# Why the idea that fiscal conservatives hate poor people? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 6, 2010, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872 "2010-02-06T01:32:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/201 "2010-02-09T18:34:49Z")
> [@2sense](#): > > You don’t have to pay the taxes. No one is forcing you to stay here. You can always leave. If you do choose to stay and enjoy the benefits of our society then why shouldn’t you be expected to pay a fair share of the cost? Cite for “fair share”? ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/202 "2010-02-09T18:35:38Z")
> [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > He does not understand what a “fair share” means. He wants to pay for only those things that give him an obvious direct benefit. He seems to be thinking very superficially, and without a lot of knowledge about how a society is interconnected. > > For example, I’m sure he does not want to pay for road improvement in Florida. The roads that are used to transport oranges to a factory where juice is made, and used to transport the juice to his home state where he happily buys it. > > He does not want to pay a tiny fraction of the cost for an operation for a person between jobs with no healthcare insurance. A person who may end up starting a business and repairing **RR** ’s Highlander. If he wasn’t dead. > > He does not want to pay a penny to give a child with no mother a good breakfast, and educate that child who will go on to become a doctor who will treat his prostate cancer at the age of 75. > > It’s a simplistic philosophy that cannot see complex connections over a large population or over a long time span. > > Much easier just to call people “freeloading parasites” like friend **Bricker** does in another thread, and parrot nonsense like “taxation is violent theft” You must have me sonfused with someone else. I have never said that I don’t want to pay for something unless it directly benefits me. I do think that the only legitimate activities of the governmenbt are those that benefit everyone more or less equally. So, what bothers me about acitivites that I think are not legitimate is the lack of a more or less equal benefit to everyone, not the lack of a direct benefit to me. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/203 "2010-02-09T19:28:03Z")
So to Rover taxation is violence. Violence is wrong. Therefore taxing is wrong. I get it. ---
**Author:** ![Punoqllads](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/d2c977/32.png) [@Punoqllads](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Punoqllads)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/204 "2010-02-09T19:44:49Z")
[This is why](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=12097375#post12097375) ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/205 "2010-02-09T19:54:21Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > You must have me sonfused with someone else. I have never said that I don’t want to pay for something unless it directly benefits me. I do think that the only legitimate activities of the governmenbt are those that benefit everyone more or less equally. So, what bothers me about acitivites that I think are not legitimate is the lack of a more or less equal benefit to everyone, not the lack of a direct benefit to me. Which would be what, exactly? I can’t think of a single government activity that benefits everyone more or less equally. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/206 "2010-02-09T20:19:19Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Which would be what, exactly? I can’t think of a single government activity that benefits everyone more or less equally. Pretty much everything that has been brought up to cry for the government to ensure that health care is available as a right. Roads, firemen, police et al… ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/207 "2010-02-09T20:35:41Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Pretty much everything that has been brought up to cry for the government to ensure that health care is available as a right. > > Roads, firemen, police et al… Some people don’t drive. My house has never caught fire. Ask the inmates at San Quentin about the police. Nothing benefits everybody equally. We still do those things, though, and many more. I have no problem with that. I just thought that as an explanation from **Rand Rover** , it was pretty weak. ---
**Author:** ![2sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/2/e47774/32.png) [@2sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/2sense)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/208 "2010-02-09T20:36:59Z")
> [@Kearsen](#): > > Cite for “fair share”? **Rand Rover** is asserting that all taxation is violence so the particular share isn’t really an issue. But as to how that should be determined see my earlier posts on our theory of government. #165 for instance. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/209 "2010-02-09T21:12:04Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Some people don’t drive. > > My house has never caught fire. > > Ask the inmates at San Quentin about the police. > > Nothing benefits everybody equally. We still do those things, though, and many more. I have no problem with that. I just thought that as an explanation from **Rand Rover** , it was pretty weak. It isn’t and never will be equally beneficial in implementation. It is the simple fact though that all of the above mentioned articles are _available_ to everyone **equally**. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/210 "2010-02-09T21:14:16Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > Laws against extortion are violence. Laws against speeding are violence. Laws against littering are violence. Ooo, we’re scared. Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I’m bein’ repressed! ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/211 "2010-02-09T21:15:39Z")
