Three states form the base of Democratic political power in the United States: California, New York and Illinois. All three states are locked in an accelerating economic, demographic and social decline; all three hope that they can stave off looming disaster at home by exporting the policies that have ruined them to the rest of the country...
Illinois politicians, including the present President of the United States, have wrecked one of the country’s potentially most prosperous and dynamic states, condemned millions of poor children to substandard education, failed to maintain vital infrastructure, choked business development and growth through unsustainable tax and regulatory policies — and still failed to appease the demands of the public sector unions and fee-seeking Wall Street crony capitalists who make billions off the state’s distress.
Blue politicians speak eloquently and often sincerely about their desire to help the poor. They speak beautifully about the need for better education as a ticket to better lives. They speak intelligently about the contributions a well managed, well organized government can make to the common good.
But these beautiful sentiments have less and less to do with the actual policies they pursue...
Liberals are right to feel that social justice matters, that the poor should have greater opportunity and that government in a democratic society cannot remain indifferent to the existence of great social evils.
But where liberals in America have the freest hand—in states like New York, California and Illinois—we see incontrovertible evidence that the policies they choose don’t have the consequences they predict. California by now should surely be an educational, environmental and social utopia. New York should be a wonder of glorious liberal governance. Illinois should be known far and wide as the state that works.
What’s interesting about the governance failures of these states is how comprehensive they are...
Clinging grimly on to failing policies and dying institutions is the Democratic answer by and large, even as Democratic policies accelerate the rate of decline and aggravate the damage done...
Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives need to think much more clearly and much less sentimentally about policy so that voters can have choices that are both clearer and better than the ones we have now.
In the meantime, it is more than troubling that President Obama seems so unwilling to reflect on the rich experience of liberal failure in his home state.
Education, politics, and anything else that catches my attention.
Friday, October 26, 2012
Why I'm Not A Liberal
It's because I objectively evaluate evidence and make decisions based on it:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Excellent post!
Of course, the states which form the "conservative" base generate the least in federal revenue and draw the most in federal aid. They also represent the lowest wages, standards of living, property value, education success, health, and contributions to GDP. And they represent the heart of civil rights violations. But, you know, those are just facts.
Wow, and yet people flock to them. Why might that be, mmazenko?
People flock to Mississippi and Louisiana and South Carolina and Wyoming? Hmmm. Of course, you have no explanation why the places that have the most conservative policies aren't economic powerhouses of innovation and growth. And don't point to Texas or North Dakota - because you know that is about oil deposits. Where are the Apples and Googles of Nebraska? Where are the GEs and TimeWarners and Ciscos and Oracles of Mississippi? Why are all the great startups in places like California and Illinois and NY? Oh, and Texas? Its budget is exploding just like California's.
So?
Maybe people like freedom more then they like government control. It's a thought--not one you seem capable of understanding :-) but it's a thought.
California has lots of oil, too. Why is it a basketcase?
MMazenko:
I sure wish I knew where you were pulling those "facts" from.
Dodging the issues of stagnant economies in red states, are you? OK.
And, we've been down CA's problem before. When the state mandates 2/3 legislative approval for revenue - but not for passing new spending (much of which is done by referenda) - you will have deficit problems.
It's that simple.
I guess we'll have to take California out of the "blue" column because none of California's economic success has anything to do with left wing policies.
First, you know that is about oil deposits.
Yes, that's right. California produced and continues to produce quite a bit of oil.
Then there's the Central Valley and more then a few other areas in California that are agricultural powerhouses.
There's also that big, blue thing off to the left - the Pacific Ocean. I'm pretty sure that's not the result of "progressive" policies.
In fact, I'm trying to think of anything of value in California that is the result of lefty policies and I'm coming up dry. Perhaps you could provide something more then invitations to assume that lefty policies are responsible for California's economic growth - before California became an economic basket case - and not that lefty policies are parasitic on the economic growth resulting from conditions which either pre-existed or for which lefties have no claim?
Just out of curiosity, I wonder if Boeing regrets relocating their corporate headquarters to Chicago over Dallas. At the time, the Dallas City Council was a circus, but when has that not been the case in Chicago? Of course Rahm makes sure the trains run on time. There is that. And the most restrictive urban gun laws in the nation have not stemmed the tide of murders. Suburbs are NOT happy. We get reports from relatives who were active in The Party and even ran for office. They warned us about Obama in the ramp up to 2008 and everything they said would happen has come to pass. Watch suburban IL voters stay home while downstate comes out in droves. It may not change the outcome electorally, but it could send a message.
Post a Comment