Another view on the TEA Party

There I go posting one simple view about the Tea Party and the very next day somebody on the Bar posts this link in Politics.

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/10/87474-y ... -literate/

Which is based on this:

http://www.culturalcognition.net/blog/2 ... itted=true

Enlightening. Still makes it real hard to quantify an "average" TEA Party member.

I hate stereotypes wish I didn't use so many.

Have Fun,
T2M

They touch on the Tea party but also have a facinating discussion on the overall topic of the role of government.

Glenn Beck talks to Penn Jillette, author of "Every Day is an Atheist Holiday! More Magical Tales - YouTube
Note: This is video is 42:50 long.

Surprised at the lack of comments.

Found a way to get at videos quicker(with less definition) and Adblockerplus is another wonderful tool as well.

More of a Libertarian deal but for the most part I would self identify with them. If they could figure out foreign policy. Though to be honest anymore why the heck do we have any military presence (other than maybe a few bases to stage out of) in Europe is a wonderful question. Especially in light of the current spate about spying. Guess it has been too long since the President gave them bombs to further their economic interests (somewhat simplistic stated but ...).

For another look at the US and Polarization: Try this article:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/10 ... lue-states

Which leads to this article:
http://science.time.com/2013/10/22/the- ... cas-moods/

Enjoy,
T2M

PS Another couple of links I have found interesting the PBS one is about ACA second half is novel. When then the proponent can't figure out if your policy is cancelled you have to get something if the website doesn't work or the insurance company can't get the information from the website, you don't have insurance. The other is a wonderful blog of a Baen author with a different view on some things and makes me think a lot (writes good books with not so typical sort of heroes)
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/governme ... transcript
http://accordingtohoyt.com/

T2M, good point about lack of comments. Perhaps we are all a bit cautious about incurring Duckk's wrath. Couple of comments for you, firstly I do appreciate your nom de plume as it would apply to me as well. I do enjoy the occasional drink as normally I just can't shut the brain down, always analysing everything around me. Put in a null environment to force relaxation I then start doing exercises by designing cathedrals or universes.
Now in regard to your post I found it and your links interesting. Starting with the last, Ms Hoyt to me is an example of how an intelligent and literate person can selectively cherry pick information to come to a paradigm that most people would disagree with. Lots of words that lead to gigo.
The other links are a bit more complex even though they are shorter. Your Obamacare is a pale shadow of what many other countries have successfully had for many years and those outside the US are puzzled as to why you haven't gone much further.
I too wonder why the US seems to believe it has an obligation to intervene in every little global squabble. Sure in WW1 and WW2 plus other serious conflicts, but generally please don't believe that you are morally superior so must use force to ensure that others follow your example.

Daryl wrote:snip
Now in regard to your post I found it and your links interesting. Starting with the last, Ms Hoyt to me is an example of how an intelligent and literate person can selectively cherry pick information to come to a paradigm that most people would disagree with. Lots of words that lead to gigo.

snip.

Funny, I believe that Sarah's points are quite salient to the discussion of TEA Party members and Amercians in general. The rest of the world don't have these traits in combination. The three that are most important in relation to this thread are the drive to spontaneous associate, flexibility and not taking orders well. The various combinations of these characteristics make most Americans pretty antagonistic to the class structures that the rest of the world accepts as normal. The classes might not like each other abroad, but they recognize the need to divide into classes. Not here for the most part.

Many of the changes progressives advocate WILL assert a more rigid stratification into US society. The more regulations the more difficult it will be to rise above our economic and social station. That is quite rare in other countries but not nearly as rare here. Sure the broader social safety net will ensure that the truly disadvantaged will have help. The problem is that most Americans believe a job will do that better than government hand outs. As we saw in the income and wealth distribution charts of another post, government intervention as will lead to greater economic stratification.
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL33433.pdf

That result rubs most Americans the wrong way in the extreme. We might not agree amongst ourselves on how best to deal with issues of those less fortunate than us, but most of use WILL bridle when someone shoves us in a social/economic pigeon hole and tells us to accept our station. While most of us do accept our lot in life, that lot is not defined by some social structure but the results of our decisions. That's part of why you wonder how Americans raise such a ruckus over policies that are but shadows of what already exists around the world. We look that what you guys accept as normal and just and wonder what type of personality can accept such stifling social stratification. Heck, forget about the personality types, why do you do it?

The bottom line is that we ARE different than most of you non-Americans. We value different things. When you, Daryl, blythly assert how silly we are for not accepting what you consider just and right, many of us who read your post just scoff and dismiss it as just another know-it-all telling us what we should do. Your casual dismissal of Sarah's points suggests that you do not understand many of the Americans you are writing to. Because you don't, you don't understand how important what most of us have to give up is to us if we adopt some of the policies you advocate. Namely the social and economic mobility that we value as much as breathing.

Unfortunately, in the middle of exams, so i cant spend much time discussing these. Would love to spend more time on it, but will have to wait until the 13th.

