tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8444674393027690239.post4622287710874681774..comments2023-04-05T08:40:37.630-04:00Comments on Rationally Exuberant: Welfare vs. EntitlementWhitney Lynnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03726785207422553890noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8444674393027690239.post-53663551137739550672009-01-21T11:57:00.000-05:002009-01-21T11:57:00.000-05:00Hmmmmm... I have to disagree. Here's why...On co...Hmmmmm... I have to disagree. Here's why...<BR/><BR/>On coopting welfare: it is, first of all, infeasible to do this, since so many of the policy-makers and important folks are on record as being against, both with their votes and their quotes. They will not want to look dumb or worse: a flip-flopper. And there's no "new evidence" that can provide political cover to make such an about-face on that. Second, I disagree on moral principle: you should get what you earn and earn what you get. But you know this... Third, not only is in infeasible and morally repugnant, but I think it's a poor strategy. I think Republicans would actually LOSE a ton of votes if they tried to cater to the left on this. Who would switch their vote from Dem to Repub if the Repubs changed their stance on welfare? Zero. Would former Repubs be more open to vote for another candidate if they moved in that direction? Yes. They may not switch in the end, but a think quite a few could be enticed to if the Repubs moved FURTHER away from the classic moral platform that has guided them for years. No one will EVER buy the Repubs being the party to offer a hand in a tough time-- that will always be the Dems. The Repubs must hammer home their moral platform (and then actually adhere to it in practice), and they will win elections. <BR/><BR/>On entitlements: I could buy into everyone having a right to the money they've invested in Social Security. I've actually been keeping my eyes open to someone that did a study on how much it would cost to give everyone back their lifelong Social Security contributions (with or without interest) and shut down the program. No one has done one that I've seen, but I think that number would be a good starting point for discussing shutting down this poorly-structured program. But of course, any action cannot be implemented now for political reasons-- it must take effect years and years down the road. There will be now turning off the switch-- it will have to be tapered off over a long period of time. All the more reason that it's important to start now...benztahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06593050095452863698noreply@blogger.com