument actually meant there would be more workers if his policies were carried out.
The problem is, most workers don’t give a flying boot if there are more of them. They want and only care about their own jobs.
In the end though, I think it was RomneyKare that did him in. Too many conservatives thought there wasn’t much daylight between him and Zero in this area so, why believe there was really that much in other areas, despite his words to the contrary? Thus the lower Repub turnout versus 4 years ago.
Yes, Romneycare/Obamacare was a factor. But also let’s not forget that the trigger event that brought the nation’s finances low was the 2008 banking crisis. Yes, it was probably necessary to bail out the big banks, but what the American public saw were profligate bankers being ‘saved’ by taxpayer money; self-serving Wall Street gluttons being rescued by someone else’s money and seemingly rewarded for their greed. It didn’t sit well with most of the American public, nor should it have. Romney would have made a very fine President, perhaps even an exceptional one, but he was perceived broadly as a man who came from the world of big banks and big finance. It didn’t help him. Sometimes timing is everything.
This is true as well, Gug. He did leave himself open to identification with banks.
In fact, in line with Andrew’s argument, he aligned himself with banks while spurning the working man (however undeserved the perception might be!) when he said GM and Chrysler should have gone bankrupt. He should have said, and rightly so in my estimation, that he would not have voted for TARP either!
If I recall, he only made the point once that Dodd-Frank didn’t change anything as far as the big banks were concerned. This was worth capitalizing on, along with the hands off approach to Fannie and Freddie by D-F and, of course, Zero.
Mitt should have made the point, forcefully, that the meltdown was triggered not by Bush policies but the culmination of Dim policies. He could have even made the case that, unlike Bush, he would not support disastrous policies just to get elected! Which is exactly what Repubs have been doing. Don’t tell me Barney Frank stood in the way to bring about change in the CRA. Repubs just backed off to not lose votes instead of sticking to principle.
Sure, the liberal press would squeal and whine but, if he said it enough, like Dim politicians do, maybe it might have made a difference.
Nevertheless, it’s the workers that see the decline in their wages, it’s the workers who see the price of gas making it nearly not worth it to go to work, it’s the workers who see their net worth drop precipitously and Mitt was talking about taxes on small business owners.
A complete disconnect with those he needed to reach, in my estimation.
Though, even this might not make up for the perception conservatives had of him due to RomneyKare.
The bulk of the 47% who take government paychecks are not illegal aliens or recipients of food stamps, but the elderly on Social Security.
You’re going to be one of those someday.
The bulk of the 47% includes the entire older generation, who don’t think of themselves as “moochers.” They paid SS taxes all their working lives.
It also includes veterans now receiving Federal veterans’ benefits. They certainly are not moochers.
In fact, those two groups–the elderly and veterans–often vote Republican.
I’m “going to be one of those someday”? Beg to differ. When I was younger, I doubted that SS would still exist by the time I hit retirement age. I’m in my mid-forties now, and that conviction has only strengthened. For my entire adult life, I have worked, planned, and invested as if my monthly government check upon retirement would be jack sh$*t. I recommend it highly to one & all.
Whatever you consider to qualify or not qualify as “mooching,” there’s gonna be far, far less to mooch than anyone wants to believe.
Sinz – you’re wrong. In 2011 (the last budget with complete records) the single-largest financial expenditure was for means-tested welfare programs. Things like SNAP (food stamps), AFDC, Section 8 housing, Medicaid, etc. In 2011 the federal and state governments spent over a trillion dollars on welfare. No other expenditure, SS, Vets benefits, medicare, defense, etc. even came close.
The leftist media falsely linked that comment to seniors and vets, in order to help get O elected. It is a lie, plain and simple.
I recall reading high up on an impressive savings bank facade that catered to a lower middle class working neighborhood the words “THE PHILOSOPHERS STONE- Spend Less Than You Earn”.
Shortly or longly (not sure which) I came across the idiom that re-enforced the philosphers stone mentioned above and that idiom read:
BUY IT NEW…..USE IT OUT…..MAKE IT DO…..DO WITHOUT
Coincidentally this is the way I was being raised at the time and I felt reassured that my parents were doing the right thing because I always had all the elements in my life that would grant me the success that I was and still am to this day.