I freely admit that I don't know as much about Americans as someone who lives there would, but would challenge the assertion that Americans have less class distinctions than all progressive societies. My own country Australia has an egalitarian ethos that probably exceeds the US. We do have various social tribes, but they represent different interests not levels. Our equivalent to the American Redneck is the Bogan who is loosely associated with a love of football, beer, pub rock, casual clothing and trash TV. However in a workplace it is just as likely to find that the boss is a Bogan as to find the cleaner is or not, and both may well be mates who socialise outside of work regardless of background.
The concept of "a station" is as alien to us as the concept of accepting it. Our current PM had previously been a Catholic novice, the one before him was the son of a sharecropper (who died when he was 10), the lady PM before that was an atheist who lived with her boyfriend in our White House equivalent, and who migrated here from Wales as a child.
I spend a fair bit of time in other countries as well. When Spacekiwi finishes his exams I know he will support my observation that New Zealand has zero class distinctions. The UK is an interesting place as there still does exist a mistaken perception among a small minority that they are better bred, but once again the average person would never consider that their birth would preclude them from anything. Bad luck, laziness, lack of brains yes perhaps, but not a social level.
My principal exposure to Americans has been through work, and while I generally got on very well with those I associated with, I did see some indications of levels between them. A simple illustration of this was when an American executive was headhunted to lead one of our corporations, and one of his first acts was to instruct staff to refer to him as Mister, not his first name. Caused headlines here and he didn't last long at all, pompous pratt. I was fairly senior in my organisation, and visiting Americans had to be constantly reminded to call me by my first name.
Your link to the US distribution of wealth pdf is interesting, however I recently posted somewhere on these forums some from IMF, UN and the OECD that covered all countries, and the US was much more wealth stratified than many others. The following link does illustrate this well.
http://www.middleclasspoliticaleconomis ... es-in.html

Basically what it says is that while the US has enormous wealth most of it is held by the top few percent. Australia has a median individual wealth of four times the US, because ours is better spread.

My apologies if the snip loses some of the context.

Your definition for "redneck" is a mite off. Not even sure how to define "redneck". Many would consider me such, I don't, not even close. Maybe go by the old Foxworthy comedy routines. <shrug>

Thing is that you have a label and apply it is more structure than I am used to. We always called people stupid or ... and left it at that.

Who your friends were was more defined by common interests and attitudes. Associations.

As far as the job goes who cares where you are from, it is what you do that should matter. Label it as such.

How far you get and how much money you make is up to the person. Me, I am quite happy on my retirement of ~$20k net a year. Lets me do everything I want to. Could I still be working yes was offered 6 figure positions to do so. Looked at them like they were nuts, work when I don't have to. When I explained my plans they looked at me like I was nuts. We were in agreement.

I do to a certain extent differ from PeterZ's points. The US Federal Government and the so called "progressives" have been doing a wonderful job of creating that class structure in the cities.

No clue if this mess of a post makes any sense, it does in my mind. It went a lot farther afield than I originally intended as well

Should have seen it before I edited it.

Have fun,
T2M

Daryl wrote:I freely admit that I don't know as much about Americans as someone who lives there would, but would challenge the assertion that Americans have less class distinctions than all progressive societies. My own country Australia has an egalitarian ethos that probably exceeds the US. We do have various social tribes, but they represent different interests not levels. Our equivalent to the American Redneck is the Bogan who is loosely associated with a love of football, beer, pub rock, casual clothing and trash TV. However in a workplace it is just as likely to find that the boss is a Bogan as to find the cleaner is or not, and both may well be mates who socialise outside of work regardless of background.
...snip not addressing...

Daryl wrote:I freely admit that I don't know as much about Americans as someone who lives there would, but would challenge the assertion that Americans have less class distinctions than all progressive societies. My own country Australia has an egalitarian ethos that probably exceeds the US. We do have various social tribes, but they represent different interests not levels. Our equivalent to the American Redneck is the Bogan who is loosely associated with a love of football, beer, pub rock, casual clothing and trash TV. However in a workplace it is just as likely to find that the boss is a Bogan as to find the cleaner is or not, and both may well be mates who socialise outside of work regardless of background.
The concept of "a station" is as alien to us as the concept of accepting it. Our current PM had previously been a Catholic novice, the one before him was the son of a sharecropper (who died when he was 10), the lady PM before that was an atheist who lived with her boyfriend in our White House equivalent, and who migrated here from Wales as a child.
I spend a fair bit of time in other countries as well. When Spacekiwi finishes his exams I know he will support my observation that New Zealand has zero class distinctions. The UK is an interesting place as there still does exist a mistaken perception among a small minority that they are better bred, but once again the average person would never consider that their birth would preclude them from anything. Bad luck, laziness, lack of brains yes perhaps, but not a social level.
My principal exposure to Americans has been through work, and while I generally got on very well with those I associated with, I did see some indications of levels between them. A simple illustration of this was when an American executive was headhunted to lead one of our corporations, and one of his first acts was to instruct staff to refer to him as Mister, not his first name. Caused headlines here and he didn't last long at all, pompous pratt. I was fairly senior in my organisation, and visiting Americans had to be constantly reminded to call me by my first name.
Your link to the US distribution of wealth pdf is interesting, however I recently posted somewhere on these forums some from IMF, UN and the OECD that covered all countries, and the US was much more wealth stratified than many others. The following link does illustrate this well.
http://www.middleclasspoliticaleconomis ... es-in.html

Basically what it says is that while the US has enormous wealth most of it is held by the top few percent. Australia has a median individual wealth of four times the US, because ours is better spread.

