Quillette is not the first publication to point out that a popular brand of liberalism, strong in California in particular, favors policies that hurt the poor. The poor have little ability to fight back at all. The middle class is limited to a sort of veto power over politicians it finds obnoxious or policies that catch their imagination and hold their attention even while they use precious time getting to work and getting the kids educated. Sustained effort to change things is far from them, as they have to compete with paid lobbyists - indeed with entire lobbying organisations that know how to target one audience while keeping what is happening out of sight of the rest. The rich can change things in a narrow area, usually to protect the industry the work in or the value of their real estate, but even the richest of them can't affect everything. They learn to be content with policies and politicians who favor their class and tribe in general. It's usually enough.
I highlight this because things go off my sidebar so quickly.
3 comments:
Does your analysis take into account Prop 8 and 187? Both propositions passed with the voters but were overturned by the liberal California courts. Prop 8 banned gay marriage and 187 banned benefits to illegals. It seems to me that the people's voices only count if it supports what the Democrat party wants anyway.
Good point. Further limits the power of the poor and middle class
I'm not sure the damage is going to be limited to the poor and middle class. There are high-level executives of Silicon Valley companies who have chosen *not* to live in SV or anywhere else in California, for reason of tax rates and social disintegration. This is a lot more feasible and socially-acceptable than it was pre-Covid.
=
Post a Comment