A Plea: No More False Dichotomies

[Hastrman]

So in every thread about economics that comes up here, pretty much one whole half of the forum (which is left as an exercise for the reader) offers a false dichotomy. Namely,

Either we have a massive bureaucratic welfare state or the poor die in the gutter.

Now seriously. Other than complete wackjobs like Ayn Rand, nobody is suggesting that. The foundation of economic conservatism is the idea that a free market, low taxes, minimal regulation, is better for the poor.

That is debatable, but why don’t people debate it? I’m sure its opponents could find some statistics to oppose that view, just as its proponents find stats to support it. Why do they insist on attacking the strawman of “cutting programs for the poor”, while begging the question “Do those programs actually help the poor?”

Oh, and if you’re planning to utter the phrase “trickle-down economics”, don’t bother. The economist Thomas Sowell has already revealed that to be a caricature, here. From the article:

Those who imagine that profits first benefit business owners—and that benefits only belatedly trickle down to workers – have the sequence completely backward. When an investment is made, whether to build a railroad or to open a new restaurant, the first money is spent hiring people to do the work. Without that, nothing happens.

Money goes out first to pay expenses first and then comes back as profits later—if at all. The high rate of failure of new businesses makes painfully clear that there is nothing inevitable about the money coming back.

If all you ever do is attack strawmen, it makes you look weak.

 

[Nimzovik]

Well said sir!!

 

[Joe_5859]

So in every thread about economics that comes up here, pretty much one whole half of the forum (which is left as an exercise for the reader) offers a false dichotomy.

So one half of the forum offers false dichotomies and the other half does not…

Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

Yes, there certainly can be a lot of talking past each other on these issues and directing the bulk of our talking points towards straw men. Sometimes we take our cue from the public discourse on these topics a little too readily. It can be a slow process to recognize these tendencies in ourselves. At least for me it is.

 

[manygift1spirit]

I heard a joke a few months back about this topic. Seems there were three stone tablets dictated to Moses on the mountain, but he dropped one on the way down. According to legend, this is what is said:

XI. Thou shalt not entertain false dichotomies. Take it or leave it.

 

[davidmlamb]

So one half of the forum offers false dichotomies and the other half does not…

Sorry, I couldn’t resist.

Yes, there certainly can be a lot of talking past each other on these issues and directing the bulk of our talking points towards straw men. Sometimes we take our cue from the public discourse on these topics a little too readily. It can be a slow process to recognize these tendencies in ourselves. At least for me it is.

I’m going to be practical here and state what I believe best helps the poor.

There are two types of poor, the working poor and the non working poor.

For the working poor the best way to help them is to pass laws such as the employees free choice act. This law makes it mandatory to allow employees to form unions and collectively bargain for their wages and benefits. Imagine if Walmart suddenly became union represented how many working poor would be lifted from poverty and be able to purchase homes and cars?

The second ingredient that works best for both classes of the poor is job training or a formal education. These programs are already in place and should not be cut. There are Federal Pell grants available to the poor as well as vocational rehabilitation and JTPA through your local Career Center which is run by the state.

The next ingredient is self determination to improve oneself. It must be recognized however that a person who is disadvantageous need assistance to improve themselves which is why we should never cut the funding of the programs I have mentioned. But a person must want to improve ntheir lives and then take the steps to do so.

It must also be recognized that not everyone can work. There is a huge population of disabled people out there and especially mentally disabled. The mentally disabled are especially disadvantageous because they lack the mental faculties to not only work, but to socially interact with co-workers at a level that maintains peace and comfort in the work place. So the best way to help these poor who just cannot sustain themselves is for them to be publicly provided for. I suggest that we cut social security benefits for the retired rich; those with retirement incomes far above the poverty level, and divert those funds to a more liberal social security disability program. Private Charities such as Catholic Charities ought to act in union with the state to offer these people structured assistance, not just in a disability check but in assisted living where their needs are met and they can receive proper medical and psycological care.

