|
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
Report Comment
"Folkertsma gets it right. Reagan fumed and railed at "big government" every chance he got. All his administration managed to do was slow its growth. Government enjoys steady growth under conservative leadership. It metastasizes under progressive leadership.
Perhaps a continued severe recession or even a turn to actual depression would be what's best for America long-term, i.e., it might help us save ourselves. More than anything, what seems to have energized the conservative base is having their 401K wiped out. Should we return to economic prosperity and halve the unemployment rate, shore up Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid, likely folks would become somnolent again, i.e., no Tea Party rallies for me. Might miss an episode of "Family Guy". I mean, at what point do we get "energized" about government size and overreach? When 80 cents of every dollar we make goes to fund government?
The relationship between the American populace and the political class can be likened to consumers who have two - and only two - choices of laundry detergent, Brand A and Brand B. Neither product will get stains out. So consumers helplessly switch back and forth between the two hoping one will work, and neither one ever does.
So Folkertsma is correct; elections have devolved to a zero sum affair. We go one way for awhile, then the other, but eventually we keep winding up back where we started.
Meanwhile, government keeps growing .. and growing. And when the wishes of the majority cannot be achieved through elections, the only recourse left is revolution."
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