After reading the article which was interesting I resented that I had to reflect upon my now “taker” fellow citizen in order to assure a well ordered society. When President Roosevelt came to the aid of a 25% unemployment rate, people were grateful and felt good abouit all the new roads, parks, beaches and available manual labor jobs not only for adults but for students after school and during heavy snowfalls when they were hired to shovel snow etc etc. President Obama is only loved by the “takers” who are to a large part native born Americans and perhaps even more illegal aliens (yes they are illegal because they committed a SOCIAL CRIMEs without reverence for the immigration laws, rules, regulations and policies and do not belong here in that status.)
Perhaps President Obama does not realize in his zeal to introduce “FAIRNESS” whatever that means, but reeks of socialism for the “takers” and make poor poorer and make the rich less rich like the political ad shown on TV that the solcialism he is espousing “has a record of failure so blatant that only an intellectual could ignore or evade it” (sowell,b.1930). This leaves the “makers” with an unequal share of the blessings of a free economy and the equal sharing of the miseries with the “takers” and that is not FAIR!!!
But doesn’t this all point to culture? (or Kulture?) and I guess it makes sense that is what Andrew Klaven should get back to writing about, since culture creates the attitudes that votes one way or the other.
Trying not to be an ass – just that there are things that happen to the makers that the takers don’t always appreciate.
It seems that maybe there is a disconnect that those employees don’t always realize the ramifications of when the company they work for is in trouble. Employees are generally the last level to take a hit in a downturn. Long before that, the owner has stopped taking a paycheck for himself and is struggling to feed his own family. Expenses are being trimmed which is hurting suppliers. Receivables & Payables are carefully juggled around payroll and tax dates. And often, owners elect to face tax penalties when the choices are meeting a huge tax bill or paying the employees in the same week.
Currently, our country is in trouble, the makers have been reduced to survival mode – we can only hold on so long.
In those employees’ defense, companies in trouble often try their damnedest to HIDE their problems from the employees, to stave off mass defections. If workers do get a wind of financial crises at their company, it’s often not for lack of their employers’ efforts to give the contrary impression.
This is not the case in many a big company. In a big company when the cash slows down HR asks the managers who to layoff and out the door those people go.
Strangely employees who have seen that happen a time or two don’t feel so guilty about moving on to a better job if one appears.
Big companies are collectivist bureaucracies. They tend toward having posters on the walls that say things like none of us are as smart as all of us. I think it takes a certain size to get many a task and there is a danger zone at which a company gets too big to be able to actually get anything done it hasnt got procedures on in triplicate.
The natural business cycle has long been dead in the US. When companies get big and impersonal like this they also means they are top heavy and inefficient. In a healthy economy these companies get weeded out by smaller companies who are more focused on product, market and their employees. Regulation is such that there are TONS of artificial barriers to growing a company past certain levels. It’s plain not worth it. So these “dinosaur” companies are allowed to exist and even push for more regulation to keep the smaller more agile companies out.
My contribution somehow was absorbed when I erroneously clicked “link to this comment”. Is there someway or retrieving same and republishing here?
I’ve always counted workers among the “makers” group, but interesting point of view still. Thanks, Mr. Klavan.
Well, you’re on the right track, Mr. Klavan. Your message on messaging is very important. (Yes, there is a ‘but’, here.) Whether they realize it or not, or will admit it or not, a lot of conservatives -if not most of them- have made a habit out of insulting the average working joe.
You can’t insult people…and expect them to like you, let alone support you or vote for your policies. You don’t tell them, or infer, that they’re going to hell unless they support your latest and greatest political ‘saviour.’
No, in politics, you don’t always have to play nice…but it helps a whole bunch if you play fair…and are willing, yourselves, to give other Americans the benefit of the doubt wrt our intelligence…and our willingness …and our ability …to take care of ourselves.
Plus, it often helps if your politicians actually do what they say they’re going to do, once you’ve elected them.
