Thursday, April 15, 2010

Jane: a conundrum

I don't usually post political stuff, but I read an article that Bruce posted on Facebook and it made me think. I sense that a lot of people are really concerned about the intersection between the economy and the government, and that's why the Tea Party is growing. People get agitated about government spending, perhaps because they are worried about spending in their own homes?

If only we could just find that "waste" in government spending and cut it, things would be so much easier. But the supporters who were interviewed couldn't seem to describe what it is . . . I found these last few paragraphs from the article (from the NY Times) about a poll of Tea Party supporters interesting.

When talking about the Tea Party movement, the largest number of respondents said that the movement’s goal should be reducing the size of government, more than cutting the budget deficit or lowering taxes.

And nearly three-quarters of those who favor smaller government said they would prefer it even if it meant spending on domestic programs would be cut.

But in follow-up interviews, Tea Party supporters said they did not want to cut Medicare or Social Security — the biggest domestic programs, suggesting instead a focus on “waste.”

Some defended being on Social Security while fighting big government by saying that since they had paid into the system, they deserved the benefits.

Others could not explain the contradiction.

“That’s a conundrum, isn’t it?” asked Jodine White, 62, of Rocklin, Calif. “I don’t know what to say. Maybe I don’t want smaller government. I guess I want smaller government and my Social Security.” She added, “I didn’t look at it from the perspective of losing things I need. I think I’ve changed my mind.”

1 comment:

T-Mom said...

check out today's Doonesbury (4/29)