> [@2sense](#): > > **Rand Rover** is asserting that all taxation is violence so the particular share isn’t really an issue. But as to how that should be determined see my earlier posts on our theory of government. #165 for instance. I’d purport that “fair share” does indeed matter and is the very sticking point at which the fabric of the universe hangs. For example, fair share may determine that government spending is out of control because fair share isn’t enough to cover operating expenses. Or contrary, that fair share may be excessive to what the “poor” really need in order to subsist. It isn’t my definition that matters, nor is it yours. Sadly, it’s the leeches we have in Congress and as many others have pointed out, it ain’t gonna change anytime soon. ---
**Author:** ![sqweels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f19dbf/32.png) [@sqweels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sqweels)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/212 "2010-02-09T21:21:37Z")
My primary concern is the need for more family planning to moderate population growth, and yet fiscal conservative are at best AWOL on this issue. Why is that? If we bestow the same amount of resources on a smaller number of children, each of them are likely to be more productive and not only will there be fewer poor people, but the _rate_ of poverty will be lower. And the tax savings will be enormous. ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/213 "2010-02-09T21:23:13Z")
> [@sqweels](#): > > My primary concern is the need for more family planning to moderate population growth, and yet fiscal conservative are at best AWOL on this issue. > > Why is that? If we bestow the same amount of resources on a smaller number of children, each of them are likely to be more productive and not only will there be fewer poor people, but the _rate_ of poverty will be lower. And the tax savings will be enormous. How are you going to limit/encourage “moderate population” growth? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/214 "2010-02-09T21:26:53Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > …more or less equal benefit to everyone, not the lack of a direct benefit to me. Well, shit! So much for rebuilding the levees in New Orleans and Grand Rapids, they only benefit the citizens of those respective areas. Never mind school lunch programs, private preppy schools don’t need those. Vaccination programs really only help those children who aren’t already vaccinated… Shit, we’re gonna save a ton of money! ---
**Author:** ![Kearsen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/82dd89/32.png) [@Kearsen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kearsen)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/215 "2010-02-09T21:48:41Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Well, shit! So much for rebuilding the levees in New Orleans and Grand Rapids, they only benefit the citizens of those respective areas. Never mind school lunch programs, private preppy schools don’t need those. Vaccination programs really only help those children who aren’t already vaccinated… > > Shit, we’re gonna save a ton of money! If you break it down that much then no. However if you equate it all to ‘natural disaster’, then everyone has equal access to such help. Private preppy schools aren’t just havens for rich kids. Vaccination (whether free or at a reduced cost) make the vaccine available to all, even if the already vaccinated don’t take advantage of such programs. What else you got? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 9, 2010, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/216 "2010-02-09T22:03:49Z")
[QUOTE=elucidator] Well, shit! So much for rebuilding the levees in New Orleans and Grand Rapids, they only benefit the citizens of those respective areas. Never mind school lunch programs, private preppy schools don’t need those. Vaccination programs really only help those children who aren’t already vaccinated… Shit, we’re gonna save a ton of money! [/QUOTE] Glad to have you on board. Here is your complimentary puppy to kick and free peasant foot rest… -XT ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2010, 2:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/217 "2010-02-10T02:48:51Z")
Thing is, questions of government that are answered from first principles tend to lead to wildly impractical results. Like, taxation is coercion. Sounds nice. Except it turns out that every decent place to live on planet Earth has taxation. So now what? It seems to me that questions of government need to be answered empirically. So if places with a particular sort of government are invariably shitholes, that is evidence that that form of government is wrong. Not because it violates some abstract theoretical principle, but because it results in a shithole. So now we can ask the question, should government provide health insurance for all? How about we take a look at various countries. Are countries with universal health care all shitholes? Turns out that they aren’t. Some are better than others, but there’s only one government on this planet that doesn’t provide universal health care and is also a first world country, and that’s the United States. So if Japan, Portugal, Italy, France, Germany, Australia, and so on can fund universal health care without turning into shitholes, what does that say? But how much does all this cost? When we look at how much health care costs in the United States, it turns out we spend twice as much per capita as most other first world countries. So we must be getting good results for our money? No, it turns out that our health isn’t any better than other first world countries. I know that it seems like a government run health insurance system would cost a lot more and provide worse service, but in every other country that turns out not to be the case. So is the United States government uniquely corrupt and wasteful? Are our citizens innately greedier? So what do we get for our money? We pay twice as much for health care, don’t insure everyone, and get worse results. But see, that doesn’t matter to Rand Rover, because he’d be happy to pay even more and get even worse health care, because for him it isn’t an empirical question, it’s a matter of principle. It doesn’t matter that he’d actually pay less if he let other people ride free, excluding them is worth paying more. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2010, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/218 "2010-02-10T04:15:19Z")