I think in a lot of people’s minds business=Cronyism. They simply do not understand how much Dems push Cronyism and benefit from it. The Republican establishment for example looks at the Digital Literacy initiative in education and sees dollar signs from all those taxpayer funds locked into buying Tablets and IPads and is not appreciating there is bipartisan revulsion when either party pushes a Mercantilist vision. Especially with taxpayer money.
http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/didnt-adam-smith-write-a-book-explaining-why-this-is-a-bad-idea-back-in-1776/ is an example of my reaction to all the Corporatism being pushed by both parties now. Many State Republicans really do want to plan and reward economic development in their states. The average person sees that as favoritism to cronies and thinks that is how Business works.
Politicians have no idea what is wrong with insisting that future voters merely have to be Competent, not knowledgeable. A winning Republican national ticket will have to make the case on what really creates job growth and economic growth and how the growing public sector harms everyone not on the public workforce.
We also have huge swaths of the US where the local hospital, public college, and school district are the area’s largest employers. Which means as a practical matter there really is not a private sector. There is no understanding now of why everyone cannot live at the expense of taxpayers.
Our culture does not understand what makes the economy work. We need a candidate who can explain it in ways the average person can relate to. How they actually benefit even though they are unaware of the power of exchange.
cronyism because these dinosaur corrupt businesses aren’t allowed to fail to be replaced by better smaller companies. They use their political contacts to introduce more regulations to make darn certain smaller companies won’t arise to push them out.
Personally I include workers like myself in the “makers” column. The distinction between makers and takers is simply between those that contribute or who want to contribute and those that do not want to contribute.
My wife and I paid about $40k in federal income taxes in 2011, we are makers even if we’re just employees.
Yes.
Great video, too, btw. It opened so poignantly and was so touching; the rococo ending made me laugh.
There has been bi-partisan destruction of the Republic. There are many progressives in the Republican Party and the I suspect that most of the big funders are progressives. The problem is their base is mostly conservative to moderate. So they finally met their match with the ruthlessness of Barack O’Dismal. Formerly they were content to trade places presiding over all the power that BOTH SIDES have built up. However, they just got cut out of the deal as they could never out Santa Claus the Democrats, even if O’Dismal’s record was pathetic.
And we ceded the culture, the media (except a few pockets) and all the functioning institutions, including the Foundations, education, and sorrily lots of churches. The bias in the media types of NBC, CBS, ABC etal has never been greater. And they did everything to support Barack and assail Romney. They don’t criticize Barack’s lies (Romney doesn’t pay taxes, he killed a guy’s wife, and shipping jobs to China). They didn’t care, they supported St. Barack and by golly they were going to do whatever they could to get him elected, including the disgraceful performace of Candy Crowley in the debate.
The Republicans can’t get back the welfare crowd as they will never pander as much. And the unions are the army of volunteers that not only donate tons of money, but lots and lots of get out the vote workers by hook or crook. Then there are the electronic voting machines that seems to select Barack, even though the voter punched Romney. The military votes were supressed by not getting ballots to them. And then there is the outright voter fraud in the inner cities. This has gone on a long time, and the Republicans have done little to combat, even when they hold the governorships.
And people still think the Democrat party is the party of the middle class. No amount of information will change their mind. Not, $4.00 gasoline, not high food prices, not high clothing prices, and not rasing taxes (Note votes in Illinois and California). And many, many elderly people didn’t believe that O’Dismal had already cut their medicare and they didn’t want anyone else like Paul Ryan cutting the program regardless that it wouldn’t effect THEM.
Finally the American people have lost all touch with reality. Being $16 Trillion dollars in debt simply didn’t factor in the election. I know I have a sister and when I asked her how long we gonna’ last spending $1 Trillion more than we take in, I don’t get an answer. But I’ll bet you she voted for O’Dismal.
Everyone, unions, welfare crowd, and grandma want their stuff regardless whether the economy can generate the money to pay for it. Period!
