Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes

[midcan5]

This is a year old but it is good news. It doesn't get much play in conservative MSM but that is because corporate greed is too large a factor in news today. Add to corporate greed fear of job loss or promotion and you quickly see why the fourth estate is such a tepid wimp of an institution.


Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes

"Increased public support for the social safety net, signs of growing public concern about income inequality, and a diminished appetite for assertive national security policies have improved the political landscape for the Democrats as the 2008 presidential campaign gets underway.

At the same time, many of the key trends that nurtured the Republican resurgence in the mid-1990s have moderated, according to Pew's longitudinal measures of the public's basic political, social and economic values. The proportion of Americans who support traditional social values has edged downward since 1994, while the proportion of Americans expressing strong personal religious commitment also has declined modestly."


http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=312

 

[rayboyusmc]

Well, let's wait for the troglodytes to come out of their caves and beat this one to death with their sound bite clubs.

 

[Bern80]

Sure I'll take a crack at it.

The article ties in amazingly well to what I have been saying about the change in people's attitudes for some time. What does a concern for a social safety yet really reflect? I believe it reflects that people are afraid. It doesn't reflect people's concern for their fellow man. It reflects an individuals concern for themsleves. We simply don't value that work hard and achieve mentality as much (that would the social value going by the way side part of the article. Simply, people are more self-centered, we think we are entitled more and at the same time less should be expected of us.

 

[midcan5]

Sure I'll take a crack at it.

The article ties in amazingly well to what I have been saying about the change in people's attitudes for some time. What does a concern for a social safety yet really reflect? I believe it reflects that people are afraid. It doesn't reflect people's concern for their fellow man. It reflects an individuals concern for themsleves. We simply don't value that work hard and achieve mentality as much (that would the social value going by the way side part of the article. Simply, people are more self-centered, we think we are entitled more and at the same time less should be expected of us.

So if people are greedy and self centered they are so because they are greedy and self centered, and if they are not greedy and self centered, they are not because they are greedy and self centered. Makes perfect sense in some world, maybe we'll discover it one day.

 

[Bern80]

So if people are greedy and self centered they are so because they are greedy and self centered, and if they are not greedy and self centered, they are not because they are greedy and self centered. Makes perfect sense in some world, maybe we'll discover it one day.

Must be the same world where hard work equals greed, huh?

 

[rayboyusmc]

It reflects an individuals concern for themsleves. We simply don't value that work hard and achieve mentality as much (that would the social value going by the way side part of the article. Simply, people are more self-centered, we think we are entitled more and at the same time less should be expected of us.

Perhaps a generalization more than a fact. There are people I know who care for others safety etc. just like they care for their own.

 

[midcan5]

Must be the same world where hard work equals greed, huh?

That's not what you wrote, you wrote a cynical view of your fellow man. If you do that, expect the same in return.

The point is for years everyone in need was lazy or conning the system, the truth is that is often not the case. And people are starting to recognize that because they see it, it is probably true of most people that empathy only exists after they experience something that demonstrates the fickle nature of life chance and luck.

 

[Bern80]

Perhaps a generalization more than a fact. There are people I know who care for others safety etc. just like they care for their own.

All I'm saying is you can see culture, especially popular culture, moveing that way. Yes there are people that care for others, most of us do, but I think we're seeing a shift where we devote more time to ourselves than to others. Again look at popular culture. Perhaps you'll be fortunate to catch an epidose of My Super Sweet 16 on MTV that makes just want to hurl that teenagers are that self centered and that there are parents that enable them. Is it any wonder that people are growing up to think they deserve to be taken care of instead of taking care of themselves. My point is, to me the article is trying to spin a bad thing into a good thing.

 

[Bern80]

That's not what you wrote, you wrote a cynical view of your fellow man. If you do that, expect the same in return.

The point is for years everyone in need was lazy or conning the system, the truth is that is often not the case. And people are starting to recognize that because they see it, it is probably true of most people that empathy only exists after they experience something that demonstrates the fickle nature of life chance and luck.

I think those people believe like you believe. That there is this un-named invisible force that no one can control that arbitrarily keeps people down. You're right about your empathy comeing from experience. I drew unemployment for about 6 months last year. However I am also fully aware there is very little about that situation that is out of my control.

