Comments on: This week in blaming poor people of color for poor economic policy. http://revolutionaryact.org/2008/09/this-week-in-blaming-poor-people-of-color-for-poor-economic-policy/ "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act" - George Orwell Sat, 02 Jan 2010 16:43:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Dan http://revolutionaryact.org/2008/09/this-week-in-blaming-poor-people-of-color-for-poor-economic-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-40 Dan Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:53:27 +0000 http://revolutionaryact.org/?p=112#comment-40 Heh. I think Uri that sterilization is always going to be problematic with the vast socioeconomic differences in our social castes. The other side of this Republican's proposal is that it includes racist hand-wringing about the populations of one race overtaking another. Nevermind a leap its not even a step to pull that logic out of a kkk/ccc playbook. Sterilization plays right into that fire. One might argue profitably where there is money there is coercion. Heh.

I think Uri that sterilization is always going to be problematic with the vast socioeconomic differences in our social castes.

The other side of this Republican’s proposal is that it includes racist hand-wringing about the populations of one race overtaking another. Nevermind a leap its not even a step to pull that logic out of a kkk/ccc playbook. Sterilization plays right into that fire.

One might argue profitably where there is money there is coercion.

]]> By: Uri http://revolutionaryact.org/2008/09/this-week-in-blaming-poor-people-of-color-for-poor-economic-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-36 Uri Wed, 01 Oct 2008 04:02:31 +0000 http://revolutionaryact.org/?p=112#comment-36 dan, you wouldn't know a good sterilization proposal if it bit you in the vas. i thought it was clear that my proposal was tongue-in-cheek, but i guess that didn't come across. i still maintain, seriously, that sterilization of the rich would have the kinds of benefits that i suggested, and is significantly less problematic than sterilization of the poor. i reject the position that coercion would be involved - it would be purely voluntary as an alternative to the noncoercive wealth tax, which makes it noncoercive. now, if you think the wealth tax is coercive, i disagree but that's a different issue. dan, you wouldn’t know a good sterilization proposal if it bit you in the vas.

i thought it was clear that my proposal was tongue-in-cheek, but i guess that didn’t come across. i still maintain, seriously, that sterilization of the rich would have the kinds of benefits that i suggested, and is significantly less problematic than sterilization of the poor. i reject the position that coercion would be involved – it would be purely voluntary as an alternative to the noncoercive wealth tax, which makes it noncoercive. now, if you think the wealth tax is coercive, i disagree but that’s a different issue.

]]> By: Emily http://revolutionaryact.org/2008/09/this-week-in-blaming-poor-people-of-color-for-poor-economic-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-32 Emily Tue, 30 Sep 2008 20:51:10 +0000 http://revolutionaryact.org/?p=112#comment-32 Uri: My proposal would be to ensure everyone access to proper health care, including the options and means to pursue any reproductive path- or path of prevention!- of their choosing, regardless of their economic standing. I disagree that a sterilization driven wealth tax would effectively counter any problems or could be implemented without coercion given our political/cultural climate, and agree with Dan that it would surely only encourage more. Jeff: Indeed. Nice conclusion. Dan: Yes, that's surely a part of this scheme. Uri: My proposal would be to ensure everyone access to proper health care, including the options and means to pursue any reproductive path- or path of prevention!- of their choosing, regardless of their economic standing. I disagree that a sterilization driven wealth tax would effectively counter any problems or could be implemented without coercion given our political/cultural climate, and agree with Dan that it would surely only encourage more.

Jeff: Indeed. Nice conclusion.

Dan: Yes, that’s surely a part of this scheme.

