this post was submitted on 09 Aug 2023
1004 points (93.4% liked)

Political Memes

5509 readers
2916 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] dx1 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I wouldn't say Democrat takes on libertarianism have ever been very good. Especially in recent years with the alt-right trying to occupy the middle space between "libertarian" and "Republican" and adding to the confusion.

You have a problem on two ends - corporate interests can get out of hand, pollute, monopolize, etc., and you want to rein that in somehow. This can be done via the market, since corps do need money to survive, but a lot of people don't care enough to make it happen. On the flip side, if you rely on government to just control everything and hope they'll act benevolently, there are huge risks - a government agency could be benign or beneficial, or it can turn into a machine for oppression and monopolization.

I feel like the Democrat takes never acknowledge the negatives of state control (at least unless it's something Republican-associated) and also never acknowledge there's a valid way to accomplish anything outside of the state. It seems like their answer is always to just throw state programs at everything. Well, we did try having the state run everything once...

[–] afraid_of_zombies 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Democrats constantly complain about government control. Defund the police ring a bell? How about all the wars over school district control? Or wasting money on the military?

Just because you lean towards moving power and resources from private to public sector doesn't mean you always always agree with the public sector.

If I support NASA does that mean I agree with every decision ever made by the Fed?

[–] dx1 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Democrats constantly complain about government control. Defund the police ring a bell? How about all the wars over school district control? Or wasting money on the military?

Look what I wrote:

I feel like the Democrat takes never acknowledge the negatives of state control (at least unless it’s something Republican-associated)

Wouldn't really say "defund the police" was a mainstream Dem thing though, they mostly distanced themselves from it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Democrats in the US are not as left-leaning as they make themselves out to be. I'd argue they moved further right economically a couple of decades ago, which pushed the Republicans even further right to the point of absurdity. What to you seem like the Democratic Party's attempt at "state controlling" things aren't actually that extreme, or that left-wing for that matter. Both parties are right-leaning. There's no center or center left in the US. Bernie tried to be center-left, but he was seen as too extreme.

[–] dx1 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It's not an issue of perception, either the state controls something or it doesn't (or somewhere in that gray area in between w.r.t regulations, public-private partnerships and so on).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, exactly, most traditionally public institutions in the US are now carried by private companies and cititzens. Universities, for example.

[–] dx1 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

The pie grows, so you need to look into the funding of these institutions, into the percentage of government vs private coffers. I'll look into it later, still at work now

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Hi, I'm back.

State colleges receive the same amount of funding from tuition as from state governments

U of Wisconsin-Madison, 15% State Revenue, 21% Tuition There's also a graph showing the percentage decline since 1976

U of Texas, Austin, 10% State Appropriation, 20% Tuition Also with a fun cow shaped graph showing the decline from 34% State Appropriation in 1990 to the 10% of today. Important to add that they have income from an endownment that generates oil and gas revenues that is not included in these figures.

U of Virginia 2011, 10.3% State Funding

Other universities show the amount of money instead of the percentage, I'm too lazy to do the maths right now. These are some of the ones that are easier to read on the go. Speaking of, here's another light read on healthcare The World’s Costliest Health Care, David Cutler, Harvard Magazine

As to HOW COME the percentage of GDP increased and it didn't translate into better finance for institutions, my leftist ass would guess that the laissez-faire market failed to self-regulate. This is definitely an oversimplification of a more complex economical issue, this could also be a post hoc ergo propter hoc, or a cum hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. In any case, you asked for sources and I provided.

[–] dx1 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

OK, fair enough re: colleges. Not sure what institutions you're referring to. Government spending as % of GDP is a rough indicator of their general presence in the economy (either through which institutions they're running directly, or which institutions they're regulating).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

Hi, read my comment again, I specifically mentioned university in my example. Other public institutions would be schools, libraries, recreation centres, etc. The US government spends a lot on armament and military tech, maybe if you can look at a graph where the spendings are separated you'll get a clearer picture

[–] Samwise 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I think it's because, as you laid out, the only 2 current options are market led control which isn't viable, and govt based which is viable but risky. Since it's the only viable option it gets the risks downplayed.

[–] dx1 1 points 1 year ago

Well, in market or government, if you have bad people you get bad results. It's not a simple "viable or not viable" - right now we're in a mode where most people implicitly assume that any business allowed to exist is probably OK, and don't really exercise boycott, while relying on regulators etc. to clean up the mess. But that kind of abdication of responsibility isn't a constant of human nature or something, it's just what we've lazily been doing in this society for a while. Likewise, it's not the case where regulators, politicians, judges etc. are universally acting in good faith - it's hard to put a number to it, but there are examples of abuse all over the board as well.