The Election - 22 days to go

Should people on the lower rungs of the socio-economic ladder be left to fend for themselves? Should the argument be that since in a democratic, free economy, each individual is free to make their own choices, people who have not risen up financially simply haven't made the right choices for themselves and therefore do not need our empathy or special intervention?

Well, I've been thinking about the ideological differences between the Democratic and the Republican parties on the middle class issue and poverty. The Repubs feel that prosperity will trickle down - this might be somewhat true, but to what extent does it trickle down, and how much does it permanently and positively impact the poor and the less privileged to enable them to actually rise up to the level of the rich? I am not so sure... Whereas the Democratic ideology of starting from the bottom has a double advantage - it does not substantially or materially diminish the wealth of the rich, while also enabling systemic change from below - Like what Obama proposes - education, sex education/abuse awareness in schools, tax cuts for the middle class, health care reform, creation of new jobs in manufacturing and construction - jobs that cannot be outsourced easily etc.. Obama also admonished America for getting used to spending beyond our means - I have been waiting to see when one of the candidates would be brave enough to actually tell the middle class and other Americans that they must shoulder some of the burden of responsibility - cannot just blame the Congress or the Government or Wall Street.

It might be socialistic if you view it as taking from the rich to give to the poor. But you could look at it another way - education in all aspects from the ground up has the potential to reduce crime, sex education has the potential to reduce unwanted teen pregnancies, higher self-esteem to understand when someone is subjecting you to abuse, and providing that safety net that its Okay for a child to raise alarm when bad things happen to them. Knowing that you have access to reliable healthcare and a steady paycheck gives you peace of mind, confidence, and happiness and more love than loathing, more tolerance and less anger. With such potential positive impact, would it be only the poor and the middle class that would benefit?

Would the wealthy not benefit from a generally happier and at-peace-with-the-world population in this country? Would they not benefit from less crime and more responsibility?

In that sense, I really do not think such an ideology implies taking from someone to give to others. I think it means taking from someone to increase the size of the pie, so that ultimately, everyone gets a bigger piece. Viewed from this perspective, I do not think its wrong.