Opinions/Editorials
See other Opinions/Editorials Articles
Title: Thurston Howell Romney
Source:
New York Times
URL Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/18/o ... urston-howell-romney.html?_r=3
Published: Sep 18, 2012
Author: DAVID BROOKS
Post Date: 2012-09-18 10:24:46 by Brian S
Keywords: None
Views: 2906
Comments: 4
In 1980, about 30 percent of Americans received some form of government benefits. Today, as Nicholas Eberstadt of the American Enterprise Institute has pointed out, about 49 percent do. In 1960, government transfers to individuals totaled $24 billion. By 2010, that total was 100 times as large. Even after adjusting for inflation, entitlement transfers to individuals have grown by more than 700 percent over the last 50 years. This spending surge, Eberstadt notes, has increased faster under Republican administrations than Democratic ones. There are sensible conclusions to be drawn from these facts. You could say that the entitlement state is growing at an unsustainable rate and will bankrupt the country. You could also say that America is spending way too much on health care for the elderly and way too little on young families and investments in the future. But these are not the sensible arguments that Mitt Romney made at a fund-raiser earlier this year. Romney, who criticizes President Obama for dividing the nation, divided the nation into two groups: the makers and the moochers. Forty-seven percent of the country, he said, are people “who are dependent upon government, who believe they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to take care of them, who believe they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it.” This comment suggests a few things. First, it suggests that he really doesn’t know much about the country he inhabits. Who are these freeloaders? Is it the Iraq war veteran who goes to the V.A.? Is it the student getting a loan to go to college? Is it the retiree on Social Security or Medicare? It suggests that Romney doesn’t know much about the culture of America. Yes, the entitlement state has expanded, but America remains one of the hardest-working nations on earth. Americans work longer hours than just about anyone else. Americans believe in work more than almost any other people. Ninety-two percent say that hard work is the key to success, according to a 2009 Pew Research Survey. It says that Romney doesn’t know much about the political culture. Americans haven’t become childlike worshipers of big government. On the contrary, trust in government has declined. The number of people who think government spending promotes social mobility has fallen. The people who receive the disproportionate share of government spending are not big-government lovers. They are Republicans. They are senior citizens. They are white men with high school degrees. As Bill Galston of the Brookings Institution has noted, the people who have benefited from the entitlements explosion are middle-class workers, more so than the dependent poor. Romney’s comments also reveal that he has lost any sense of the social compact. In 1987, during Ronald Reagan’s second term, 62 percent of Republicans believed that the government has a responsibility to help those who can’t help themselves. Now, according to the Pew Research Center, only 40 percent of Republicans believe that. The Republican Party, and apparently Mitt Romney, too, has shifted over toward a much more hyperindividualistic and atomistic social view — from the Reaganesque language of common citizenship to the libertarian language of makers and takers. There’s no way the country will trust the Republican Party to reform the welfare state if that party doesn’t have a basic commitment to provide a safety net for those who suffer for no fault of their own. The final thing the comment suggests is that Romney knows nothing about ambition and motivation. The formula he sketches is this: People who are forced to make it on their own have drive. People who receive benefits have dependency. But, of course, no middle-class parent acts as if this is true. Middle-class parents don’t deprive their children of benefits so they can learn to struggle on their own. They shower benefits on their children to give them more opportunities — so they can play sports, go on foreign trips and develop more skills. People are motivated when they feel competent. They are motivated when they have more opportunities. Ambition is fired by possibility, not by deprivation, as a tour through the world’s poorest regions makes clear. Sure, there are some government programs that cultivate patterns of dependency in some people. I’d put federal disability payments and unemployment insurance in this category. But, as a description of America today, Romney’s comment is a country-club fantasy. It’s what self-satisfied millionaires say to each other. It reinforces every negative view people have about Romney. Personally, I think he’s a kind, decent man who says stupid things because he is pretending to be something he is not — some sort of cartoonish government-hater. But it scarcely matters. He’s running a depressingly inept presidential campaign. Mr. Romney, your entitlement reform ideas are essential, but when will the incompetence stop?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: Brian S (#0)
So you vote for welfare now. Pat Buchanan would be ashamed to know you voted for him. If you ever really did.
You're channeling loonyming... jumping to irrational, insane conclusions about what a person does (or does not) stand for, based upon your own insanity. By any objective standard, you're no different than any o'Bungler supporter, because you use blind faith as a substitute for logic and intelligence. If mcRomney used the "hope and change" mantra, you'd be slavering all over it. I challenge you to find any real policy changes that have occurred since 2002, to stop the creeping police-state, socialism and the systematic dismantling of the American economy. I challenge you to find a single POTUS since JFK, who actually stood for the Constitution. The path this country is going down, is easy to see. And NOBODY who might challenge that plan, will be let anywhere near the White House... I think mcRomney will "win" the election, in all honesty. But I know for a fact that he will not alter the course of our country one dram, from its intended goal of perdition. So you sit back and your fat ass, talk all the shit you want about this candidate or that... Talk about how you love Israel and think we should defend it (though you'll never have the courage to back your words with action), talk about how you hate Muslims, all that other shit... But in the end, I will once again be proven correct; there is NO MEANINGFUL DIFFERENCE between the two sock-puppet "candidates" for POTUS. NONE.
Ronald Reagan you dumb ass muslim.
Please explain what he did, to stand FOR the Constitution. Give me something specific. And your feeble name-calling makes you look even more insane than usual...
By 2010, that total was 100 times as large
#2. To: A K A Stone (#1)
So you vote for welfare now.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
#3. To: Capitalist Eric (#2)
I challenge you to find a single POTUS since JFK, who actually stood for the Constitution.
#4. To: A K A Stone (#3)
Ronald Reagan you dumb ass muslim.
"I am relying on my personal experience with Morons, which have been universally positive." -jwpegler
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]