Why is the Republican party so content with denying healthcare as a human right, and trying everything they can to harm people who need any sort of assistance? Like… How do they do it? How much are we talking here when we speak about tax savings for them?
Pretend I am rich? Like how much money am I getting back by Republicans kicking men off healthcare or destroying insurance for those who need it most. It must be alot right?
It’s not hate, it is complete and utter indifference beyond whatever they need to win the next election. After that it’s simply a priority of lining the pockets if themselves and their donors. Dems aren’t that much better, but at least their virtue signaling is on the right side.
My brother’s a CEO of a hospital. He makes over $400,000 a year. He told me that he votes for whatever candidate lowers his taxes. He cares about nothing else. Which is strange considering he’s in the healthcare industry. But, he broke down the numbers for me and he voted for Trump over less than $10,000 a year. That’s how much less tax is he pays. Like I said he cares about nothing else. He has a trans son, who he supports, however he will vote against his interest for under $10,000 a year. Year. I don’t know that this is the answer you were looking for it is just the personal experience. Edit: for typos
This affects where people live too. blue states have higher tax and income tax so why would I live there ?
Maybe if we could directly see where every penny of our taxes go. But in the US its just blatant theft we try to avoid as much as possible. In other countries you actually see benefits of your taxes. Not here.
Still if I made 400k a year I wouldn’t really give a crap. Its more when you make 40k a year and taxes take 25% you get a little upset.
When you earn $400k and lose $200k of it to taxes, you get more than a little upset.
He does not lose half or anywhere close, but hey if that helps you justify things🤷♂️
Depends what country you’re in. I’m on far less than $400k and I pay around 40% income tax alone.
And do you vote in a 2 party system where one of them is following through on threats of dehumanizing immigrants, non-white citizens, and LGBTQ?
That’s not happening in the USA.
Nice rock. Sorry your taxes are so high under there.
Classic conservative math.
Tax rate is 35%? That’s basically half!
Classic “there’s only 1 country in the world” math.
. He told me that he votes for whatever candidate lowers his taxes. He cares about nothing else.
Single issue voters. 🤦♀️
He has a trans son, who he supports
No, he objectively does not. Tolerates on a local level, sure, but not supports.
“I love you, son! I’m so proud of you for being your true self,” he yelled from outside the burning building, holding the door shut, “but you’re on the insurance policy, so the payout is better if you die!”
Your brother is what we would call a “leech”.
Poor people who do the same as him would be put to sleep on the streets. But him? He gets tax breaks and he makes other peoples’ lives a living hell.
I hope your brother encounters the consequences of his own actions. Fuck him.
This is vaguely what my mom told me. “My paycheck was bigger under him last time” direct quote.
Its not hate FOR some other group its selfishness and greed and paranoia that someone is getting something over them.
It’s really just exclusive-validity identity politics, which has roots DEEP in many mammal-species…
Here https://www.amazon.com/Immunity-Change-Potential-Organization-Leadership-ebook/dp/B004OEILH2/ you can read the beginning of a book which explains how our unconscious-minds fight off any growing-up, fighting-off change…
In it, it describes 3 unconscious-mind-development-stages, which I call Kegan3, Kegan4, & Kegan5, simply because there are SO many different systems-of-stages-or-dimensions to keep mindful-of, like Kahneman+Tversky-1 & Kahneman+Tversky-2 ( imprint->reaction system, lower-forebrain, the ideology/prejudice/trained-expertise system, vs considered-reasoning, upper-forebrain, much exercised in programming )
… that it’s idiocy to NOT index all such things, now…
Here, if you scroll down a little, you can see a table describing the different unconscious-mind-development stages, ALL of them, that their-kind know about ( the stage after Kegan5 is the self-conquering-stage, which they never saw or identified, because our world’s process sabotages/prevents it )
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Kegan#The_Evolving_Self
Now think about herdbeasts, which don’t have Kegan5’s systems-of-systems stage…
They do have Kegan3, which is the upper-limit that cows are allowed to, by bulls, & they have Kegan4, which the bulls level-off in…
Kegan3 is wanting to be liked, it is associating-with validity ( hence the power of “influencers”, among the younger humans in any time ), it is, fundamentally, ( & I’m not certain that Robert Kegan understood this ) the absorbing experience stage of one’s life, living more in feelings & social-“reality”…
Kegan4, on the other hand, is what I call “BullingBOSS mode”, where validity is zero-sum game: it is exclusive and that is exactly the way bulls work: it is limbic-brain, in basis, so it should hold throughout most mammals!
