Debate on Bryan Quote

Matthew's Facebook Status
“There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it.”
- William Jennings Bryan (1896)

Russell
What a childish generalization...

Russell
What a childish generalization...

Matthew
Why are you repeating yourself?

Matthew
Why are you repeating yourself?

Matthew
On a serious note, not only are you wrong in characterizing that comment as a "childish generalization", but I strongly suspect that many of the fiscal conservatives you implicitly defend would probably agree with Bryan's statement. I could understand your objection if the quote impugned the motives of those who adhere to laissez-faire economic (or "trickle down" or "supply side" or whatever else you choose to call it), but all it does is concisely reiterate the essential philosophies that have been regularly articulated by the two main factions. It's a statement of fact, not an expression of opinion.

Incidentally, I do happen to think that many disciples of right-wing economic gospel believe what they do for self-serving reasons. One of the key figures in the development of conservative fiscal thought, Alexander Hamilton, famously declared that America should give "a distinct, permanent share in the government" to "the rich and well-born" since "the people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right." When overtly proclaiming this principle became politically suicidal (as the Federalist Party learned the hard way), Hamiltonians began creating rationalizations to make government favoritism toward the wealthy dovetail with democratic ideals. It was from that tactical imperative that trickle down economics was born.

In that sense, you were right in suspecting that William Jennings Bryan (and by default myself, for having put up the quote) hold plutocrats (i.e, "government by the wealthy") and those who serve them in the harshest contempt. That said, this suspicion was not technically validated by the content of the quote itself, rendering your reply erroneous.

Jessie
To be a bit reductionist about things, in American society at present there is welfare for the impoverished and welfare for the wealthy...it is the middle class who suffers.

Matthew
The impoverished still suffer more than the middle class, although the plight of the middle class remains a travesty to justice and humanitarianism. It is easy to forget that the people who receive welfare because they are dirt poor are, well, DIRT POOR. Welfare is usually a supplemental form of income, and a meager one at that. Our welfare system is like a man standing on the edge of a pier who, seeing another man drowning twenty feet out into the lake, throws him eleven feet of rope; it's not enough to really help, but it lets us brag that we met them more than halfway.

What our government needs to do is guarantee that everyone who seeks full-time employment is capable of obtaining it, and that the work thereby received is fair (reasonable hours, safe working conditions, guarantees that termination of employment cannot be done capriciously, etc.) and gainful (offers employees enough in the way of salary and benefits to enable them to afford biological and social necessities).

Jessie
I agree with you completely in your last paragraph, but would remind you that I have spent most of my adult life working with the impoverished both in this country and abroad. Where a great deal of individuals are victims of circumstance, there are those who deplete and take advantage of the system. It's not so one-sided.

Matthew
I agree with what you just wrote, but your earlier comment was that the middle class are screwed more than the poor because at least the latter have welfare. My point was that the welfare offered to the impoverished is hardly enough to "de-screw" them. By pointing out that there are some people who, though not needing welfare, exploit the system, you do not validate your earlier statement on the relative advantages of being impoverished versus being middle class, but instead identify an unrelated (though very serious) problem with the management of an important government bureaucracy.

Russell
iphone, sometimes it double posts, my bad

For the policies that I would propose in order to achieve the last objective mentioned, see the proposals mentioned in the conversation after Scott Brown's victory (http://riskinghemlock.blogspot.com/2010/01/implications-of-browns-victory-part-two.html). Those aren't the full extent of what I believe ought to be implemented; I would also want to raise the minimum wage, overhaul unemployment agencies so as to make them more efficient and helpful to those in need of them, and democratize the infrastructure of the Federal Reserve. Those measures would came later, though, and I would try to begin with the more moderate reforms mentioned on that link.