I happen to largely agree with Grodin on this issue, but I find him so sloppily liberal, that I really don't respect him as a pundit. Even if he does happen to be agreeing with me at the moment.
He's a pretty good illustration of a knee jerk liberal, from all that I have seen. I like to call them as I see them, which is not from any fixed point of view.
For instance, while I think the liberals have been right to want to help poor people, and right that welfare really isn't all that huge a direct drain on the economy, there has also been a HUGE amount of liberal cant on the issue. And an ideological refusal to discuss many things, and to slant evidence among academics that approached outright fraud, in my view. There was every reason to think that an expansion of welfare in the sixties while all that upheaval was going on, and while most extensive programs were fairly new (at least when combined with civil rights). There was also every reason to realize that some drastic reform was necessary by the time the Contract with America came along. I don't know if we've worked out the right balance, and rather imagine we will find that come the next recession some changes are again necessary, but I was and and am clear that some serious experimental changes were necessary. Because what we had was a disaster for the long term recipients, their offspring, the crime rate, and accordingly the country.
Doug |
