Yes, We Still All Have Equal Rights When It Comes To Sleeping Under A Bridge
The other day on Public Radio a conservative economist was interviewed about the federal budget battle now going on in Washington. He was asked the usual questions and gave the usual answers. Until, that is, he was asked whether he didn’t think that the rich should share the sacrifices that deep program cuts would impose on the poor. His answer to this question blew me away.
He said that they would share these sacrifices. The reason being that the same program cuts applied to all equally, and any sacrifices would therefore be shared by all.
Well, sure. If public school classes soar in size because of education cuts, the children of both rich and poor would suffer equally — unless, of course, the rich send their kids to private schools. And if cuts in infrastructure programs put working people who repair things like roads and bridges on the unemployment line, than any rich construction workers would also lose their jobs — though that is not generally the kind of work done by the very well-to-do.
The French writer, Anatole France, famously noted that “The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.”
So in the great federal government shrinkage about to begin, all will suffer equally. From the conservative economist perspective. And you thought these people had no heart.
More from this writer at http://blog.wallstreetpoet.com
3 Responses to “Yes, We Still All Have Equal Rights When It Comes To Sleeping Under A Bridge”
Let them all eat day old cake from a thrift shop…
Generally, I agree that it is laughable to say that the rich will suffer as much as the poor if cuts are made but I feel a few considerations are needed.
RE: Example of public school education decreasing in value: Even if the rich’s children go to private school and may remain directly unaffected by the changes in the local public school system, there is still the issue of property value (often linked to the quality of the public education institutes). So the rich will indirectly be affected. Not to mention the reduction in quality of employees they may be able to hire if they are any sort of entrepreneur/small business owner in technology or science.
RE: Example of reduction in infrastructure costs: No, a rich person will not have to worry about not being able to hold on to their construction job. However, if they own a construction or development business, they will be worried in other ways. The contracting company owners that would be hired for such investments will have to try to find work elsewhere for their contractors or otherwise go belly up. They’ll likely have more stashed away (personally) for such an occurrence but it is still a stop in income flow.
Yes, the rich and the poor have different problems to be concerned with, but to suggest they’ll be completely unaffected by cuts is disingenuous. I agree they’ll likely fare better than the poor and it’s silly to suggest in the same breath the sacrifice will be comparable, but let’s keep it honest so that the arguments are on equal footing.
Typical 21st century rightwing mindset. Frankly I don’t know why anyone would be surprised by this, although it was a pretty clear window into a tribal empathy deficit. If America ever goes down the tubes it will be in part due to sustained rightwing efforts toward dividing and de-humanizing citizens who in the past had at least a minimal sense of unity and mutual respect. Let’s not forget, this is the party who once attempted to claim the mantle of family values. Funny yes… but true.