 

[mattskramer]

Sure I'll take a crack at it.

The article ties in amazingly well to what I have been saying about the change in people's attitudes for some time. What does a concern for a social safety yet really reflect? I believe it reflects that people are afraid. It doesn't reflect people's concern for their fellow man. It reflects an individuals concern for themsleves. We simply don't value that work hard and achieve mentality as much (that would the social value going by the way side part of the article. Simply, people are more self-centered, we think we are entitled more and at the same time less should be expected of us.

I think that it concerns both – one’s concern for himself – that he does not become incapacitated by some freak accident, make a foolish catastrophic mistake, hit a string of bad luck and become dependent. It also reflects concern for his fellow man. As I see it, people want to be sure that there is a strong safety net for those who are mentally restarted and ill, and those who are severely physically handicapped. There are some people who will never be self-reliant, without some degree of government assistance. (We can debate how much we should spend on social services but I doubt that there are people who think that every cent from each and every social service should be removed. I think that we would be more problems if we were to end all government social service support. There is not enough charity in the private sector to support all of the truly needy.) Some people will always be dependent on handouts through practically no fault of their own. People want to be sure that government services remain, at lest to some extent, for such people. Consider yourself lucky and fortunate that you are not one of them.

By the way, I pay taxes and give some time and money to private charity.

 

[midcan5]

I think those people believe like you believe. That there is this un-named invisible force that no one can control that arbitrarily keeps people down. You're right about your empathy comeing from experience. I drew unemployment for about 6 months last year. However I am also fully aware there is very little about that situation that is out of my control.

Egads a welfare recipient of all...lol... 'invisible force,' wth does that mean? My point is it is more complicated and there are a variety of things that support us and hurt us in this life and it is simplistic to think otherwise. But that the simplistic notions are dying is great and we sure as hell don't need another Ronnie he was one of the greatest simple minds. You do remember the Cadillac mom? who didn't exist!

 

[Bern80]

Egads a welfare recipient of all...lol... 'invisible force,' wth does that mean? My point is it is more complicated and there are a variety of things that support us and hurt us in this life and it is simplistic to think otherwise. But that the simplistic notions are dying is great and we sure as hell don't need another Ronnie he was one of the greatest simple minds. You do remember the Cadillac mom? who didn't exist!

Yeah if heard the life is so darn complex one before too. Life is more often than not as complicated as you choose to make it. Saying it's complicated is just an excuse or another way of saying I'm not responsible or I have no control over my situation.

 

[Shogun]

did you have control over the situation that caused you to poke your hand in the unemployment insurance basket?

 

[Foxfyre]

Technically unemployment insurance is not welfare as all employers pay into a common pot from which unemployment is dispensed. It does help prevent extreme hardship for the temporarily unemployed and it does help deter the boss from maliciously firing people just because he is in a bad mood that day. It IS an entitlement, however, as employers have no way to opt out of the system without running afoul of state and federal laws. Workers Compensation works much in the same way. Though it is administered by private insurance companies, it is regulated and mandated by the State.

There is something insidiously predictable in the human psyche, however, that will "let George do it" whenever George is willing. Americans will give sacrificially to help a burned out family or flock to the aid of a natural disaster until the government steps in. Our personal puny offering seems meaningless against the government millions offered so the tendency is to give less or just let the government do it.

Likewise when things get really tough, we're tired, we're depressed, we're frustrated, etc., it is all too easy to just quit and take a breather while the government supports us for awhile. If the government was not there to do so, however, we would probably find the strength and gumption to get it done ourselves. Unfortunately there are large groups that have been conditioned to not find strength and gumption for generations now. We haven't done those people any favors.

Socialism seems so attractive sometimes. How nice it would be to know that all our needs will be met with us contributing minimal effort or perhaps no effort at all. The more we accept big brother's largesse, however, the easier it becomes to continue to do so and the less likely we are to look to ourselves for what we need. After while we scarcely notice the erosion of our freedoms as we 'let George (i.e. the government)' do it more and more.

 

[Shogun]

are you going to hop on one side of that fence and admit that my question is valid or hall we sprinkle some more glitter on the unemployment insurance reference?

