Skip to main content

View Diary: Stewart to O'Reilly: Why Are Tax Break Recipients Viewed as "Savvy" & Welfare Recipients "Moochers"? (125 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Obvious answer to question (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dogs are fuzzy, shaharazade

    Short answer = .....Because tax break recipients are active and welfare recipients are passive.

    Stereotypes with some element of truth at the heart of the matter; FDR was emphatic about the government getting out of the "relief"  business because people need meaningful work and a living wage.

    Long Answer = Because tax breaks have been engineered by those with the most money and power; the rest of us do not  adequately ORGANIZE, LOBBY, or VOTE.

    Views? For over 100 years America has been bombarded and overwhelmed by well-crafted messages equating the wealthy and big business with God and cleanliness ......vs. refomers, working class, poor, etc. as the Devil and dirt.

    Major highlight of this perversion of American democracy, radio segment about the book:

    Sixty-eight years ago Upton Sinclair, muckraking journalist and erstwhile socialist, won the primary for the governorship of California by a landslide. The response from the state's newspapers and the motion picture industry was swift and merciless: they used every trick they could think of to defeat him. In 2010, Brooke spoke to Greg Mitchell, author of The Campaign of the Century, who argued that, for better or worse, the anti-Sinclair effort ushered in the modern political campaign.
    Also, worth reading the whole page about FDR.


    The lessons of history, confirmed by the evidence immediately before me, show conclusively that continued dependence upon relief induces a spiritual and moral disintegration fundamentally destructive to the national fibre. To dole out relief in this way is to administer a narcotic, a subtle destroyer of the human spirit. It is inimical to the dictates of sound policy. It is in violation of the traditions of America. Work must be found for able-bodied but destitute workers. The Federal Government must and shall quit this business of relief.
    I am not willing that the vitality of our people be further sapped by the giving of cash, of market baskets, of a few hours of weekly work cutting grass, raking leaves or picking up papers in the public parks. We must preserve not only the bodies of the unemployed from destitution but also their self-respect, their self-reliance and courage and determination. This decision brings me to the problem of what the Government should do with approximately five million unemployed now on the relief rolls.
    All work undertaken should be useful — not just for a day, or a year, but useful in the sense that it affords permanent improvement in living conditions or that it creates future new wealth for the Nation.
    The work itself will cover a wide field including clearance of slums, which for adequate reasons cannot be undertaken by private capital; in rural housing of several kinds, where, again, private capital is unable to function; in rural electrification; in the reforestation of the great watersheds of the Nation; in an intensified program to prevent soil erosion and to reclaim blighted areas; in improving existing road systems and in constructing national highways designed to handle modern traffic; in the elimination of grade crossings; in the extension and enlargement of the successful work of the Civilian Conservation Corps; in non-Federal works, mostly self-liquidating and highly useful to local divisions of Government; and on many other projects which the Nation needs and cannot afford to neglect.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site