One of the principles of conservatism – carried to the extreme with Trumpism and Project 2025 – is individual responsibility and limited government. That, of course, implies lower taxes also.
It sounds simple, even logical. The problem is when you match individual responsibility with human behavior and human nature. Most people don’t always act responsibly or can’t do so.
Consider that in the context of a society of 300+ million people and it should be clear the simplicity claimed by far right conservatives, especially the MAGA folks, is deeply flawed.
This is especially obvious when it comes to finances and planning for the future, health care and education. Hence, Social Security, Medicare, ACA, CHIP and federal education loans and support. And other programs like SNAP.
Americans who use and rely on such programs are not parasites, nor are they billionaires. It is not sufficient or fair to simply say, “it’s their own fault, they should have …” yeah, the probably should have, but they didn’t or couldn’t.
Conservatives claim smaller government means lower taxes. That’s probably true, but the reality is the services those taxes provide are still needed and after cutting at the federal level the costs are shifted to the states and the individual who may or may not have the resources to cope.
A country of 300 million is a society which is different from 300 million individuals. That society is one giant risk pool for all the vicissitudes of life. It functions as a unit spreading risk and supporting those in need. It doesn’t limit individual freedom or rights, it supports them.
Government coordinates and manages the pooled risk in society. And yes, it should be as limited as feasible – to do the job necessary.
Just like with insurance premiums where risk is pooled, taxes spread the risk. And, just like with insurance, some taxpayers will benefit more or less than others. I for one hope never to need SNAP benefits or any subsidy, I’d rather not use Medicare, but I value Social Security.
Conservatives favor more control by the individual states. Okay, that was basic to our founding as a Country, but now we are in the 21st century and a highly competitive world, it’s a bit different than 1787. Shouldn’t some things be coordinated on a Country level in our best interests?
Take education for example. Can we afford to have a wide variance in the education provided by the individual states? Is it fair students in poor states have less opportunity, that the Country may miss out on the value better educated students provide just because a state does its own thing?
West Virginia is the least educated state followed by several southern states. Does that make sense? What potential value is the Country missing from those students?
Limited government, individual responsibility is fine. Applying common sense in our collective best interest is better.
QUINNSCOMMENTARY 
ok by me if we reduce public assistance to those unable (not unwilling) to provide for themselves – everyone else needs to step up.
And everyone needs to have skin in the game – income tax starts at first dollar of income, flat rate, a la FICA taxes – so those who only have wage income need not file a tax return.
no more refundable tax credits – all subsidies of those who cannot provide for themselves must be explicit, and part of public record – to minimize cheating.
we have had 60 years in the war on poverty – and poverty has won – our federal government absolutely sucks at this, the very definition of waste, fraud and abuse – hundreds of billions each year in theft from Medicaid and other public programs.
why are there tax credits for health insurance in households whose annual wages exceed $100,000?
LikeLike
Al Lindquist:
Jack you make too much sense–brother Quinn wants to grow government not shrink it no matter the results–we have a whole society looking for various handouts shifting the tax burden among various groups.
LikeLike
That’s a very simplistic view and when did I ever suggest growing government.
LikeLike
Simplistic–yikes you of Medicare for All–of course it will be less expensive say you–sort of like “you can keep your doctor and the cost will be $2,500”.
Look at all the programs listed above ending in SNAP–could be done at local level with grant $–hell, cutting 1% or less of federal workforce numbering 2.3 million is an issue with you–never heard you say the feds are too bloated and we could do with a slim down.
West VA. the “least educated state”–what does that mean?–latest 4th grade math tests show D.C., Ark., Oregon, Alaska, New Mexico, Puerto Rico score behind West Va..
Top states are: Utah–Wyoming–MA—NH–ND–MN–Texas and Florida–not in order just top scores–4th grade math–2024.
I count 6 low tax states–lots of factors go into school achievement and money helps but obviously not the preeminent factor. Maybe 2-parent families helps quite a bit.
LikeLike
Theft by who?
LikeLike
Well then thank the good Lord spending money is the answer Richard. Maybe we can take a closer look at spending that money. In 2023 the City of Baltimore spent $1.7 billion and another $780 million of COVID money on education. If you need help that’s almost $2.5 billion on education. Results, what were the results you ask. Well let’s take a look. 13 High Schools in Baltimore and zero percent of students tested proficient in math and less than 40% in reading.
There are always more issues than money involved so next time you disgustingly cherry pick the bad results you needed for your hit peace try reporting all the real “facts!”
LikeLike
Al Lindquist
This is typical of cities in so many states–what does work would be vouchers–charter schools–and any place that dos not have the union and its influence on education–schools are not organized for the parent and student as much as they are for the educators. Get the union out (good luck!) and you have a chance of educating young people.
I just heard that Mississippi and Alabama had solid increases in 4th grade reading scores (I think the largest % increase) after adopting phonics the year before testing–back to basics seemingly works–are we not surprised!
LikeLike
Boy, you hit the nail on the head with this, and you don’t even know it! 😂 For-profit charter schools are exactly the kind of thing that happens when you shrink the government. They have no oversight, and they just slash teacher salaries and pocket the difference through management fees and rent payments. Most charter schools deliver poor results, and there are many examples throughout the country of these charter management companies bankrupting themselves. And they do the additional damage of hamstringing public schools as they siphon off funds from their operating budgets. Vouchers are and always have been a monumentally bad idea. Do you know that several states that have proposed the idea, chief among them Texas and Arizona, that voucher money be paid out with zero supervision of how the funds are used. Talk about fraud. And here’s the other kicker: a lot of these vouchers just go straight to funding private school for the already well-off with kids in private schools. Now that’s a government handout if I’ve ever known one!
LikeLike