We'll definitely pay for it

I mentioned Rand Paul before, the Senate candidate in Kentucky who said we could do without the Civil Rights Act because market forces will take care of the problem. Blogger Pam Spaulding says that idea (and many ideas held by Libertarians) looks great on paper but doesn't make sense in reality. The Civil Rights Act didn't make racism go away, it only made it illegal. The market can't account for deeply-held prejudices, even if letting go of such prejudices means there is a larger pool of customers. Purity of worldview should not take precedence over the complex circumstances of life.

Blogger/essayist Terrence Heath says Rand Paul is trying to have it both ways by saying that Paul claims to not be racist, yet says there should be no laws that ban discrimination. The big problem with that statement is that Paul is not the one affected if the Civil Rights Act is repealed. His privileged life will go on as before. There are lots of other people who will be affected and those effects will cut deeply.

One doesn't have to go all the way back to the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to see examples of one group proposing laws that will have no effect or will help the lawmakers, but will have disastrous effects on other people. There are enough examples in the last year. And that brings us back to a discussion of the national deficit.

The current GOP mantra is the deficit must be cut. They are getting a lot of Blue Dog Democrats to join their chant. While there are long-term structural problems in the national budget (which are not being addressed by those chanting the mantra), there are plenty of short term problems being short-changed. At the top of the list is job creation. Terrence Heath expands on this idea. Business has figured out how to increase profits without creating jobs. There is no one but government to take up the slack like it did in the 1930s with the WPA. Yet government is slashing works programs, training programs, unemployment benefit programs, and education programs while chanting their mantra. Heath says:

We will let our people go without work. We will even cut off their unemployment benefits. We will subject our children to ever more crowded classrooms. Because we do not believe they are worthy of investment any more.
…
Well, we won’t have to worry about building a new economy, because we won’t have anyone capable of building it or a workforce capable of sustaining it.

Heath says the choices are even more stark. If we address the human problem first, we'll be able to tackle the fiscal problem in due time. If we address the fiscal problem first, there will be no chance to fix the human problem and America faces oblivion.

Tackle the fiscal problem first and we'll pay for it. We'll pay for it through unemployed Americans who are cut loose -- no prospect of a job and no income to tide them over. We'll pay for it through children who can't get an education. We'll pay for it through underfunded parks, libraries, community colleges, and services that matter to working families. We'll pay for it by telling millions of families to expect a lower standard of living for yourselves, your children, and beyond. That ends the dream of economic mobility.

The deficit hawks have won a few rounds and they have done so without answering -- or providing contemptuous answers -- to some basic questions. And the prez. hasn't demanded those answers. These are questions like: Without government stimulus what does the GOP see as the plausible engine of job creation? What will the effect of massive teacher layoffs have on the education of American children? Why are the working class and the poor made to pay for the sins of the wealthy?

We'll pay for it by shattering the social contract (which leads to fascism) and the concept of a common good. We'll pay for it through increased joblessness -- the more workers out of a job, the slower the recovery, and the more workers out of a job. We'll pay for it through slashed state budgets because of dwindling tax revenue, leading to cut services (for the poor) and the inability to attract new business. We'll pay for it through rising resignation and the loss of the American Dream.

I've written before about the need to address the deficit. By that I mean addressing the long-term structural problems (Social Security/Medicare) and doing so now so that those affected can plan on the changes. I do not mean slashing programs that are meant to prevent the working class from becoming the underclass.

All that leaves me wondering what's really behind the GOP drive to reduce the deficit, though I think I know. One reason is racism. The don't want money to go to those people. Another is they really do want to send the country towards fascism as a way to remain in power.