[QUOTE=Lemur866] So if Japan, Portugal, Italy, France, Germany, Australia, and so on can fund universal health care without turning into shitholes, what does that say? [/QUOTE] That it’s an apples to bananas comparison? That it’s a complex issue, and that simply pointing to other countries that don’t have the same fiscal or political (or cultural or ethnic) makeup as the US and saying ‘well, THEY can do it…so we should be able too as well’ is kind of silly? No, those other countries aren’t shitholes and yes, they have UHC…that doesn’t mean it’s best or even possible for us. To turn it around, and leaving aside Der Trihs, the US isn’t a shithole either, and we don’t have UHS…so, does that mean that our system is best for them? Why not? -XT ---
**Author:** ![AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2010, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/219 "2010-02-10T05:28:58Z")
> [@](#): > > So$etimes people say I’m selfish because I want to pay less tax, but that same person wants government money to go to them. So, I want to keep what I work for, they want to use the threat of violence (ie, going to jail for not paying taxes) to take my money, and then somehow they call me seolfish. I think they are the ones being selfish. BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH… No, they think that the taxes you pay should go to improve services and things for the COMMON GOOD! That can range from anything to better roads and financial aid for college to welfare to a lot of stuff. And, I notice you’re not upset about having to pay welfare to big corparations. How is that different from welfare payments to indivduals who may not even be able to afford food and shelter? YES, there are chronic welfare families, and people who should be sterilized…but most of the people who are requesting public help are people who have been severely priced out of the private market. You know that’s a downside to all those rich folks out there…many people are priced out of the market and can’t afford private market stuff. Think of it as the price you pay for getting rich. ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [February 10, 2010, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872/220 "2010-02-10T13:55:56Z")
Okay, let’s be kind to **Rand Rover** and concede his point – to him, taxation is violence, and he should therefore not be compelled to pay taxes. Any taxes. But in exchange, he needs to forfeit any and all benefits secured by taxation. Like police protection. (Note that this is removing it from him, not from others who presumably are contributing their fair share of the tax burden supporting the police; this is important later). And of course all fire protection; he can contract for private coverage if he feels so inclined. And all access to the court system: construction and maintenance of courthouses, judges’ and court attendants’ salaries all require tax money to pay for them. Further, let’s extend that to all public offices, as the buildings and civil servants’ salaries are covered by taxes, by and large. Oh, and taxes pay for the public streets and highways, and for traffic regulation devices – so he should not be using them. Now, no one should object if someone contacts his clients and lets them know that he has no access to the corut system, no recourse to the courts to collect payments on any contracts they may have with him, in fact no access to the agencies that print and process tax forms – and hence cannot obtain nor file the physical tools of his trade as a tax consultant. And likewise, nobody would have any objection to passing word to the local criminal underworld that police will not respond to a robbery or burglary at Casa Rand Rover. (But RR cannot use unnecessary violence to protect himself and his so-called ‘property’ – those criminals do have police protection, of violence against life or limb. So – he’s forfeited any source of income in his chosen profession; a lawyer who cannot appear in court or use the courts or any public offices to process any paperwork is reduced to providing people with the fruits of his wisdom, legal advice – and the unscrupulous among his clients will not have paid him (Why should they? He can’t sue them if they don’t), while the scrupulous will have paid what his contract calls for but understandably have dropped him in favor of a taxpaying lawyer who can actually use the courts and bureaucracy to their benefit. He cannot go anywhere except afoot – and then only on sufferance of his neighbors, since he has no right to use the public right-of-way. In fact, if he is using publicly owned water, sewer, or power, they need to be disconnected, as whatever rates he may be paying do not necesssarily cover the cost of building and maintaining them, which was likely borne from the general fund. And presumably he’s being laid siege to by the criminal element, who are probably experiencing a thrill at having only to outwit a single homeowner instead of the police. And for once the cops are on their side – if Rand Rover goes beyond the ‘appropriate resonse’ standard in defending self and property, they can have him arrested for assault. It’s not a lifestyle I would have chosen – but it’s the one he seems to prefer. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-the-idea-that-fiscal-conservatives-hate-poor-people/527872.md?page=12)