Well, yes and no. If conservatism is the answer, then why didn’t a more conservative candidate win in the primaries, like Santorum or Perry? I think you need a better messenger, like Marco Rubio or Rand Paul. Also, Republicans have to come to grips with the fact that: (A) You basically have a lot of dumb and uninformed voters out there and (B) You have a mainstream news media and a clutural television media that is far left and is constantly trashing Republicans.
Face it, when the bulk of the population is getting its “news” from The Daily Show, The View, David Letterman, The Tonight Show, Us magazine, Rolling Stone, and radio shows like “The Pimp With A Limp,” you are in serious, serious, trouble. There was a good reason why Obama ONLY went on all of those shows. I don’t really know how you overcome all of that media and cultural bias. Add to that the fact that Obama promises everything to everyone in his quest to transform this nation into a socialist paradise, and you have a deadly combination when it comes to trying to defeat a Democrat for president.
The only answer I have is NOT to give up and NOT to give up your principles. If you do, then you’re no better than being a Democrats light, just like in Great Britain, and we can all see how well that’s working out for them. But the key is to make inroads in the mainstream and cultural media, and I really don’t know how a conservative Republican can do that. Maybe the only way to do that is to get a conservative from Hollywood to run for president. Don’t think we can find one? Hmmm, I seem to remember a fellow by the name of Ronald Reagan. He started life out as an actor, didn’t he?
At the start of the GOP primary season, Perry was the favorite to capture the GOP nomination. Many conservatives were just waiting for him to enter the race so they could throw their support to him.
Until the GOP primary debates, when he made a fool of himself.
As we just saw, debates do matter. If Romney hadn’t clobbered Obama at their first debate, Romney would have had no chance whatsoever, and Obama would have won a huge landslide.
Santorum came off as shrill, hectoring, and extreme. The GOP could never afford to nominate a candidate who says things like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBTLnO7FQM8
Conservatives don’t win the primaries, because many people refuse to get involved in primaries and the “system” meaning the party appartus and the money people want “moderates”.
Well I’m looking at this ‘fiscal cliff’ the idiots on both sides have invented for us. Neither side want to drive us off that cliff according to —- both sides! Imagine that! The very idiots that could make that cliff simply (poof) disappear refuse to do so. Why? Crick chirping from both sides when asked that one. The solution seems so clear – get rid of the cliff. Didn’t the prez say that raising taxes in shaky economic times is counter-productive?
Then there is one I find hilarious in a morbid sort of manner – the coming sequestration (to which I refer to as the castration of our military) – something “we didn’t want” – and didn’t our current prez say it wasn’t his idea and didn’t much like the idea in the first place? Didn’t he also sign that into law?
Now both sides are scrambling to figure out a way to work with the other side of the isle. Lets see if I have this right – you need to find a way to work with someone you now view more and more as an enemy to get rid of something you never wanted – never really intended to vote for but gosh – it seemed like a great way to screw the guy on the other side of the isle – but now see it coming to screw him and his buddies – and – gosh – well we just wish to figure out how to get rid of…
Is it just me or (pardoning the seriousness of the problem) is this not just freaking ironically hilarious? The same morons that thought they painted the other guy into the corner now see how throughly they’ve also painted themselves into a corner.
Workers are makers, unless they only pretend to work. Even if they pay no taxes, they at least pull their own weight.
Excellent. The GOP did fall into a trap by defending the entrepreneurial class at every turn. They made working class and middle class Americans feel unworthy by comparison. Not a good idea. They identified with the bosses, not the workers. What happened to a “rising tide lifts all boats,” a “full lunch pail,” and a “chicken in every pot.”
Most entrepreneurs are in the middle class. They voted for Romney. Obama won with the very poor and the super rich.
We need someone to articulate? If they will not listen to a Marco Rubio or a Paul Ryan, who will they listen to?
Popular culture – a subsidiary of a few media conglomerates that churn out endless movies and TV programs about evil business fat cats – has trained the majority to view all business as evil. Most could not distinguish between the entrepreneur and the board member of a too-big-to-fail outfit who knows nothing more about innovation than how to trick shareholders into believing the quarterly statement is not as bad as it looks.