Finally in all of this there must be faith in God, hope in God, and the love of God. This post started out talking about false dichotomies but the conservative tradition offers one that I would like to call on and that is the state is offered as a subsitution for God and faith. But the reality is the state was created by God (Romans 13:1-6; CCC 1897-1912) as a means for God to work is grace and mercy through. The state is not a faceless entity or run by an army of atheist opposed to God. The state is ran by a diversified branch of caring people who God works his grace through. I am a veteran of the US Navy and I have used the VA for my medical care for 6 years. Never in my life have I experienced a staff so caring. Never have I received such thorough and excellent care. The VA has been a blessing from God and not a subsitution for God. A foodstamp card for the Walmart worker to supplment their low income is a blessing from God and not a subsitution for God’s provision. In a free society a state is something we the people form and if we the people form our government then it should be formed in a manner that is consistent with the love and mercy of God as well as the Justice of God.

Pax Christi,

David

 

[Nimzovik]

Thats - nice- and may feel really good to say - however tax money given to the Government (say for Health Care) is often tentamount to giving money to what is currently defined as atheists** due to ‘political correctness.’ This in turn creates untold numbers of ‘middle men’ to dispense the proposed plan whom must be paid. Then there must be inspectors created that assure the public is getting it’s money’s worth. The Beauracracy then must appoint a Czar (appointed every four years as he/she will be part of the Presidential Cabinet) to oversee the whole operation and report to the President. This Czar position will most certainly expand exponentially his/her power via calling for legislation to be enacted to periodically redfine and broaden the program in terms of what many here would be declared to be unescessary and a varitable waste of public monies. (I.E, not unlike the convict that sued the state -California -apparantly he claimed his mental health was not being addressed by the prison system because the said system would not pay for his sex change operation like they pay for medications for other inmates with mental disorders. I kid thee not) This said Czar would then effect the president’s agenda in interpretation of the dispensation of the plan. (I think some here would indeed protest the Czar allocating public monies going to abortionists-yes? Which in turn would perhaps then make all U.S. taxpayers ‘remote participators of Evil’ perhaps?) In view of another perhaps impending beauracracy to be created as described above one can see it is going to,obviously,cost. By the way - has it been noticed that the U.S. is financially broke? One can not give what one has not earned.

Did you know that every elected U.S. President invariably owes back taxes? Why? Because no one understands the current Tax Code! Ergo a scrupulous audit is made to assure the opposition party is mollified. The Gov’t has been involved in the Tax Code for just how many years? Indeed and it still is not understandable. Hmmmm… I wonder if the Health Care plan would be that convoluted as well?? Ya think?

No. IF the Gov’t is to be involved (certainly not a given since Socialism has it’s -shall we say - dangerous pitfalls?) then Faith Based Initiatives a la the Bush Administration is the way to go methinks.

 

[davidmlamb]

Thats - nice- and may feel really good to say - however tax money given to the Government (say for Health Care) is often tentamount to giving money to what is currently defined as atheists** due to ‘political correctness.’ This in turn creates untold numbers of ‘middle men’ to dispense the proposed plan whom must be paid. Then there must be inspectors created that assure the public is getting it’s money’s worth. The Beauracracy then must appoint a Czar (appointed every four years as he/she will be part of the Presidential Cabinet) to oversee the whole operation and report to the President. This Czar position will most certainly expand exponentially his/her power via calling for legislation to be enacted to periodically redfine and broaden the program in terms of what many here would be declared to be unescessary and a varitable waste of public monies. (I.E, not unlike the convict that sued the state -California -apparantly he claimed his mental health was not being addressed by the prison system because the said system would not pay for his sex change operation like they pay for medications for other inmates with mental disorders. I kid thee not) This said Czar would then effect the president’s agenda in interpretation of the dispensation of the plan. (I think some here would indeed protest the Czar allocating public monies going to abortionists-yes? Which in turn would perhaps then make all U.S. taxpayers ‘remote participators of Evil’ perhaps?) In view of another perhaps impending beauracracy to be created as described above one can see it is going to,obviously,cost. By the way - has it been noticed that the U.S. is financially broke? One can not give what one has not earned.

