Is That Harsh? Tough.

In case you missed it, Charles Pierce has some thoughts on this thing we call “representative democracy.”

We are talking about voters who, by and large, vote against their own economic self-interest time and time again and who, quite honestly, are the biggest suckers in the history of representative democracy. They continue to support policies that render their states into third-world sweatshops for corporations headquartered thousands of miles away. They doom their kids to inadequate schools and themselves to the whims of free-market medicine. The problem, of course, is that the rest of us have to live with the consequences and, it should be noted, pay a fkload of the bills for it besides. You’re welcome, idiots.

Read more: Chris Wallace Gross Eric Cantor Over Congress Doing Nothing – Heartless Bastards – Esquire

12 responses to “Is That Harsh? Tough.

  1. “The problem, of course, is that the rest of us have to live with the consequences and, it should be noted, pay a fkload of the bills for it besides.” – Charles Pierce

    “The process by which banks create money is so simple the mind is repelled.” – John Kenneth Galbraith

  2. Cultural liberals like Pierce turned against democracy a long time ago in favor of technocratic elitism and narcissistic worship of their own superior educations and intellectual culture. Then they whine about why its not working and the dumb guys always win. Maybe they should get off their high horses and actually do something to help people. I see no evidence in general that Democratic cultural liberals have any real concern for working people and their interests, nor that they are possessed of the higher critical reasoning skills and realism they imagine themselves to possess. They continue to support a transparent plutocratic stooge like Barack Obama in the face of all evidence. They continue to call on the ugly and obese working miserable whom they loathe to “sacrifice” more, while letting the wealthy walk away with billions and groveling at the feet of the latest silicon valley or Hollywood entrepreneur-hero.

    I listen to NPR on the way to and from work every day – Pierce sometimes shows up there. The network has become appallingly conservative and smug. There is almost no issue of note where they don’t take the side of plutocracy and established social privilege. If any successful politician came along with a truly progressive plan to challenge and equalize income distribution patters, take on crony capitalism, and socialize health, education and retirement, then the relatively affluent and tony NPR set would have a collective stroke.

    A lot of people do vote against their economic interests. Unfortunately that’s because they sometimes think its even more important to stick it to people like Pierce who obviously hate them.

  3. It takes a lot of money to steep the American people in ignorance. The investment obviously pays off for some, and they aren’t the 99%.

  4. reve_etrange

    I don’t think it’s clear that low income voters actually vote against their own interests, despite the popularity of the idea. For example, maps of the 2008 presidential election results by income suggest otherwise (from 538, but the originals are broken links now).

  5. Hi Dr. Kelton,
    I just finished reading the primer as well as Warren Mosler’s and Frank Newman’s books, and I am totally enthralled with MMT. However, there are a couple puzzles I can’t seem to figure out.

    1) MMT holds that banks lend irrespective of their deposits. If this is the case, why would a commercial bank voluntarily take on new depositors that were not planning on taking out a loan (ie, take on a liability without having an asset in return) ?

    2) What is the role of financial sector debt in the economy? Does the level of financial debt materially influence the lending decisions of banks?

    3) I’ve heard that the big banks are using their Fed-provided excess reserves to lend abroad and for trading in the equity markets. Do you know if this is the case? If so, have the banks always done this when the Fed Funds rate is low? Why/why not?

    Thanks in advance for your help!

    Peter in Beijing

  6. When are we are going to stop standing around the water cooler, talking all high minded and everything, and go out and stop the hegemony being perpetrated on us by the folks Charles Pierce writes about? Come on everybody….oops…sorry, I’ll have to join in later. My wife just told me to go out and get a job. I’ll talk with you all later.

  7. Not familiar with Pierce in particular, but I agree with Dan on many cultural liberals of today’s NPR type.

    “They who have put out the people’s eyes, reproach them of their blindness” fits.

    • Look at the source here. Pierce writes for Esquire. Is Esquire a noted source for progressive economic principles and social justice. I always thought it was all about alpha-male glorification and worship.

      I understand that a lot of Republicans defend troglodyte policies that are off the charts nutty. But would we be a lot better off if they agreed to Obama’s plutocracy-serving neoliberalism?

      • Yes, as I said, I entirely agree with you, but just don’t know Pierce in particular. The cultural “liberals”, who reproach the blindness of those whose eyes they have put out, are legion, though.

        In fact, saddle up my dinosaur: I think we would be a lot worse off if our good ole nutty troglodytes converted to plutocrato-neoliberalism. They’re smarter, and there’s more hope for them than the others, neoliberal cultural “liberals” serving plutocracy.

  8. How is the working person to know which candidates will best represent their economic interest? Politicians seldom walk the talk they gave at election time anymore, if they ever did. There is also the problem of determining the extent of a candidates economic knowledge. So much speech is rhetoric at election time.
    It’s also quite evident that only the rarest man on the street has even a rudimentary knowledge of the governments role in shaping the economy or the role of money in the economy even. They often vote for the most successful business leader on the ballot in the sincere hope that that will translate into economic policy decisions benefiting the common good.
    Outside of increasing openness to greater public participation in government decision making processes and public oversight of lobby processes how do we get around these issues?

  9. John Rosenfield

    In order to adequately vote for one’s self interest, one has to first have a sufficient and reasonable development of one’s sense of individual self. This principle is nonpartisan.