Now, IF one’s identity & validity are rooted in zero-sum game, then anyone else having any validity reduces one’s own validity!!
Narcissism also works this way, you’ll notice, so now there are 2 fundamental-causes for such instinct, in-play…
Here you will find a book which explains the 5 LEVELS of culture-process, from competitive-nihilism’s culture-level-1, to LIVING IS SELF-INHERENTLY AWESOME!!'s culture-level-5: https://www.amazon.com/Tribal-Leadership-Revised-Leveraging-Organization-ebook/dp/B006IDG1K6/
Here is the dumbed-down TED Talk about their years-of-research: https://www.ted.com/talks/david_logan_tribal_leadership
Culture-level-2 produces conspiricism! Subject-to-narcissism is therefore strategically-cancerous!
Now, what happens if your culture glorifies exclusive-validity identity, and, in so doing, produces a glass-ceiling on one’s culture, which prevents culture-level-4 & culture-level-5…??
One ends-up devaluing, dehumanizing, others, & wanting them butchered, in order to validate one’s culturally-grown prejudice!
IOW, it isn’t just-the-Republicans, the nazis did it, I’m certain that much of the time the Romans did it, different Chinese cultures have done it, same with the Japanese, etc…
It expresses different ways, depending on the identity-anchors of the “valid”, vs the “nonvalid”…
As Logan, King, & Fischer-Wright noticed, you can walk into ANY hospital in North America, with the exception of 1, which outgrew that cultural-glass-ceiling, & if you walk-in looking both professional & self-confident, the junior staff won’t meet your eyes, because the narcissism-culture of the doctors has destroyed their human-validity.
THAT is evidence-based knowing!!
The vignette that Logan gives, in that TED Talk is on that specific section of their book, but doesn’t give enough of it.
Both my parents were medical-professionals, Dad was a medical researcher and doctor, and that researcher bit was significant … because the narcissism-culture of White medicine definitely saturated them both, but his science-culture overrode that, intellectually … for which there ought be no limit to my gratitude, for that gift…
( doesn’t mean I didn’t go no-contact with both of them, though: the narcissism, the exclusive validity that doesn’t include me is toxicity/cancer, in any “family” or “community” )
( btw, the personal-stuff is only so that you understand the experience-induced-understanding: it isn’t just theory, it’s earned understanding. There’s no reason to care about it, otherwise: it’s just context/perspective, so leave me out from any “care” or “concern”. )
Now when you’ve made your culture narcissistic, AND you’re glorifying Kegan4’s BullingBOSS mode…
…AND you add-in non-accountable authority’s rule … then sociopathy’s the result, isn’t it?
It is produced by this configuration of culture-forces!!
( definitions: psychopathy means incapable of empathy, because one’s mirror-neuron-system, or something, just doesn’t function, so other-lives are just meat-marionettes…
sociopathy isn’t brain-intrinsic, it is psychologically-produced analogue-of-psychopathy, through systematic imprinting ( that Kahneman1 imprint->reaction system ), until the programming produced it. )
So, anybody here who wants to read just how evil “normal” can be, please read some of Angela Davis’s “Women, Race, & Class” book … https://www.amazon.com/Women-Race-Class-Angela-Davis-ebook/dp/B0054KKRKY
& you will begin understanding just how spectacularly wrong our assumptions are, re human-culture-produced-outright-evil, from the utterly stomach-turning historical-facts she’s putting into that…
& then you will begin understanding that when prejudice is the ruling-religion, then the nazis were normal, in evil.