Did you know that every elected U.S. President invariably owes back taxes? Why? Because no one understands the current Tax Code! Ergo a scrupulous audit is made to assure the opposition party is mollified. The Gov’t has been involved in the Tax Code for just how many years? Indeed and it still is not understandable. Hmmmm… I wonder if the Health Care plan would be that convoluted as well?? Ya think?

No. IF the Gov’t is to be involved (certainly not a given since Socialism has it’s -shall we say - dangerous pitfalls?) then Faith Based Initiatives a la the Bush Administration is the way to go methinks.

You start this thread by making a plea for no false dichotomies and then you write this post filled with nothing but false dichotomies. How can you be taken seriously?

David

 

[Joe_5859]

You start this thread by making a plea for no false dichotomies and then you write this post filled with nothing but false dichotomies. How can you be taken seriously?

David

He didn’t start the thread.

 

[Nimzovik]

*Some *generalities must be allowed. To do otherwise would induce us to embark upon perhaps a Doctoral Thesis, neither of us would agree upon I am sure.

Note: I personally did not open this thread regarding said ‘dichotomies.’

 

[Nimzovik]

Indeed David- seriously here - when you wrote------------- “The state is ran by a diversified branch of caring people who God works his grace through. I am a veteran of the US Navy and I have used the VA for my medical care for 6 years. Never in my life have I experienced a staff so caring. Never have I received such thorough and excellent care. The VA has been a blessing from God and not a subsitution for God. A foodstamp card for the Walmart worker to supplment their low income is a blessing from God and not a subsitution for God’s provision. In a free society a state is something we the people form and if we the people form our government then it should be formed in a manner that is consistent with the love and mercy of God as well as the Justice of God.”-----------

Bold Lettering Mine.

Were you not indeed offering a ‘dichotomy’ as loosely defined by this thread of your own? A straw man- ‘caring’ Gov’t -yes?

I mean no offense here. I have worked for the Gov’t for over 30 years - I have literally seen for my own eyes much of what I speak.

I will concur with you in regard to the ‘individual worker’ for the state may indeed be a caring person that loves God. The current institution (Gov’t -State or Federal) itself is a far different beast IMHO.

 

[Hastrman]

*Some *generalities must be allowed. To do otherwise would induce us to embark upon perhaps a Doctoral Thesis, neither of us would agree upon I am sure.

Note: I personally did not open this thread regarding said ‘dichotomies.’

No, I did.

And I wasn’t talking about generalities, I was talking about the fallacy that comes up—every time economics is discussed on this forum—that claims that we either have a massive welfare state bureaucracy, or we let the poor starve. This is nonsense. There are any number of methods that can be used, and have been used, to see to the well-being of the poor, other than the welfare state.

That is the only thing I was pointing out.

Everyone, I’ve made this mistake myself, but you absolutely have to check who you’re talking to on these things: there’s a reason they have a big honking name up at the top of the post. I am not Nimzovik or davidmlamb, and I will neither be held accountable for anything they say, nor ask them to be accountable for what I say.

That last one would be asking too much.

 

[Nimzovik]

Indeed.

I also agree with your -how should I say this- ‘either or’(?) - premise.

 

[davidmlamb]

Indeed David- seriously here - when you wrote------------- “The state is ran by a diversified branch of caring people who God works his grace through. I am a veteran of the US Navy and I have used the VA for my medical care for 6 years. Never in my life have I experienced a staff so caring. Never have I received such thorough and excellent care. The VA has been a blessing from God and not a subsitution for God. A foodstamp card for the Walmart worker to supplment their low income is a blessing from God and not a subsitution for God’s provision. In a free society a state is something we the people form and if we the people form our government then it should be formed in a manner that is consistent with the love and mercy of God as well as the Justice of God.”-----------

Bold Lettering Mine.

Were you not indeed offering a ‘dichotomy’ as loosely defined by this thread of your own? A straw man- ‘caring’ Gov’t -yes? .

