Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mary Cluney who wrote (90408)	10/16/2008 6:45:54 PM
From: thames_sider	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 541791

I'm in the middle of the continuum on this (not necessarily the middle view, mind). FDR expressed it well, as did William Beveridge in our country just after the war. Good oratorical training they had back then... But I'm not sure either of them envisaged the degree to which welfare would be not just an requirement in extremis, but for some a daily expectation - that someone else will pay for your needs and wants, without you needing to work or even try to work for them. Certainly we can't afford this now, unless most state spending is redirected: and in 30 years or so, not even then. There needs IMO to be a major difference between a safety net and a way of life. Perhaps it's in the phrasing. "Freedom from fear", for example, or "freedom of speech" - they have limits. There's an implied "reasonable" in them. Wants are not limited. Wants expand to encompass the same standard as the rest of society, especially in a culture that teaches that material possessions and a consumer lifestyle are so important. It's too late for me to expand on this properly now and do it justice, but I'll have to consider it at further leisure. For now I'll simply conclude that the most resonant words don't always lead to the soundest judgment.