THE DEMAGOGUES STRIKE AGAIN: Greed, Corruption and Other Misguided Terms

The Leftist agenda in the United States has been dominated by a redistributive economic mindset.  Like modern day Robin Hoods, they rob from the rich to give to the poor.  Their vocabulary is a steady diet of references to a system of “greed,” “corruption and “economic inequality.”  But these terms are usually undefined.   The Left uses loaded, demagogic terms to gain the rhetorical high ground.  Who in their right mind finds “greed” and “corruption” as acceptable modes of action or behavior? 

But it is the Left which has been able to manipulate, control and apply the use of this terminology with the eventual goal of transforming their rhetoric into policy.  If the Left opposes “greed,” “corruption,” and “economic inequality, then what the Left supports is the antithesis to those terms.  At least that is what the Left propagates.  In the contemporary period, the Leftist cure to these economic problems is to give the governing body more power over taxing and spending.  Yes.  It is they, the Leftists who have the solutions to all socio-economic ills.  And when their agenda fails to cure the ills they attempted to eradicate, and it usually does, the remedy is not to question the failed solution.  No. Not at all.  The remedy is to demand more money from the populace and larger budgets for its constituents. 

This is truly an amazing dynamic.  The bureaucratic or political elite has named the problem whether poverty, housing or education, creating a solution, usually without consulting those it seeks to help and when the solution fails, the short term remedy is to blame the opposition or some external obstacle or group for its lack of success.   Doubling down, the Leftist will rely on their allies in the media and perpetuate slogans such as those mentioned above to gain further support and castigate opponents. And what of their policies?  Has poverty been eradicated?  No.  Not all.  Since LBJ’s Great Society, the government has spent approximately 22 to 30 trillion dollars, transferring wealth, not only to the impoverished, but to a wide array of government bureaucrats, administrators and vendors who benefit from lavish federal, state and local spending through wages, health care and other benefits.  Is it any coincidence that 7 of the 10 wealthiest counties in the US are in the vicinity of Washington DC?  What this translates to are financial resources which could have been used for private investment, which economists acknowledge is the long term job creator in the economy, instead being allocated to public coffers which has certainly proven not to be a means to eradicate poverty. 

In an odd twist,  economists assert welfare programs as implemented in the US do not alleviate poverty but ironically only contribute to creating a state of dependency of the recipient on the government, further perpetuating poverty.  Therefore, the problem of poverty is not solved but institutionalized.  So one could possibly argue it is the actual government spending which is greedy and corrupt because bureaucrats and vendors benefit at the expense of the public. Bureaucrats and vendors have a vested interest in not solving or significantly lessening the problem because doing so would actually cost them to lose access to public money.  But lost in this discussion is the query of the best means to reduce and cure poverty?  That is the primary purpose of having these programs in the first place. 

One of the objectives should be to give people a mechanism to raise themselves up and live their lives in a productive and meaningful way as a free person who has relinquished their economic dependency on the state.  Oftentimes these are very difficult questions which in some respects are beyond the scope of government purview.  But if one is interested in a place to start, the data would indicate an important characteristic is having a functioning 2 parent household with mom and dad in residence.  When does such a finding enter the arena of discussion?  Can’t say I have heard much debate in the mainstream devoted to promoting this ideal.  Actually, a great deal of discussion is devoted to excluding this model to the benefit of lesser paradigms.  Instead, the fatherless rate has increased significantly and the dependency of individuals on the state has grown perpetuating poverty and resentment.  In an almost satirical manner, very unserious, dystopian politicians and bureaucrats demand more government spending to fight poverty and in the end the winners are certainly them.  And the poor, not so and much and the public… well..just get out your wallets.