NO NOT AT ALL!! I stated both facts and my personal experience. The facts are this; that scripture and the Church teach us that the state (or governments) were established by God for the common good (Romans 13:1-6; CCC 1897-1912). The false dichotomy is the state subsitutes God, that the state is ran by an army of godless people opposed to both God and your well being; the false dichotomy is that the state offers help apart from God being the ultimate source of that help. I offered no strawman at all as a strawman represents a non sequitur argument. Both the federal government and the state government is filled with careing people many of whom are practicing Christians. That is not to say that all them are people of faith but even atheist and agnostics are perfectly capable of being humanitarians, showing mercy and grace. Contrary to popular belief’s God even works through atheist and agnostics.

I have been in 5 different VA Medical facilities and have never received less then compassionate and excellent care which included Catholic Chaplains. I too have worked for the government since 1981 and one thing I have learned is that God has placed His servants their to be instruments of His grace and mercy. Not everyone in the government yields to God’s will and grace but neither do they in the private sector or even in religious institutions. Scripture tells us that every good and perfect gift comes from God. This includes the good we receive from the state.

I mean no offense here. I have worked for the Gov’t for over 30 years - I have literally seen for my own eyes much of what I speak. .

I don’t think you are neccassarily being offensive here but I do think you are offering a convoluted view of facts to justify the position that some how the government is a subsitute for God. If you really believed this then why would you work on the side of evil for 30 years? The only possible answer is that you are the one offering the false dichotomy. No offense intended.

I will concur with you in regard to the ‘individual worker’ for the state may indeed be a caring person that loves God. The current institution (Gov’t -State or Federal) itself is a far different beast IMHO.

The Church and scripture dissagrees with you.

In the service of Christ and His Church,

David

 

[Nimzovik]

NO NOT AT ALL!! I stated both facts and my personal experience. The facts are this; that scripture and the Church teach us that the state (or governments) were established by God for the common good (Romans 13:1-6; CCC 1897-1912). The false dichotomy is the state subsitutes God, that the state is ran by an army of godless people opposed to both God and your well being; the false dichotomy is that the state offers help apart from God being the ultimate source of that help. I offered no strawman at all as a strawman represents a non sequitur argument. Both the federal government and the state government is filled with careing people many of whom are practicing Christians. That is not to say that all them are people of faith but even atheist and agnostics are perfectly capable of being humanitarians, showing mercy and grace. Contrary to popular belief’s God even works through atheist and agnostics.

I have been in 5 different VA Medical facilities and have never received less then compassionate and excellent care which included Catholic Chaplains. I too have worked for the government since 1981 and one thing I have learned is that God has placed His servants their to be instruments of His grace and mercy. Not everyone in the government yields to God’s will and grace but neither do they in the private sector or even in religious institutions. Scripture tells us that every good and perfect gift comes from God. This includes the good we receive from the state.

I don’t think you are neccassarily being offensive here but I do think you are offering a convoluted view of facts to justify the position that some how the government is a subsitute for God. If you really believed this then why would you work on the side of evil for 30 years? The only possible answer is that you are the one offering the false dichotomy. No offense intended.

The Church and scripture dissagrees with you.

In the service of Christ and His Church,

David

Bold Lettering mine

Ok. It is indeed understandable that ‘a Gov’t’ in it’s ideal form can be used by heaven to administer to the flock. However to assert that the totality of this current Gov’t is not in error is simply wrong. Abortion just being one issue. How to resolve *that? *

As far as for Gov’t run hospitals all I can say is that your experience may not be everyone’s experience. Certainly it is not mine.

 

[Hastrman]

Nimzovik:
Bold Lettering mine

Ok. It is indeed understandable that ‘a Gov’t’ in it’s ideal form can be used by heaven to administer to the flock. However to assert that the totality of this current Gov’t is not in error is simply wrong. Abortion just being one issue. How to resolve *that? *

As far as for Gov’t run hospitals all I can say is that your experience may not be everyone’s experience. Certainly it is not mine.

If the totality of the current government is in error, why are you not engaged in insurrection against it?

Sorry, but where I come from, a government that’s totally in error has to be overthrown. This government is nowhere near that point. It sucks, indeed it’s probably better than 50% bad, but it is not yet irredeemable. Countries have come back from worse.