 

[Foxfyre]

What question? I've been unemployed now and then, but I've not drawn any unemployment insurance as I usually found some legal means to make a buck between regular jobs.

 

[Bern80]

are you going to hop on one side of that fence and admit that my question is valid or hall we sprinkle some more glitter on the unemployment insurance reference?

Yes I did have control over it. I could have stayed at my job for a 25% pay cut or I could quit and find a better opportunity. Seeing as how that takes time, I collected unemployment for 5-6 months. So let's ask the other question, what didn't I have control over that would add credance to this woe is me life just happens argument and we all need to be protected?

 

[Shogun]

Yes I did have control over it. I could have stayed at my job for a 25% pay cut or I could quit and find a better opportunity. Seeing as how that takes time, I collected unemployment for 5-6 months. So let's ask the other question, what didn't I have control over that would add credance to this woe is me life just happens argument and we all need to be protected?

So then am I mistaken that you just admitted to taking advantage of a social program, paid for by taxes, when you had every opportunity otherwise to control your own life without taking a handout? Why didn't you take it like a man, stoically, and keep from adding your burden to the shoulder of the populace if you had as much control?


gosh, bern... i wonder what we'd call a kid that grew up on gov't cheese and peanut butter who now decides to ride the right wing bandwagon railing against social programs.... Indeed, i wonder how lofty his lectures would be regarding the laziness of those enrolled in social programs with THAT skeleton in his closet..

 

[Bern80]

So then am I mistaken that you just admitted to taking advantage of a social program, paid for by taxes, when you had every opportunity otherwise to control your own life without taking a handout? Why didn't you take it like a man, stoically, and keep from adding your burden to the shoulder of the populace if you had as much control?

I guess to make your point stick you would have to reference my 'get rid of all social programs' post.

gosh, bern... i wonder what we'd call a kid that grew up on gov't cheese and peanut butter who now decides to ride the right wing bandwagon railing against social programs.... Indeed, i wonder how lofty his lectures would be regarding the laziness of those enrolled in social programs with THAT skeleton in his closet..

Collecting unemployment for 6 months is hardly growing up on the government cheese. You are once again attributing positions to me that I don't posses so I guess I will have to spell it out for you. You have assumed:

1)That I believe all those collecting unemployment or some form of government assistance are lazy. I don't. I have never never made anything close to such an argument. What I have suggested is that people have far more control over their options then they give themselves credit for.

2) (again) that all social programs should be abolished. Never argued that either.

This is why haveing conversations with you is bordering on pointless. You never stop to consider what the other person's position actually is. You just assume whatever is most convenient for argument.

 

[Shogun]

I guess to make your point stick you would have to reference my 'get rid of all social programs' post.


Should I not be comparing your current words with your previous words, Bern?


Collecting unemployment for 6 months is hardly growing up on the government cheese. You are once again attributing positions to me that I don't posses so I guess I will have to spell it out for you. You have assumed:

I guess that depends on who wants to rationalize their own behaviour, eh? After all, YOU are the one arguing that everyone has control of their lives, yes? That people who take advantage of the system is the rotten apple in the bushel?


1)That I believe all those collecting unemployment or some form of government assistance are lazy. I don't. I have never never made anything close to such an argument. What I have suggested is that people have far more control over their options then they give themselves credit for.

that's a mighty engrossing dance there... so, you had control over your life... but took advantage of social TAX PAYED program anyway rather than resign yourself to the stoic positions that you usually take regarding social programs? Gosh, I don't even want to ask if you had cable TV during that period of time...


2) (again) that all social programs should be abolished. Never argued that either.

So which ones get the axe then, Bern? The ones that you have enjoyed or the ones that a target demographic enjoys? Why am I reminded of the conversation we had just the other day regarding "regulations" and the aftermath of repealing them without further consideration?


This is why haveing conversations with you is bordering on pointless. You never stop to consider what the other person's position actually is. You just assume whatever is most convenient for argument.


Be defensive, Bern. By all means. It seems that you get frustrated easily when you are not talking down to people on some king of the hill position of authority on an issue. Im not the one making you take a hardline position in the abstract that becomes retracted bit by bit upon further closer inspection. Feel free to sling mud if such is necessary though. It's probably my fault for referencing your previous statements.