# Robert Reich nails it: This is what this election is about **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 27, 2016, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399 "2016-01-27T19:09:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/241 "2016-02-06T00:20:59Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > …then money and money alone will dictate the kind of society you live in and the values that prevail in it… You say that like its a bad thing. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 5:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/242 "2016-02-06T05:08:17Z")
> [@Blalron](#): > > They won’t be silenced. The David Kochs and Sheldon Adelsons would be able to make their voices heard just like everyone else. It’s just that they couldn’t drown out the voices of ordinary voters like they are now. If you can’t see a difference between a million people donating 25 bucks each to a campaign, and one person writing a check for 25 million to a super PAC, why the former should be encouraged and the latter outlawed, I can’t help you. What’s the value of the New York Times’s endorsement? Will unions be able to volunteer? What’s their time worth? Obviously, in their minds, quite a bit. Will that be treated as money spent? Or do these rules just hamstring ideologies you oppose while leaving institutions that align with your point of view alone? ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 5:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/243 "2016-02-06T05:09:54Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Fine, you’re free to believe that. You can even pat yourself on the back and call it a “principled position”. I call it blind, absolutist dogmatism. But it doesn’t matter what I call it, what matters are the consequences, of which your position is recklessly dismissive. If you consider that “money is speech” in a completely unlimited dogmatic sense, then money and money alone will dictate the kind of society you live in and the values that prevail in it, which will – not coincidentally – reflect the values of those with the most money. As indeed it already does. > > I also support free speech. Trying to suggest that I don’t is ridiculous and misdirected. I support it very strongly, and perhaps more strongly than you do. Because speech is only one side of the dialogue. Free speech is not just about everyone being able to speak, it’s also about having a decent chance to be heard – about enabling a diversity of opinions instead of only those which money wishes to be heard. Otherwise the freedom to speak is meaningless. Those are principles, too, and they are totally missing from your libertarian world view. > > Allowing money to control ideas without limit is not synonymous with freedom – it promotes the establishment of orthodoxy. It can soon become more like an Orwellian world where eventually even thoughts are driven out to the fringes if they don’t conform to the required orthodoxy, like what the Kochs are trying to promulgate with their infiltration of college campuses. Seems like millions of people, even non Canadians, are immune to so called mind controlling money. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 6:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/244 "2016-02-06T06:02:04Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Interesting. So it’s all the Democrats’ fault. > > And yet lower-income earners are generally far better off in countries that have much more liberal social policies than even Democrats would ever propose, because among other things they’re supported by strong social services like income and housing and guaranteed health care at the same level as everyone else. Yet these countries also have their fair share of the very wealthy who seem to do quite well even if they support a somewhat more egalitarian and less economically stratified society. It’s not the Democrats’ fault, it’s just that not all of their policies are pro-poor and middle class. The Republicans have enough advantages on such policies to be competitive among working class voters. The Democratic Party was once almost uniformly pro-working class down the line, but as the coalitions shuffled after the Civil Rights era, the party found itself depending on Northeastern and California professionals as much as the working class and that changed up some of the priorities a bit. And made them have to tamp down a little on the talk of taxing rich people more. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/245 "2016-02-06T06:15:38Z")
The pro-working class Republican priorities sound exciting and interesting. Maybe you could give us a bit of fill-in on these wonderful new policies! Since so many of us have yet to hear of them… ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/246 "2016-02-06T06:21:21Z")
Tax cuts do actually benefit the working class, which is why Democrats have in recent elections had to get on the bandwagon. More restrictive immigration policies reduce labor supply, thus reducing unemployment. Prioritizing energy exploitation over climate change means more jobs and lower bills for working families. And since the issue of crime is returning to the front burner, Republicans are better at reducing crime too. Hey, let’s add education too. Republicans are more on the side of parents, Democrats are more on the side of teachers’ unions. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/247 "2016-02-06T13:42:29Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Tax cuts do actually benefit the working class, which is why Democrats have in recent elections had to get on the bandwagon. Tax cuts provide an immediate financial benefit to whoever gets the cut, obviously. Everyone loves tax cuts, especially when they only think of themselves and don’t consider the consequences. But as thoroughly demonstrated by the links upthread, Republicans have consistently and overwhelmingly offered the biggest tax benefits to the richest few percent of the population, resulting in a disproportionate burden to the middle class while growing the national debt and jeopardizing government services. Which is why the rich have been getting so much richer, the national debt is unbelievably out-of-control huge, and the US has some of the poorest and most destitute communities in the civilized world. Duh. Just ask the people of Flint. > [@adaher](#): > > More restrictive immigration policies reduce labor supply, thus reducing unemployment. How long has this been going on, since every single person in this country is either an immigrant or descended from one? Have Republicans forgotten about the idea of immigrants contributing to national productivity and thus growing the economy, or did they just never know it? Or did it all get lost in the recent frenzy of xenophobia? > [@adaher](#): > > Prioritizing energy exploitation over climate change means more jobs and lower bills for working families. Not only that, but the resulting extreme weather, heat waves, droughts, hurricanes, and storm surges creates even more jobs cleaning up the destruction and burying the dead bodies. Not sure about lower bills, though. Although reckless disregard for the environment resulting from a vision that doesn’t extend past the nose on one’s face often makes various destructive industrial ventures cheaper, to be sure. Koch Industries knows that well. In fact in their case it’s cheaper even when they have to pay millions in fines for repeated environmental violations. > [@adaher](#): > > And since the issue of crime is returning to the front burner, Republicans are better at reducing crime too. Yes, nothing reduces crime like creating a huge, growing wealth gap between the rich and poor and gutting social services while personally luxuriating in a gated community. What Republicans are actually good at is throwing black people in prison for using drugs. And then privatizing the prison system. While letting their corporate masters steal billions from shareholders and taxpayers – in a delightful coincidence, this was just in the news: [Elizabeth Warren Blasts Republican Plan to Protect White-Collar Criminals](http://www.thenation.com/article/elizabeth-warren-blasts-republican-plan-to-protect-white-collar-criminals/) > [@adaher](#): > > Hey, let’s add education too. Republicans are more on the side of parents, Democrats are more on the side of teachers’ unions. Last I heard, Republicans were great fans of home schooling and voucher programs, because public schools, dontcha know, are a liberal-infested hive mind of socialism. They want to rewrite the textbooks about evolution and climate change, and they hate colleges and universities because they’re infested with liberals. Scott Walker tried to decimate the tenure system in Wisconsin colleges. And who is it that keeps wanting to abolish the Department of Education? Oh yeah, Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/248 "2016-02-06T13:45:08Z")
All good arguments, and I’d address them if my point wasn’t simply that working class voters have many valid reasons to vote Republican, which is why they do. But if Democrats are allowed to call working class voters stupid for voting Republican, then don’t we get to call minority voters stupid for voting Democrat? ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/249 "2016-02-06T14:28:12Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > All good arguments, and I’d address them if my point wasn’t simply that working class voters have many valid reasons to vote Republican, which is why they do. But the whole point of this thread is that those reasons are bogus. They are “Joe the Plumber” reasons. Joe ostensibly supported Republicans because it would grow his business and help him become rich. Except that, as it turned out, Joe the Plumber didn’t have a business. And, IIRC, he wasn’t a plumber. He did try to carve some minor celebrity out of it but it turned out that another thing that Joe the Plumber didn’t have was any actual ideas or any actual understanding. About anything. But gosh darn it, he sure knew what he believed. Why Joe the Plumber is emblematic of many millions of know-nothings who firmly believe what Republicans are telling them on behalf of the Kochs and the 1% is precisely the subject that this thread has addressed. To be fair, this isn’t what Republicans have historically been about. There are valid ideas and principles in conservatism, even if I don’t agree with all of them. But this is assuredly what Republicans have become in the era of the Koch brothers and Sheldon Adelson – in the era of big money dictating public policy. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2016, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/250 "2016-02-06T14:32:32Z")