So, really it all comes down to specific identity-forces:
- Kegan4, unconscious validity-narcissistic BullingBOSS-mode, being glorified,
- culture being ruled by narcissism, systematically, with an invisible “glass ceiling” preventing culture-level-4 from being known within their culture, &
- nonaccountable-authority garrotting evolution
- our unconscious-mind’s innate mechanisms for preventing growing-up, fighting growing-up off, as “Immunity to Change” identifies, & it gives us simple methods, that work, for getting past the unconsciously-manufactured-obstacles we grow, to block our evolution.
- entirely possibly more, that I’m not aware-of, or not remembering now…
Salut, Namaste, & Kaizen, eh?
_ /\ _
They weren’t raised right.
Hatred of the poor can be found in every society and culture. It’s so pervasive, it’s ridiculous it doesn’t have a proper name. The closest thing is “classism,” but this is something different.
In order to truly understand this, you have to tear yourself away from the Republicans and start looking at conservative ideology itself.
At the core of conservative ideology is the very American idea of “pulling oneself up by their own bootstraps.” This is essentially the idea that, no matter the circumstances of one’s birth, one can achieve anything. Historically, this was a rebellion against the classism of old Europe, which was structured around a class system. So, in that context, it was a very liberal idea. The problem comes in when you start to recognize that people are not actual born on a level playing field, financially, culturally, educationally, etc. Today, the idea that everyone can “pull themselves up by their own bootstraps,” foments the lie that we are all born into equal opportunities in life, which is demonstrably false.
So, the core of conservative ideology is based on an untruth, and it has never reconciled this. Conservatives thus blame disparities in achievement in society on lack of individual effort, and don’t take into account differences in opportunity by birth circumstances. As such, when they see people who haven’t done as well as others, they attribute that to personal failings rather than circumstantial inequalities. When you see all outcomes as a result of personal effort, you can dismiss bad outcomes as the result of a lack of effort, and thereby justify denying the less fortunate help under the notion that it is unfair to the more prosperous because it rewards those who didn’t try as hard with the same outcomes who had to work for them.
Conservative ideology is simply outdated and uninformed by modern sociological research.
modern sociological research or… basic common senses? It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that if you start with 10x as much money as everyone else in a game of monopoly you’re almost certainly going to win that game.
I’ll take a step back even further, and pontificate my own point of view.
Modern conservatism, at its core, is the natural set of beliefs that well-adjusted humans have.
- Family is good, and I should support my family.
- Having children is good, and we should have more children.
- Our society is good. We should celebrate our anscestors and carry on our traditions.
- We should defend our society and traditions from outsiders and those who wish to tear it down.
- There is a Great Force, which loves us and is on our side.
- Bad things generally happen to bad people and good things generally happen to good people. So if good things are happening for a person, they are probably good, and if bad things are happening to a person, they are probably bad.
- When obviously bad things happen to a good person or vice versa, it is because the Great Force has a plan for an even better future which we are ignorant of by virtue of our weakness.
- Gaining wealth and power is good.
- Because our leaders are wealthy and powerful, they must be good people.
- If our leader is obviously not a good person, it is because the Great Force has a plan for them to make the future better for us.
- Large groups of outsiders are dangerous, and are not to be trusted. If they encroach on our territory or take our resources, we should fight them.
- If we are controlled by outsiders, this is bad, and we should fight them.
- Our people are what is important to us. Outsiders should be left to handle their own problems.
- The roles we have in society give us value. People who fulfill their roles well should be celebrated. People who do not fulfill their roles should be rejected.
- The things I learned as a child are true.
