One of the most common tropes coming from critics of "Obama Care" is "The government has never required people to buy any good or service." The reality of life in these here United States is that there are de facto mandates which are imposed by the actions of the U.S. government and the priorities of the legislature.
One of today's big political stories is the passing of a transportation bill before Congress scarpers off for their Independence Day vacation. Of course, the original GOP House bill would have severely cut funding for mass transit. Of course, public transportation is abysmal in most of the U.S., therefore there is a de facto mandate to purchase an automobile if one wants to travel to work, or to conduct necessary errands.
Public transportation is often decried as being injurious to freedom, because, frankly, people are dumbasses. Having a public transportation option increases one's transportation choices- there is nothing so freeing as being able to leave the most expensive consumer good one owns at home, and not having to worry about traffic, parking, and the like. Of course, a public health insurance option would also result in a net gain in "freedom", because it would give Joe Schmo greater independence from the whims of his employer.
Conservatives and Libertarians have a twisted view of "freedom"- they believe that freedom can only be curtailed by government, while some of the greatest threats to individual liberty are now coming from corporations. It boils down to the asshole axiom "socialism is bad, while neo-feudalism is A-OK." Owning a car offers the illusion of freedom- one can travel on one's own terms, but is saddled with gasoline and insurance purchases. Having workplace insurance coverage, with no public option, ties one to the whims of an employer and removes a bargaining chip from the workers (and makes possible the spectre of fundamentalist lunatic employers seriously curtailing their employees' freedom of self-determination).
Contrary to GOP and Libertarian whining, the federal government has been the greatest guarantor of freedom for average Americans. One merely has to look back on the Civil Rights struggles of the mid-twentieth century to realize that state governments and corporations cannot be trusted as stewards of liberty.
I wish we had a public option.
ReplyDeleteBut our corporations said no (via their employees/our elected politicians).
~
Well, someone's wrong:
ReplyDeleteMass transit, for instance, is a mistake not because freeways are more cost-effective, but because it will allow the government to control the movement of its citizens. By getting rid of cars, "they'll be able to restrict where you go," director Bearly says.
ties one to the whims of an employer and removes a bargaining chip from the workers
I've always thought that the fundamentalist/patriarchal "Daddy brings home the bacon & Mommy stays home w/ the quiverful" crap is really intended to eliminate the flexibility of two-income households. Lot harder to go on strike, quit & look for a new job, yada, if there's only one household income.
It's never been about freedom per se with those guys, it's always freedom for white male property owners. Their freedom not to buy you insurance, their freedom to shoot you if you look scary, etc. While the freedom of wage earners has to be curtailed because they're always getting up to bad stuff. That's why they love the originalist reading of the Constitution so much, because it was written in 1787.
ReplyDeleteBut our corporations said no (via their employees/our elected politicians).
ReplyDeleteYeah, the thing that gets me is that so many small business owners seem to buy this line of bullshit, and they keep trumpeting the megacorporate line.
I've always thought that the fundamentalist/patriarchal "Daddy brings home the bacon & Mommy stays home w/ the quiverful" crap is really intended to eliminate the flexibility of two-income households. Lot harder to go on strike, quit & look for a new job, yada, if there's only one household income.
Yeah, patriarchy even hurts the average man, who is often too insecure to see it.
It's never been about freedom per se with those guys, it's always freedom for white male property owners. Their freedom not to buy you insurance, their freedom to shoot you if you look scary, etc. While the freedom of wage earners has to be curtailed because they're always getting up to bad stuff. That's why they love the originalist reading of the Constitution so much, because it was written in 1787.
Thanks for commenting! Yeah, the "libertarian" notion of freedom is really odd- it's basically feudalism, and the dumb libertarians think they'll be the lord of the manor. Scratch that, I think they just want to be the overseer cracking the whip.
Buncha loony libruls.
ReplyDelete