If anything, it’s been too much populism going on with the Republicans and the Tea Party. The Kochs would like a more inclusive party, but aren’t getting their way. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2016, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/251 "2016-02-07T07:29:30Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If the outside money creates a huge gap between candidates, this is true. But in practice, outside money rarely floods into races where one candidate already has a big money advantage. It generally is used to enable a challenger to compete with a well funded incumbent. Which is why we have more defeated incumbents these days. That’s a GOOD thing, that the days when incumbents could just sail to victory because no one even knew who their opponent was are over in many districts. Do you have cites for this? > [@octopus](#): > > I disagree. No one is entitled to have his message received. Freedom of the press, to assemble, to speak, and religion do not grant one equality in audience as an entitlement. Well, which is it? Do speakers have no right to be heard, or no right to be heard equally? Can we take dissidents and lock them up and say they may speak freely to the cell walls, is that acceptable? Because what I’m hearing from you is that dissident speakers have _no right to be heard over the opinion of the owners of presses and the funders of politicians._ ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2016, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/252 "2016-02-07T18:25:30Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > If anything, it’s been too much populism going on with the Republicans and the Tea Party. The Kochs would like a more inclusive party, but aren’t getting their way. What ever happened to the Tea Party, anyway? Nobody seems to mention it any more, nobody claims to speak for it any more, and I haven’t heard of a TP rally in years. There’s still a Tea Party Caucus, isn’t there? ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2016, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/253 "2016-02-07T20:03:16Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > Do you have cites for this? > > Well, which is it? Do speakers have no right to be heard, or no right to be heard equally? > > Can we take dissidents and lock them up and say they may speak freely to the cell walls, is that acceptable? Because what I’m hearing from you is that dissident speakers have _no right to be heard over the opinion of the owners of presses and the funders of politicians._ Locking someone up for being a dissinter would be the act that violates their rights. That’s utterly different from someone owning a printing press and refusing to help the dissident propagate their message. Your right to free speech doesn’t include a right to be listened to, taken seriously, or aided in spreading your views. Twelve year olds on Twitch can get tens of thousands of subscribers and millions of views for their Minecraft commentary videos. If your message isn’t getting out, it’s not due to a lack of access to communicative tools. ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2016, 12:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/254 "2016-02-08T00:11:19Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > Do you have cites for this? > > Well, which is it? Do speakers have no right to be heard, or no right to be heard equally? > > Can we take dissidents and lock them up and say they may speak freely to the cell walls, is that acceptable? Because what I’m hearing from you is that dissident speakers have _no right to be heard over the opinion of the owners of presses and the funders of politicians._ What? ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2016, 6:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/255 "2016-02-08T06:05:47Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > I also support free speech. Trying to suggest that I don’t is ridiculous and misdirected. I support it very strongly, and perhaps more strongly than you do. Because speech is only one side of the dialogue. Free speech is not just about everyone being able to speak, it’s also about having a decent chance to be heard – about enabling a diversity of opinions instead of only those which money wishes to be heard. Otherwise the freedom to speak is meaningless. Those are principles, too, and they are totally missing from your libertarian world view. There is no right to be heard. A right to be heard is the same as a right to force others to listen. Do you have any basis to support as a matter of law there is a right to be heard? What is the penalty, and what is the remedy if this right is violated? Is there a statute that supports this view? It seems to me this is wishful thinking at best. I believe you operate based on principles. I think those principles contemplate outcomes, am I right? I personally don’t care for outcome based principles - they change based on circumstances and can be modified to achieve desired outcomes. > [@foolsguinea](#): > > Can we take dissidents and lock them up and say they may speak freely to the cell walls, is that acceptable? Because what I’m hearing from you is that dissident speakers have _no right to be heard over the opinion of the owners of presses and the funders of politicians._ Imprisoning someone is a distinct violation of rights separate and apart from limiting their speech. Both would be bad. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2016, 6:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/256 "2016-02-08T06:53:22Z")
I’m sorry, you haven’t paid me enough to take you seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2016, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/257 "2016-02-08T07:07:39Z")