With this set of beliefs, a human will fit in to any society and role they end up in; will work to support, grow, and defend that society; and will create as many children as possible. This is a fairly obvious blueprint for the evolutionary fitness of an individual, and the continued existance of a society. And this explains why conservatism is such a universal phenomenon around the world - it is the expression of our natural human instincts.
It is also why conservatives always seem to have a monopoly on “common sense” - a liberal’s common sense still requires you to think. A conservative’s common sense goes straight to your gut. And it explains why conservatives are so good at working together: liberals must find an intellectual basis of agreement before they work together; conservatives already know they should work together, since they see other conservatives have their same base emotional feelings. Plus they are part of the same in-group.
There is so much wrong with what you wrote but I don’t have the time or energy to point it all out. Suffice it to say, you are clearly biased and not very bright. And might be trolling. Goodnight.
Ok, well I’m not trolling and I’m decently smart, but I hope you sleep well.
Why do Republicans hate the poor so much?
For the rich: money reduces empathy. There a a few funny studies on the matter, including one on lottery winners. Plus the very wealthy live in their own bubble.
For the poor: propaganda. Lack of education in logic, sociology, macroeconomics, human relationships. A complete education is not all math and literature and hard science.
trying everything they can to harm people who need any sort of assistance?
The power-hungry want power, control, coercion. Through media power, cronyism they allied with the ultra rich who have power and want docile workers.
The dominated Republicans are fighting the ghost of people abusing the system, afraid of change, hiding in conservatism, backing into 1930s racism. They didn’t think the powerful Republicans would cut their help, only do something about their fears.
Pretend I am rich? Like how much money am I getting back by Republicans kicking men off healthcare or destroying insurance for those who need it most. It must be alot right?
It’s not about economics: healthcare and general welfare have a net positive impact, up to the point of housing homeless people costs globally less than having them on the street.
Personal gain is really at stake only when said service is repurchased by friends of the government, e.g. medical research, police, military, roads anything can go. Helping the poor can’t really be sold. Policing them, yes.
Does money reduce empathy or is lack of empathy just a serious advantage in acumulating money?
Yes.
But foremost, money makes you an asshole, as measured with people who had little/no control over their wealth (e.g. lottery winners.)
Or those were previously just assholes without money? Nice people who win the lottery likely don’t stay rich for long because they use that money to help people they know.
One of several studies:
So I read the study, first of all the paper aknowledges that there’s a several point swing in voting preference between non winners and people who won less than £500 which strongly implies people who play the lottery are more likely to vote right wing to begin with. Secondly even for large wins the swing was only around 18%. At worst money does not make everyone a bad person, more like 1/5 people.
So you read one study, and didn’t know social science are about mean changes overe a population and not absolute changes on individuals.
Good start, now I’ll let you dig some more on the issue.
It outright says:
“13% of non-winners switch to favour the right-wing. By contrast, nearly 18% of the winners who get more than 500 pounds switch to the right-wing party”
That is a description of induviduals, 18% of people become more right wing, not 100% of people become 18% more right wing.
It’s less “hate the poor” and more “being good dogs for their wealthy masters”
They pretend that its not a zero sum game but they act like it is a zero sum game.
To feel better about their own pathetic life.
I would say the argument is that they feel they’re paying more for people who don’t deserve it. That the government and these businesses are constantly subsidizing by taking their pay cheque and handing it to people who refuse to work or decided to do drugs or making other bad life choices. The right tends to view things at an individual level whereas the left view things as a group. Both are right and wrong. If you’re paid $60,000 a year and some goes to a safe injection site, more goes to some carbon tax that nobody is really tracking, more goes to some dark slush fund nobody knows about. Over the years we all just get bitter and angry
Because generally, they don’t vote. And additionally, they make a good boogeyman to blame for all the shit they’re doing themselves.
They want people hating trans and gay people instead.
Protestantism.
Protestantism is Christianity but Jesus is Replaced with Capitalism. If you’re rich, God has chosen you. If you’re poor you have definitely committed every sin.
