From our American correspondent, Esteban:
Much has been made over the past year of the fact that young people in America approve of Socialism in rather large numbers, and quite a lot more than their elders. Some explain that this is because they are more idealistic than the older crowd, who have become corrupted and “sold out” now that they have a mortgage and expensive lifestyle. Others argue that this supposed idealism is actually naivete.
It seems fair to point out that if you are 24 with negative net worth, a modest paying job and no reasonable expectation on the horizon to make serious cash, it isn’t idealistic to support redistribution, it’s self-interest. And you don’t change this fact by saying “Well, if I made that much money, I’d be happy to pay a lot in taxes”. If you ever get to that point we’ll see, until then this statement doesn’t fly.
Likewise, if you’re 55 with a couple of million dollars in your 401(k), a big home and an income well into six figures your view may be biased against “sharing the wealth” based on your wallet, not principles.
It seems to me that we had a little test of the idealism of youth a few weeks ago when the quarantines started being imposed. A Hell of a lot of the young idealists who were told to vacate their campus decided to go on Spring break and party on, Dude! They weren’t bashful about it, enjoyed dancing in front of the TV cameras and giving interviews.
Choosing to risk infection is normally a personal matter and at that time it was believed they were personally at extremely low risk from the virus. But the point of quarantine was that the old and immune-compromised are put in danger if the rest of us don’t flatten the curve. So, these very idealistic young people who would happily pay more in taxes had a chance to demonstrate how they were willing to sacrifice for the collective good. I’d like to say we should be surprised, but srsly!
It’s just like freedom of speech. They’re free to say what they like. What you say is hate speech.
Bernie Sanders in his “concession” speech claims success at convincing people (okay, Democrat activists) of the validity of medical services as a “right,” a “living wage” (criminalizing employment of the underskilled), and “access” to college education (that means someone else pays, and pays off your loan). But it’s not that anyone believes those things, but only that, if offered free stuff, they’ll take it, and will vote for you over the guy who’s not offering them free stuff.
Esteban’s right; this is not believing in shared sacrifice but only in capturing the proceeds of someone else’s sacrifice.
Were these quarantines being imposed or simply proposed at the time the parties took place? It may not matter. There was a UK epidemiologist who bluntly put it that in a perfect world he would move all the vulnerable to Sutherland and all the rest to Kent and let the virus rip through the not-vulnerable for 12 weeks. Then bring the two communities back together. Maybe the youngsters were selfish but they are descended from people who descended from people who indulged in such selfish behaviours as parties and virus spreading. Those peoples who had young who didn’t do this… Read more »
Bongo, shouldn’t that behavior deselected them for survival ? However, in Black Death a loss of self social control among the not yet sick and survivors was noted