You’ve been paying people this whole time?! I thought we were all just forced to listen. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2016, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/258 "2016-02-08T17:15:58Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > There is no right to be heard. A right to be heard is the same as a right to force others to listen. Do you have any basis to support as a matter of law there is a right to be heard? What is the penalty, and what is the remedy if this right is violated? Is there a statute that supports this view? It seems to me this is wishful thinking at best. It’s not statutes that need to be cited here, it’s how speech is valued. What is the cost of a 60-second prime-time national TV ad versus the cost of an obscure submission to YouTube or a personal blog? What is the cost of a full-page ad in the New York Times or WSJ versus a humble mimeographed newsletter? Why does one cost potentially millions and the other essentially free? And why do big-money politicians in fact spend those millions, and expend so much effort to raise them? > [@Bone](#): > > I believe you operate based on principles. I think those principles contemplate outcomes, am I right? I personally don’t care for outcome based principles - they change based on circumstances and can be modified to achieve desired outcomes. If there are no rules, then **the outcome is already defined** : the biggest money dominates speech, and if the money disparity is big enough, it doesn’t just drown out everyone else, it also benefits from the best spin and marketing that money can buy. The kind of professional spin, for instance, that turns people against their own interests in health care, or turns a war hero candidate into a perceived unpatriotic coward. If there are rules about how money may be spent, the rules apply to everyone equally – a point that all the sanctimonious wailing about “censorship” conveniently ignores. It promotes at least a slightly more level playing field and a chance for diverse opinions to be heard and the voices of wealth to actually be challenged. My “outcome based principle” is to have issues and dialogue determine the outcome, not to have the outcome predetermined by money alone. It’s not surprising that the Kochs want no rules and progressives do. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2016, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/259 "2016-02-08T18:05:06Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > It’s not statutes that need to be cited here, it’s how speech is valued. What is the cost of a 60-second prime-time national TV ad versus the cost of an obscure submission to YouTube or a personal blog? What is the cost of a full-page ad in the New York Times or WSJ versus a humble mimeographed newsletter? Why does one cost potentially millions and the other essentially free? And why do big-money politicians in fact spend those millions, and expend so much effort to raise them? I’m not seeing how that’s germane to your claim that being heard is connected to free speech. It isn’t. There is no right to be heard, and what you’re describing is more of your wishlist than anything based in reality. > [@](#): > > If there are no rules, then **the outcome is already defined** : the biggest money dominates speech, and if the money disparity is big enough, it doesn’t just drown out everyone else, it also benefits from the best spin and marketing that money can buy. The kind of professional spin, for instance, that turns people against their own interests in health care, or turns a war hero candidate into a perceived unpatriotic coward. Those people that are voting…they’re doing it wrong! ---
**Author:** ![octopus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/octopus/32/3716_2.png) [@octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/octopus)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2016, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399/260 "2016-02-08T18:16:27Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > It’s not statutes that need to be cited here, it’s how speech is valued. What is the cost of a 60-second prime-time national TV ad versus the cost of an obscure submission to YouTube or a personal blog? What is the cost of a full-page ad in the New York Times or WSJ versus a humble mimeographed newsletter? Why does one cost potentially millions and the other essentially free? And why do big-money politicians in fact spend those millions, and expend so much effort to raise them? > > If there are no rules, then **the outcome is already defined** : the biggest money dominates speech, and if the money disparity is big enough, it doesn’t just drown out everyone else, it also benefits from the best spin and marketing that money can buy. The kind of professional spin, for instance, that turns people against their own interests in health care, or turns a war hero candidate into a perceived unpatriotic coward. If there are rules about how money may be spent, the rules apply to everyone equally – a point that all the sanctimonious wailing about “censorship” conveniently ignores. It promotes at least a slightly more level playing field and a chance for diverse opinions to be heard and the voices of wealth to actually be challenged. My “outcome based principle” is to have issues and dialogue determine the outcome, not to have the outcome predetermined by money alone. It’s not surprising that the Kochs want no rules and progressives do. “Progressives” don’t want equal rules. That’s disingenuous. “Progressives” don’t want to limit marching, protesting, any sympathetic media, books, magazines, or anything else that advocates their point of view. You willing to assign a dollar value to union political activities? Doubt it. And practically speaking how foolish is it to trust the government, the same government that has judges that sell children into imprisonment, and police that shoot people in the back, to impartially regulate what comic book, movie, tv show, or loon protesting Wall Street has political content and a precise value for that content? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/robert-reich-nails-it-this-is-what-this-election-is-about/744399.md?page=14)