To help the poor is therefore a betrayal of God.
Protestantism.
Protestantism is Christianity but Jesus is Replaced with Capitalism. If you’re rich, God has chosen you. If you’re poor you have definitely committed every sin.
To help the poor is therefore a betrayal of God.
That is very much not Protestantism. Protestantism is simply the branches of Christianity that descend from the Reformation in the 1500s, “Protesting” what they saw as corruption and even heresy in the Roman Catholic Church. Broadly speaking, Christianity falls into three major categories: the Roman Catholic Church (with the pope and whatnot), Orthodoxy, and Protestantism. Protestant churches come in many different flavors.
Most (if not all) of the most progressive and Christ-like churches are Protestant.
What you’re talking about is Prosperity Gospel. Which is completely antithetical to Christian theology, but that doesn’t stop greedy megachurch preachers and televangelists from pushing it onto ignorant people who know nothing about their own faith.
Edit: Seeing the downvotes, allow me to clarify. I’m not saying all Protestant churches are progressive. As I stated in my follow-up, the least progressive churches are also Protestant. And the behaviors being decried are indeed carried out by Protestants. But I’m saying that Protestant is a very broad category that is not encapsulated by the description I was replying to. The accusation shouldn’t be leveled at Protestantism, but rather at Evangelicals or specifically those who hold to Prosperity Gospel.
Sorry, not convinced. Wait, not sorry either.
All the most terrible christians I have ever had the displeasure of interacting with were Protestants, whereas Catholics are just sorta there, honestly. (and I won’t comment on Orthodoxy because it’s too foreign. Like they might be terrible or amazing, I just never interacted with them, not a thing in my neck of the woods at all)
It is Evangelical Churches boosting fascist candidates in the US and my own country of Brazil.
If people want to convince me that Protestantism ISN’T authoritarian ultracapitalism in Church Clothes, they’ll have to show me something that stands stronger than the entirety of the past 10 years
Trump, Bolsonaro, all boosted by Protestants.
Like I said, Protestant churches come in many flavors. MANY flavors.
What you’re saying is like, “Every quadrilateral I’ve seen lately has four equal sides and four right angles, I think you’re wrong about them only needing four sides.”
Evangelicals are (generally) Protestants (although “Evangelical” isn’t really any sort of organized body but rather something people identify as), but not all Protestants identify as Evangelicals. Those who preach the Prosperity Gospel would profess to be Protestant or Evangelical, but not all Protestants or even all Evangelicals buy into Prosperity Gospel.
Again, the most progressive denominations of Christianity are Protestant. That said, so are the least progressive denominations. It’s a huge category.
Actually protestants in italy ate the most progressive form of Christianity we have. The Valesian church for example accept same sex marriage, has had female priests since forever and has a very strong position on church-state separation and non proselytizing.
You just don’t know much about protestants and think they are all the same like Trump or Bolsonaro.
I strongly disagree.
There are Protestants that are quite different. That is mostly protestants in the USA, which I doubt they are Christians at all.
I can guarantee you that all protestants here in Brazil are like that.
In fact when you consider that protestantism started as a defence of capitalism when the Catholic Church was condemning it – It’s hard to believe the faith isn’t that at its core.
What?
You got your history wrong mate, quite wrong.
Protestant where born as far as 13th century and had not much to do with capitalism.
Maybe you refer to Martin Luther and his attack on the mercimony on the Catholic church, that had nothing to do with capitalism but with spiritualism.
Protestantism started as a reaction to the Catholic church monetizing “Salvation” through indulgences. The Lutherans had some other gripes, but that was a big one. Evangelical protestantism is pretty evil though. It originated in America and has spread everywhere it can. Looking it up American branded Evangelical protestantism is the main kind in Brazil. It looks like less than five percent are identified as European originating branches.
In my experience most poor people are their voting base who the fuck knows why