]]> By: Dan http://revolutionaryact.org/2008/09/this-week-in-blaming-poor-people-of-color-for-poor-economic-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-29 Dan Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:05:29 +0000 http://revolutionaryact.org/?p=112#comment-29 Uri, I can't count the number of ways a sterilization driven wealth tax would backfire politically and socially. Bad idea. Jeff, I agree, we ought to be working to reduce poverty on the way towards eliminating it. Emily, Another spin on this is that the bill itself is free advertising. If he wants to paint himself as an opponent of government spending, he's just pulling out the familiar target of the "welfare queen". Uri,
I can’t count the number of ways a sterilization driven wealth tax would backfire politically and socially. Bad idea.
Jeff,
I agree, we ought to be working to reduce poverty on the way towards eliminating it.
Emily,
Another spin on this is that the bill itself is free advertising. If he wants to paint himself as an opponent of government spending, he’s just pulling out the familiar target of the “welfare queen”.

]]> By: Jeff Napolitano http://revolutionaryact.org/2008/09/this-week-in-blaming-poor-people-of-color-for-poor-economic-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-26 Jeff Napolitano Tue, 30 Sep 2008 15:44:00 +0000 http://revolutionaryact.org/?p=112#comment-26 LaBruzzo is, unfortunately, not the first person to suggest sterilization as a corrective social policy (see forced sterilization of Native Americans and the mentally disabled in the U.S., in the slums of India under Indira Ghandi, and others). That the outcome of people with more wealth and resources (who thus have the ability and privilege to manage their reproductive choices) have less children should not be of particular shock, and certainly not a statistical novelty. The clear lesson here for people with a sense humanity is not to incentivize sterilization, but to work to reduce and eliminate poverty! LaBruzzo is, unfortunately, not the first person to suggest sterilization as a corrective social policy (see forced sterilization of Native Americans and the mentally disabled in the U.S., in the slums of India under Indira Ghandi, and others).

That the outcome of people with more wealth and resources (who thus have the ability and privilege to manage their reproductive choices) have less children should not be of particular shock, and certainly not a statistical novelty. The clear lesson here for people with a sense humanity is not to incentivize sterilization, but to work to reduce and eliminate poverty!

]]> By: Uri http://revolutionaryact.org/2008/09/this-week-in-blaming-poor-people-of-color-for-poor-economic-policy/comment-page-1/#comment-24 Uri Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:33:40 +0000 http://revolutionaryact.org/?p=112#comment-24 hmmm... i'm not against the notion of incentivized sterilization per se. seems to me that many wealthy people make poor reproductive choices - that is, choices that might make sense for them, but are harmful for society. for example, they have children, who for the most part end up as a drain on the public treasury and whose assets are irresponsibly invested in financial instruments that destabilize the economy rather than producing stable growth. rich people's natural affection toward their children makes them want their children to be rich, too, and the measures that they take in support of this desire perpetuates the class system. my proposal: a wealth tax, a la huey long, with the ability to opt out of the tax by getting sterilized. there's much less of a moral issue with voluntary sterilization of the rich, because (1) they're way more parasitic than the poor; (2) they are collectively way more responsible for oppression than the poor are; (3) they have a much greater ability to defend themselves than the poor do; and (4) there's no danger of rich people being so needy that they are forced to undergo sterilization in order to meet basic needs. hmmm… i’m not against the notion of incentivized sterilization per se. seems to me that many wealthy people make poor reproductive choices – that is, choices that might make sense for them, but are harmful for society. for example, they have children, who for the most part end up as a drain on the public treasury and whose assets are irresponsibly invested in financial instruments that destabilize the economy rather than producing stable growth. rich people’s natural affection toward their children makes them want their children to be rich, too, and the measures that they take in support of this desire perpetuates the class system.

my proposal: a wealth tax, a la huey long, with the ability to opt out of the tax by getting sterilized.

there’s much less of a moral issue with voluntary sterilization of the rich, because (1) they’re way more parasitic than the poor; (2) they are collectively way more responsible for oppression than the poor are; (3) they have a much greater ability to defend themselves than the poor do; and (4) there’s no danger of rich people being so needy that they are forced to undergo sterilization in order to meet basic needs.

]]>