 

[Nimzovik]

Your point being?

 

[Hastrman]

Your point being?

Put your money where your mouth is. If the government is irretrievably corrupt, as you say it is, then you are morally obligated to do your best to overthrow it.

But it really, really isn’t. It merely needs to be reformed—albeit extensively. So it is unproductive to say something that is not, in fact, true. However emotionally satisfying such hyperbole might be, it does not actually help at all.

Every idea has implications for our actions. If the government is the enemy of justice, that is not an excuse for inaction, it is a call for extreme action. And if you don’t want to do that, stop saying that you have to.

 

[davidmlamb]

Bold Lettering mine

Ok. It is indeed understandable that ‘a Gov’t’ in it’s ideal form can be used by heaven to administer to the flock. However to assert that the totality of this current Gov’t is not in error is simply wrong. Abortion just being one issue. How to resolve *that? *.

Your offering another false dichotomy here and that is since the government has made abortion legal everything the government does is evil. Following your logic, since some women freely choose to have abortions, all women are evil. The other false dichotomy your making is that in order for God to work His grace through government, the government must be “ideal.” The government need not be perfect or ideal for God to work his grace through just as a person not be ideal for God to work through. We live in a non ideal world that doesn’t mean God has abandoned us. The government neither provides abortions or forces abortions. Women freely choose to have them and the free market freely chooses to provide them. Its a matter of supply and demand. You are simply exploiting abortion here to present a false dichotomy.

Nimzovik:

[/As far as for Gov’t run hospitals all I can say is that your experience may not be everyone’s experience. Certainly it is not mine.

It is however what 88% veterans have experience from VA hospitals.

defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=14560

paloalto.va.gov/features/topscores.asp

tucsoncitizen.com/medicare/2010/06/07/va-health-care-system-rated-highly-in-government-report/

When is the last time you received VA health Care? The New England Journal of Medicine has repeatedly named VA health care the best health care in the United States and has a 15% higher satisfactory rate from its pateints

nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa021899

Peace,
David

[/QUOTE]

 

[Nimzovik]

Deep sigh… Ok 1st. David. I have never received V.A Care. You like the way this current Gov’t works. That is fine. It really is.

Mr. Hastman: “Put your money where your mouth is. If the government is irretrievably corrupt, as you say it is, then you are morally obligated to do your best to overthrow it.”

Bold lettering mine.

These are not my words. In previous posts I highlighted some of the dynamics
I have noted in the past in regard to the way Gov’t performs IMHO. And no I am not simply presenting Abortion here to merely present a dichotomy of a sort. I presented an apparant exception to the idea of Gov’t (all? -not my assertion!) has abberations in respect to Catholic ideals. Therefore the current Gov’t can not be 100% pleasing to God. Therefore I can not of a 'Necessary Condition’ be 100% diametrically opposed to ‘The Church and Scripture disagrees with you’ as David so eloquently put it. Simple enuff really.

 

[Hastrman]

Deep sigh… Ok 1st. David. I have never received V.A Care. You like the way this current Gov’t works. That is fine. It really is.

Mr. Hastman: “Put your money where your mouth is. If the government is irretrievably corrupt, as you say it is, then you are morally obligated to do your best to overthrow it.”

Bold lettering mine.

These are not my words. In previous posts I highlighted some of the dynamics
I have noted in the past in regard to the way Gov’t performs IMHO. And no I am not simply presenting Abortion here to merely present a dichotomy of a sort. I presented an apparant exception to the idea of Gov’t (all? -not my assertion!) has abberations in respect to Catholic ideals. Therefore the current Gov’t can not be 100% pleasing to God. Therefore I can not of a 'Necessary Condition’ be 100% diametrically opposed to ‘The Church and Scripture disagrees with you’ as David so eloquently put it. Simple enuff really.

What does “this government, in its totality, is in error”, mean, if not “this government is 100% wrong”? If a thing is 100% wrong, it is quite evil, and can only be fought, probably not corrected.

Perhaps I was reading too much in, but you were being pretty over the top.