"He that oppreseth the poor to increase his riches, and he that giveth to the rich, shall surely come to want." Proverbs 22:16
And yet, according to Paul Krugman, columnist, the Congressman from Tennessee, Stephen Fincher, is even using the Bible (II Thesalonians 3:10) -- "...if any would not work, neither should he eat" -- to support his, and the House of Representatives, decision to kill the food stamp portion of the farm bill. But they are padding the portion of the bill that supports farm businesses and corporations. Fincher, himself a previous recipient of farm subsidies, says he cannot support a law that collects from the rich to give to the poor. That, according to many conservative Congressmen these days, is socialism. However, these same Congressmen see nothing wrong with taxing the rich and the middle class to feed the wealthy. That, per them, apparently cannot be construed as socialism.
Mr. Krugman recently wrote that there is something wrong with the soul of the Republican Party. He points out that several who serve in Congress seem to "take glee in inflicting more suffering on the already miserable". He says he isn't sure what is going on, but it's a terrible thing to watch.
Proverbs 14:31 states "He that oppresseth the poor reproacheth his maker...". The Bible, from cover to cover, encourages believers to help others. Go figure that this group has found the scripture that encourages no food for no work. Of course, Fincher and his ilk don't tell anybody where to find work during this sluggish recovery. They are too busy threatening to decrease the already inadequate Social Security funds, reducing funding for Head Start programs and, in general, "mucking" up the economy worse than it is.
I'm glad someone of Mr. Krugman's credentials and readership has finally taken up the crusade to open the eyes of the Republican constituents, if not the Congressmen, themselves. He says they have gone way beyond bad economic doctrine or selfishness and special interests. No kidding!
These points are much what I have been pointing out in my political blog louhough.blogspot.com
for over a year. Perhaps Krugman's message will have more effect from the man of apparent plenty than it has from myself. I, being one of the poor they wish to oppress more by cutting Social Security's COLA, as well as an obscure blog author, cannot begin to impress the politicians involved. Maybe they will hear the message from one of their own.
Previously in "The View From Main Street", the first article in my blog entitled Trickle Down Politics, I pointed out that employers who underpay their employees, as well as Congressmen who consistently keep minimum wages several dollars per hour too low, are the reason social programs became necessary. If a head of household cannot earn enough to feed, clothe and shelter his family how can he be expected to save for a rainy day much less retirement? Western countries, who now get upset over Asian manufacturing conditions, were just as bad before legislation protected employees here. You should know that from your high school history lessons.
The constant threats to cut COLA to "save" Social Security, are frequently followed by people stating they never believed in Social Security anyway or that we are whiners to expect it just because we were promised it. These people who have been elected, apparently are so dense they seem not to understand that we bought the insurance to provide our retirement future. See "Social Security and Medicare Are Not Welfare" at my BlogSpot.
I have also suggested that before they cut Social Security and Medicare, they should cut their own salaries and benefits. Their salary alone is many times more than our Social Security transfers.
I've pointed out to the rich entrepreneurs that they would not have acquired such wealth if they and their families had been the only ones making their products They should have shared the wealth with the ones who earned it for them.
The greed of the past caused earlier Congresses to step in and protect the workers who were not valued by the business community. Businessmen caused the need for these programs they love to hate so much. See "Me, Me, Me" at my blog.
There is a basic arrogance among them. They seem to behave as though they believe that the rich should get more because they are rich and the poor get less because they are poor.
When Paul Ryan was running for Vice President, there was a big deal being made that he thought Atlas Shrugged was the second Bible. For those of you who have not read Ayn Rand's work, it might be important to point out that Rand was an atheist. She also had been part of the wealthy society of Russia at the time of the revolution there. When the rich had been unseated, her parents sent her to America. Needless-to-say she had some very harsh feelings about her stuff being taken away and distributed amongst the poorer population.
Once in America, she began to hang out with gifted and talented individuals. Her husband was an artist. Frank Lloyd Wright and his family were among her friends. He probably was her inspiration for The Fountainhead, her first published novel.
In Atlas Shrugged, Rand went too far afield with her philosophy. There was so much imbedded in her plot that it became tedious. In general, there was a theme that a handful of individuals were responsible for all that was good in the world and that the rest of us would not be able to survive without them. Under the direction of John Galt, the hero so to speak, they set a date when they would walk away to their version of Walden Pond and leave us all to sink. They were sure we would not survive without them.
Now, her work is very seductive. Everyone who reads it wants to be one of the winners and a lot of people convince themselves they are. Some of these interpret those who get rich off of others to be the winners. But in her book, The Virtue of Selfishness, Rand makes it clear that she is promoting trading value for value, not making money or getting ahead by exploiting others.
It is my fear too many people have decided they are the winners, based on an incorrect interpretation of Rand's work. I just don't hold some of these individuals in the same esteem as they see themselves. See "The Fatal Flaw" at my blog.
My thanks to Paul Krugman, who has a strong enough voice to get attention. Perhaps he can teach these individuals the real meaning of the word socialism. Hopefully their constituents will read his, or even my words, and vote these people back to their gentlemen farm origins.
Certainly we can't take many more years of congresses that think it is okay to take from everyone to feed the rich while calling it socialism to take from all taxpayers to feed the hungry. I'm sure God would be happy to see some true believers in office again.
The political blog to which I refer several times in this article is at louhough.blogspot.com. You may also be interested in lousissues.blogspot.com.