I absolutely agree that the distinction must be made. The too-big-to-fail gang will be content to merge with government. They want the government to take over those pesky issues like health insurance. As it stands right now plenty of workers could move from their cubical in a large company to a cubical in some bureaucracy without noticing the slightest difference.
Please, enough of the Ayn Rand “makers and takers” claptrap. Where was this framing two years ago? Nowhere. Suddenly everyone on the right has decided “makers and takers” is how we should view the world. Why not just say “whites and blacks” or “rich and poor”? Everyone in our society is both a maker and taker at some time in their life. My father fought in WWII – presumably he was then a maker. He then attended university on the GI Bill – was he then a taker, worthy of scorn? He then taught in public schools for 40 years – maker or (because he was in a union) a taker? Today he and my mother are on social security and Medicare – are they now takers? This is a ludicrous way of artificially dividing our society and is useful only for frauds and demagogues.
Brutus, it is apparent that you do not understand the concept of maker vs. taker. Your father earned the benefits of the GI bill. He was not a taker. Your parents paid into Social Security and Medicare for their working life (they had no choice). For them to be receiving their benefits now does not make them takers. Being a union member also does not make you a taker. Considering the population makeup of the country, there are definitely more white takers than black takers in true numbers…it would be the percentages that differ. I do find it interesting that you immediately go to the racial imagery. You certainly appear to be a success story for progressive mind programming. I suggest that you look up the meaning of demagogue and ask yourself who are the true demagogues in this country…I suspect that you will not. One more thing. I, like many Americans, have worked since I was 15 years old, and I am now retired. I have never taken anything I did not earn. Everyone is not a taker at some time in their life. Speak only for yourself.
I’d quibble with you about the union issue–belonging to one unquestionably puts one into the ignoble POSITION of a “taker” … and worse. However, the uneven reach of right-to-work laws means that well-meaning, honest workers may be forced into a situation that places them structurally (though not intentionally or philosophically) at odds with a commitment to making an honest living. The worst and foullest thing about closed-shop states is the way that they legally force honest men to live according to the dishonesty of their union masters. Return to us, Colonel Pinkerton!
What I intended to say, and what I should have written was that belonging to a union does not NECESSARILY make you a taker.
This is not rich vs poor. While the stereotypical welfare queen gets her monthly check, food stamps and Obama phone the wealthy, better connected taker is in a position to grab billions in public funds. They do not add value. They do not produce. They take and take and take. If the people are unable to make a distinction between these well-fed leeches and the entrepreneur attempting to create a useful service or product, we are lost.
Look at it this way guys and gals, all over the country small business owners are crunching the numbers and deciding what to do. When they decide they’ll call a meeting and tell their employees. I’m guessing that a very high percentage of those employees voted for Obama. The owner can lay everybody off and get back in the truck, what do the employees do? I’m guessing there are going to be a bunch of off the book independent contractors shortly.
That’s what my husband and I are doing. And you nailed, all our employees voted for Obama.
Very few “Rich” people and business owners pay taxes, just tax on investment. Corporations do not pay taxes. Businesses do not pay taxes. It is a myth. People who buy things pay all the taxes. It is just siphoned off to the government in different ways. Rich, businesses, corps are just pass throughs of taxes. Does one really think that Oil companies pay taxes. They charge you to cover their tax burden, as does Walmart, Starbucks, Airlines, you name it. Buy a pizza, pay that guy’s taxes. If one followed the money trail, we would stop buying by the millions and starve the beast. We should also stop supporting businesses that support these evil politicians. Progressive Insurance? Please. Takers/Makers – wrong argument.
I live in the deep South so maybe it’s not applicable to the rest of the country. But- here the “workers” were definitely against Obama, my dog sitter, my niece who delivers auto parts, my husband’s hair dresser, my hair dresser and dozens of others. They have families to look after and they see O as taking from them to give to those who don’t WANT to work. They see the welfare cheats every day. Romney was right IMO about th 47% that would never back him.