Bother! I re-read my post after reading yours, Daryl. I found that where I thought I was clear I was nothing of the sort.

You are absolutely right. Americans are NOT as eqalitarian as you and I would hazzard many other societies around the world. We have a huge band of different social/economic strata. I will say that our poor are more wealthy than something like 95% of the rest of the world. Our rich beggers the wealthiest in many countries. Most of us here in the US don't have any issues with that.

What I should have emphasized more in my prior post is that Americans don't like being unable to move out of our current economic condition. The poor have a better chance at becoming incredibly wealthy here than anywhere else. What we cherish issocial and economic mobility. The problem with many progressive policies is that they limit that flexibility. By regulating so much of society and commerce, those policies make moving up the economic ladder more and more difficult. Place enough regulations and movement ceases. What is left is a rigid society where one's place in it is set at birth or the whim of the powerful.

The US has a large number of truly wealthy. The people that created Apple, Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Ford, GE and all our large companies SHOULD be massively wealthy. Those companies have goods and services that have made countless millions of live better in some measurable way. That increases aggregate wealth and improves the lives peoplelive with their products and services. If they didn't, no one would voluntarily give their savings to purchase those goods and services.

Americans value social mobility because without it, IMHO, there isn't the massive incentive to create the next BIG thing. That next big thing, whatever it might be, makes all our lives better. A consequence of such incentives is a disparity in wealth. As I said most Americans don't mind that at all.

So, yes, I agree with your post. Our society is much more stratified than you guys down-under and less egalitarian in the outcomes achived. We are also a much more mobile if for no other reason than there are much more levels to move around in. And that mobility is what I was trying to emphasize in my prior post.

Sarah Hoyt's post discusses the characteristics that shape our discomfort with being told what we cannot achieve. We celebrate our achievers. The disparity in income and wealth you cite is the best testement of that celebration. Steve Jobs' IPod and ITunes helped create a path for music to enter the digital age and vitalize the entire industry, making many more varieties of music available to more people. Microsoft help make people much more productive in their work and helped companies make many more things at lower and lower prices. Their success makes life better for me directly.

Progressive policies that exagerates that disparity in wealth and calcifies the channels where economic mobility is achieved attacks the source of those social and economic benefits. Attacks because it makes success and failure less within the control of the individual. Our individual choices matter less and less. Success and failure becomes an unearned gift from the successful and powerful, not a mark of how well or poorly indiviudals navigate life's choices. All of which leads to fewer and fewer people willing or able to make the enormous effort to create and then produce the products and services which will help all of us.

Much of my post is a personal rationalization of why the characteristics Sarah discusses are valuable. Others would have different reasons. What most Americans do share however, is that belief in social and economic mobility. We believe in that mobility and celebrate those who have achieved great success by rising from very mean beginnings to the such heights as they desire and work to achieve.

thinkstoomuch wrote:My apologies if the snip loses some of the context.

Your definition for "redneck" is a mite off. Not even sure how to define "redneck". Many would consider me such, I don't, not even close. Maybe go by the old Foxworthy comedy routines. <shrug>

Thing is that you have a label and apply it is more structure than I am used to. We always called people stupid or ... and left it at that.

Who your friends were was more defined by common interests and attitudes. Associations.

As far as the job goes who cares where you are from, it is what you do that should matter. Label it as such.

How far you get and how much money you make is up to the person. Me, I am quite happy on my retirement of ~$20k net a year. Lets me do everything I want to. Could I still be working yes was offered 6 figure positions to do so. Looked at them like they were nuts, work when I don't have to. When I explained my plans they looked at me like I was nuts. We were in agreement.

I do to a certain extent differ from PeterZ's points. The US Federal Government and the so called "progressives" have been doing a wonderful job of creating that class structure in the cities.

No clue if this mess of a post makes any sense, it does in my mind. It went a lot farther afield than I originally intended as well

Should have seen it before I edited it.

Have fun,
T2M

Thank you, T2M for capturing in brevety what my posts failed to do using many more words.

As for Sarah's point on associations/clubs, I believe she was referring to Alexis de Tocqueville's observations from Democracy in Amercia in 1841. He observed that Amercian's created associations in random ways to achieve common goals. Completely unrelated people came together and accomplished a wide variety of things in these associations from building each other's barns to enjoying good books. Such random associations of unrelated were not common in Europe and from his perspective anywhere else. That habit has not been lost.

EDIT: Spelling