Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
To assume people choosing to leave the workforce so they can get on the government doll is offensive to say the least. My neighbor worked up until retirement at a very low paying job -- across the state -- just to keep the health insurance for her and her husband. Had the ACA been in effect she would have quit over 10 years previous...that's a lot of life gone down the drain.
-spence
|
You have maintained a couple of times that she would have quit her job if the ACA had been in effect, not to get on the government dole, but in order to keep health insurance. And that to assume quitting her job in order to get on the government dole is offensive. This is an example of how progressive use of language fundamentally transforms our culture.
First, to quit the job which enabled her to have insurance in order to keep her insurance makes no sense. Unless she quits in order to get a better job. But quitting work altogether is not getting a higher paying or better job. Quitting work altogether in order to qualify for a government subsidy to pay for insurance would, to a rational mind, be quitting the job to receive government assistance in paying for insurance. Government assistance is, if I'm not mistaken, a form of government dole. In our current day progressive think, this is a rational, admirable decision. It is to be lauded. That's what the dole is for. It is no longer merely for indigents, but for the majority, common person, who may need a little hand-up not a hand-out.
And what used to be a factor in American culture, shame, is eradicated in current progressive America. It used to be a mark of poor character to receive dole if you could possibly make do yourself. People worked in ways that were "uncomfortable," and even at subsistence wages to avoid that mark. And most, eventually, worked out of that status into a better one. That is the "ethic" which made viable the economic mobility that this country is, or was, famous for. It used to be referred to as the "work ethic."
Somehow, maybe as a result of the usual consequence of success taken for granted, we have assumed that old ethic is no longer truly necessary. Not if it is too onerous. A great nation's success should lead to an easing of conditions for all of its citizens. Leisure time, ease and comfort in living, playful enjoyment, should not have to be strived for in difficult or demeaning ways, but entitlement to it should be a new liberating "ethic" defined and assisted, if not provided, by government.
So the word "dole" is antiquated. "Offensive." Even "assistance" is a bit off color. "Subsidy," or even more so, "a right," is a more appropriate way to inoffensively speak. If there is a government program which can provide "subsidy" it is your "right" to it--even your duty to use it. This is the privilege of all (except for those who don't qualify). It is fair, and just, and the right of Americans to demand it. Some of these new privileges are even granted to many who are not actually Americans.
So let us not "offend." Those in the past who didn't consider their life "going down the drain" when they struggled to provide for themselves rather than receive what used to be called a dole, were naïve. The pride they took in self-sufficiency was overblown ego to the detriment of their own well-being. Never again should any of us have to struggle as they did. We are greater than they because of understanding what is truly important in life. And our country will flourish and become greater in this knowledge.
As an aside, when Representative Diane Blake asked the CBO director what effect the ACA would have on the economy, his response was "it is the central factor in slowing economic growth." So let's see--the ACA slows economic growth, it creates a disincentive to work, and it reduces income--But it creates more leisure time, time spent with family, a better life for those who are qualified. Eventually, even the rest of us may become qualified. The labor supply can be reduced to the small, ignorant, percentage of those who have a false pride. Not sure of what that does to other government programs to make our lives better, i.e. social security, Medicare, the ACA itself, food stamps, social and corporate welfare in general, government bailouts of failing businesses who can't compete without adequate labor supply and rising inflation--what happens to the tax base necessary to provide all the goodies? Not to worry. Some new progressive solution will evolve. Life is too good to waste it on work.
And this new "ethic" can totally replace that old one, as progressive ideology replaces all that other musty old stuff like constitutions, rule of law, individual sovereignty, personal responsibility, and all those ancient associations which impede our "modern" administrative State's ability to define our liberty and provide it for us.