AK: “It’s largely conservative policies that help the working guy and girl, but you have to let them know that and make sure they understand that government cares about them and will not abandon them if they fall off the bottom rung of the ladder.”
What actually helps the working guy and girl is the classic liberal policy whereby each person does as he pleases with himself and the product of his own labor in their creative pursuit of happiness – the rightful liberty of the individual. Hard working people will not “fall off the bottom rung of the ladder” because hard work naturally brings forth the product of that labor – food – shelter – clothing – transportation – healthcare – entertainment – charity. This classic liberal policy is the modern conservative policy.
“With some the word liberty may mean for each man to do as he pleases with himself, and the product of his labor; while with others, the same word may mean for some men to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor. Here are two, not only different, but incompatible things, called by the same name – liberty. And it follows that each of the things is, by the respective parties, called by two different and incompatible names – liberty and tyranny.” Abraham Lincoln
What actually hurts the working guy and girl is the classic conservative policy whereby some men (the self-serving managers of collectivist government) may do as they please with other men, and the product of other men’s labor in their destructive pursuit of happiness – the wrongful “liberty of the state.” The “little people” who no longer possess a natural God-given right to the product of their own labor will “fall off the bottom rung of the ladder” because hard work unnaturally no longer brings forth the product of that labor – it goes to a small group of other people (those running the collectivist government) who simply serve themselves and toss out leftovers to a so-called proletariat class (non-disabled government-dependents – the takers) in return for votes. Sorry Andrew, but there is a lower aspect of human nature, so when government unjustly collects vast amounts of the makers property, and provide it to the half with less property, it will be accepted, and that destroys their work ethic, because the checks keep coming, and why work if you don’t have to? The work ethic of the makers is also destroyed as they are ground down by what amounts to slave labor. When the work ethic is destroyed universally – well – you will have universal poverty – another failed socialist state. Once the takers outnumber the makers, the small group of people managing collectivist government is able to stay in power via election; they have, as Karl Marx noted in the Communist Manifesto, “won the battle of democracy.” This classic conservative policy is the modern liberal policy.
“And if liberty is to be attributable of the real man and not of the scarecrow invented by the individualistic Liberalism, then Fascism is for liberty. It is the only kind of liberty that is serious – the liberty of the State [to do as they please with other men, and the product of other men's labor].” Benito Mussolini
# 27 “We also have huge swaths of the US where the local hospital, public college, and school district are the area’s largest employers. Which means as a practical matter there really is not a private sector. There is no understanding now of why everyone cannot live at the expense of taxpayers.”
How right you are. And add to that list the local district of the state highway department. For those workers outside of the mentioned institutions there is only, for the most part, the prospect of low paying minimum wage jobs that net them less than government benefits and why should they go to work when not working will pay better. These people are the majority in most small to medium sized communities and they have no hope of bettering their lives especially in an economy that is still failing. When they voted for Obama they voted their interests. This is what the so called “service” economy has brought us.
Except that the American “worker”, as in actually performing some task correctly in an efficient manner so that profit and thereby their wages may be paid by the employer, no longer exist. There is no link in the consciousness of “workers” that somehow they must produce enough of something to pay themselves and all the goodies the company must pay in their name to government, insurance, et al. They just don’t get it.
They don’t want jobs. They want a paycheck.
Obama means to get them one, whether or not they do any damn useful thing at all.
That is the real problem here. The WWII veteran who worked 35 years at a productive job is no longer. All those single mom children are utterly useless. They have the attention span of gnats. They are rude. They are never on time. Everything is either too hard, too boring, or too dirty. They can’t get their eyes off their cellphones long enough to do anything. In short, they suck.
The reason there are no more 35 year employees, you self-righteous old fart, is that there are no more 35 year JOBS. Companies treat employees like disposable tissue. Hey, why bother keeping the one you have in good shape? Another one will pop right up behind him. And it’s been that way for over forty years.
I weary of grizzled old fools who blame the state of the world on the young. The young didn’t make the world we’re in, you did.
You stuffed the young into the schools you built— and they get no education. You pushed them to go to the colleges you built, on the federal loans you created— and they end up tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt, with a degree that might as well be printed on toilet paper. Even when they get a “useful” degree…. we have an army of engineers and architects serving drinks and bussing tables. Those few who DO manage to wrest a real, full time job away from your grasping, arthritic hands lose half their paychecks paying for government welfare programs YOU started— medicare, social security, countless thousands of government porkbellies and kickbacks and bridges to nowhere that have been rolling for longer than they’ve been alive. And maybe, just maybe they’ll be lucky and keep the job for more than four or five years before you morally superior bags of skin crust call for another downsizing.
Yeah. Darn those young people.
Regardless of whether one faction or another is more or less deserving, there is a math-based limitation on the number of benefits your country–or any country–can supply.
The gist of Mr. Romney’s remarks is best represented by the canned statement:
“When those who vote for a living out number those who work for a living, then your Republic is kaput.”
Such a relationship is unsustainable.
When I walk into my corner market and the store employee complains about the Republicans raising taxes on cigarettes, I know immeadiately the word is not getting out to the predominately liberal urban setting where I live.
The republicans would do better than the democrats if they openly promised to lift the worker’s burden, and then KEPT that promise. Take the taxes off our backs! Shear back the suffocating layers of regulation and legislation that choke us, not just in our businesses but in our everyday lives! Give us back the bill of rights, let us bear arms in our own self defense and praise– not punish— those who do so! Undo the racist, sexist laws and court systems that discriminate by color and gender in EITHER direction, abolish the “no fault” divorce laws that make all divorces everywhere the fault of men! Privatize the school systems, but if noone has the innards and spine for that, establish a voucher system so that schools are accountable to the parents, not the other way around! Decimate the government bureaucracy– abolish at least a tenth of the boards and administrations that by their own performance demonstrate their irrelevance!
One might as well wish for a new Mayflower, and a new continent to start over again. Because none of the above is ever happening.
Klavan: Obama did not win because voters were convinced he cared for “people like me”.
Obama won because the voters are mindless clones of 50 years of American worthless teachers. Like the undereducated libertine sybarites running the public schools the last 50 years, the only thing the voter saw was images glimpsed casually while passing a store window with a television running as they commented to a friend on the lastest sneaker or undergarment that fascinated them.
These images stuck.
These images were designed and governed by the Democratic Party’s network of fifth columnists. The pussy Republicans were too busy with their Country Club membership committee meetings.
Pelaut,
Apparently you believe the images that the Democrats are pushing on us also. I personally know lots of Republicans that are farmers, tradesman, unemployed, etc. To foist the image of the Republican at his country club is a prejudiced image. I don’t belong to a country club (I don’t like golf and my
favorite sport is high school/college wrestling). But you do have the idea right of the average voter is someone who gets his political news in a casual way, either thru contemporary radio, late night talk shows (Leno, Letterman, Colbert, Stewart, Maher, et al) or network TV news programs. They are not getting any substantive information on the candidates only what is filtered thru those sources. The Republicans are going to have to counter this somehow if we are going to save our republic.
One of the points I have often tried to communicate at PJM for some time has been that employees see things differently than do owners and that there more employees than owners. I’m glad that some of this is finally sinking in.
If we are, actually, a divided State, this essay describes some challenges we face.
http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/the-liberal-mans-burden/2012/10/29/
Greenfield ends, “The first duty of every society is not the export of its virtues, but their safeguarding.”
Klavan – Your article got me thinking and I think you’re correct. When Romney spoke about creating small business jobs I instinctively understood those jobs would go to “average Joe’s”. But, thanks to our mass media and unions, business owners are considered the enemy of workers. I think the “average Joe” heard Romney and thought he just wants to help the fat cats, and doesn’t care about me.
One thing Obama is good at is campaigning. One of the reasons he’s good at it is because he tells the audience anecdotes. “I met a woman in ____ who has a heart condition and because of that can’t get insurance”, “I was talking to a man in _____ who’s children had to go to bed hungry because there’s no food in the house” and on and on.
That’s what Republican candidates need to start doing. “I met a man in _____ who works two jobs and can’t afford to replace his 15 year old truck because he pays so much in taxes so his Section 8 neighbors, for whom he’s paying rent, utilities and grocery bills can afford two new cars”. “I met a woman in ____ who can’t afford to heat her home because she’s paying so much in taxes to bail out Wall Street bankers”. “I met a man in ____ who was incensed when his brother, who lives off welfare, showed him his new tattoo purchased legally with his EBT card.” “I met a young lady who can’t find a job because she can barely read, despite the fact that she graduated from public high school at a cost to taxpayers of $15,000 per year for 13 years.” etc.
The way you win hearts and minds is to make it personal. Dems do that, Repubs talk about jobs or lower taxes but never connect those to the average Joe. They may think that everybody understands the connection, but they don’t thanks to our public education system.
Longer term, conservatives need to try to undo the stranglehold progressive liberals have on the culture. This will be a slow process. The progressive left began taking over the media and academia over thirty years ago, and their efforts are just now coming to fruition. It will take at least that long for conservatives to turn it back around if they start now.
One last thing. Conservatives need to leave God out of their messaging. One does not have to believe in God, or belong to a Judeo-Christian religion to be a good, moral, decent person. Living a moral life and treating others fairly is just common sense. If you don’t want somebody to screw you over, then don’t screw them over. Simple. You have no idea how many people are turned off when conservatives tell them they must believe in God and follow the Bible. Also, if conservatives want to attract women voters, then stop with the anti-abortion crap. Roe v. Wade is here to stay. Get over it and get on with the important fiscal conservative messaging.
Mr Klaven
I agree that Romney’s 47% comment hurt him. Not everyone receiving government payments is a “taker”. Retirement payments, veterans benefits, Social Security and Medicare are earned benefits (with a little redistribution thrown in on SS and Medicare). To the extent those are included in the 47%, people have the right to be insulted.
I do take issue with the idea that workers are different than makers. That sounds like another example of an elitist view that Romney seemed (note: seemed) to suggest. I would classify truck drivers, farmers, machinists, bakers, etc., as makers as much as any businessman, and a lot more than hedgefund managers, brokers, bankers and insurance agents. Not that the latter are not necessary to the functioning of a complex society (well, maybe not hedgefund managers), but the base of making is the people who get their hands dirty and the people who hire them.
This disparity of thought between the “rich” and “poor” is a redefinition of what is in between, the “middle class”. I had a very interesting conversation with my retired fire fighter farther (a blue collar, working class guy if one every existed) where he had a very interesting observation. He basically asked when did we redefine “rich”. In his time, he remembers the middle class being both the guy owning the small business and the guy working for the small business. One might be making $100,000+ per year and one might be making $50,000 per year but both were “working guys” and both middle class. They were not the makers and takes but of the same cloth. The same guy and probably friends one of whom just happened to own the company. The doctor, the lawyer, the successful salesman were all middle class. Certainly different scales of middle class but middle class. The “rich” were the Vanderbilts or people like Bill Gates today. With this new definition of the rich/redefinition of the middle class, we no longer have any way or correctly classifying people. We no longer have a middle class because it has been defined away. Who does this benefit? Why, it benefits the Left of course. Now that can classify anyone earning over $200,000 a year as “rich” and tax them to death, the result of which is a evisceration of the middle class, bifurcation of society and and us against them mentality. How do we solve this? I am not wholly sure. But we can start by taking back the definition of the middle class and letting them know in clear ways that conservative policy will bring us back together rather than splitting us apart.
Print worthy. I’m listening to it whir and chunk-a-chunk as I type.
“It’s largely conservative policies that help the working guy and girl, but you have to let them know that and make sure they understand that government cares about them and will not abandon them if they fall off the bottom rung of the ladder.”
An unfortunate expression: government cares. No it doesn’t, regardless of how its various functionaries may feel. Trying to base policy on feelings is how we often describe “liberalism.” Whether politicians & bureaucrats are “compassionate” or not, government simply coerces.
I agree. “Big government is not a person either.”