If I'm a rural American farmer or miner, how does it help me to require me to buy health insurance or pay a fine? How does it help me to tax me so that the future white collar and management classes of the American populace can owe less in student debt?
The problem isn't just that the rural poor don't act in their own best interests. It's also that the coastal rich are extremely presumptuous about what other people's interests are.
First - when you buy that Heath insurance, if you're poor or poorish, it's heavily subsidized. Of course, it might have been free but a number of red States didn't expand Medicare. But yes, it may cost you money because Oabamacare was step 1 and was always planned to be tweaked but well... We've seen how political discourse has gone. But medical bankruptcies have fallen tremendously with Obamacare. That's why you have to pay because it'll save you if you're unlucky. Just like social security.
Re:free college - why do you think rural areas couldn't benefit from free college? Less, more expensive education isn't going to help. And the people that need to pay for it are the ones destroying your neighborhoods and city centers (aka the Walton family and their ilk)
The lack of investment in their people and empathy for their people of Midwest governments is what's killing them, not costal elitism. The green new deal is a perfect example of the sort of investment it needs. But they'll fight it because winning is all that matters, people's lives be damned.
You're conflating college and education. That is exactly the kind of elitism that the rural poor interpret as a personal attack. I know you don't mean it as such, and I know most people who say similar things as you're saying similarly don't mean it that way, but that's how it's received.* When I talk about empathy, that is what I mean - understanding others' perspectives and feelings.
And no, "free" college does not help the working class, though it may help their children if they're lucky enough to benefit from the limited upward mobility in this country. There is a baseline number of jobs in the trades and service industries that need to be filled, they don't require a college degree, and for the people going into those jobs, getting a "free" college degree will only incur opportunity costs and additional taxes.
* In understanding this anger, it's useful to understand the effect of childhood poverty on stress response. "By age five, the lower a child’s socioeconomic status, on the average, the (a) higher the basal glucocorticoid levels and/ or the more reactive the glucocorticoid stress response, (b) the thinner the frontal cortex and the lower its metabolism, and (c) the poorer the frontal function concerning working memory, emotion regulation, impulse control, and executive decision making; moreover, to achieve equivalent frontal regulation, lower-SES kids must activate more frontal cortex than do higher-SES kids." Robert Sapolsky, Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst 195 (Kindle edition: Penguin Press 2017) (citing, inter alia, S. J. Lupien et al., Effects of Stress Throughout the Lifespan on the Brain, Behaviour and Cognition, 10 Nat'l Rev. Neuroscience 434 (2009); D. Hackman et al., Socioeconomic Status and the Brain: Mechanistic Insights from Human and Animal Research, 11 Nat'l Rev. Neuroscience 651 (2010); M. Sheridan et al., The Impact of Social Disparity on Prefrontal Function in Childhood, 7 Pub. Libr. Sci. One e35744 (2012); I. Liberzon et al., Childhood Poverty Alters Emotional Regulation in Adulthood, 10 Soc. Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience 1596 (2015)).
it might have been free
but a number of red States didn't expand Medicare
FWIW, I'm a pretty strong supporter of the ACA (relative to the counterfactual, though single-payer would be nice..), and I'm neutral to warm about free universal college (much of the problem with the way college fits into our economy is that it's used as a blunt employment filter instead of actually increasing human capital, and universalizing subsidies may just exacerbate the problem. OTOH, blowing up that filter and making college the new high school may be useful in and of itself).
Neither of those opinions prevents me from understanding that people may have different models of what the effects of these policies are likely to be. You may argue that it requires a degree of economic illiteracy to believe that, but 1) the majority of supporters for every policy are grossly economically illiterate, 2) there's a core of sound economically-literate arguments for almost every policy, and 3) economic illiteracy is a vastly different charge from "you're in a cult that prefers winning to improving your and others' lot in society".
I suspect that it would be pretty easy for someone to take the confident, unnuanced opinions you likely have on a host of similar issues and make a similar or at least symmetric charge about your motivations.
Healthcare- ~50k per year means mandatory $300/month for the "benefit" of an $8,000 deductible plan, or for many people you pay $300 per month for the "benefit" of paying all your own medical expenses. If the income drops to $40,000 per year then you only have to pay $150 per month for the coverage. Unless your medical bills are more than $12,000 (monthly + deductible) paying the fine/tax/penalty is cheaper. Come April, writing a $1000 check to the IRS isn't helpful. You almost have to hope to be really poor or really sick to get an actual benefit. The worst off 5% may benefit. The top 5% may benefit (well-off techies that want to leave an employer and create a startup app but still have benefits) but the middle 90% who are somewhat healthy and make average (40-50k) incomes pay more for "help" they hopefully never need.
Many people don't view "help a man when he's down" as working that way. The success of food stamps is based on how many people are on the program, not how many people are helped off the program. Subsidizing overpriced tuition doesn't lower tuition, it raises tuition while moving and hiding the true cost. Medicare and medicaid are the probably the biggest reasons why healthcare is so expensive. Does spending millions on tent cities really solve a homeless problem? Public schools already cost $10,000+ per student per year- is more money really what is needed?
These aren't questions looking for answers but when "help" is viewed through this lens it may explain why many people prefer the "leave me and my money alone" approach instead of the "tax me more for these great solutions" approach.
Has anyone done this analysis?
I'll admit I have a closed mindset here, thinking that
1. Expanded education would improve opportunities by expanding the jobs one qualifies for
2. Healthcare coverage would allow folks to take risks with businesses, study, etc.
I also dont understand how reducing taxes for the uber rich helps...i'm hearing that the economy in these areas is not well and unemployment high, so why are folks adamant to not raise taxes for the rich? And if trickle down...doesn't the present state suggest it hasn't trickled down?
I'm very interested to hear, what do folks think will help? I'll admit that whatever happened in 2009-2016 did not help. However, neither did what happened in 2001-2008, nor 2016-now. What could I help to advocate for that would help, without making presumptuous assumptions about needs?
Not everyone wants to be in STEM or be highly educated. Some want to work with their hands.
Out of the people currently declared, Andrew Yang understands these people very well. No, they don't need yet another bureaucratic program, just give them a basic amount of money unconditionally and they'll figure out the best use for themselves.
Even if that person is racist?
Concepts of privilege and structural racism require a lot of nuance to discuss. I won’t speculate as to how much nuance is intended in the way these ideas are delivered, but I can tell you as a lifelong resident of “flyover country” (who also has ties to the coasts,) the message is being received bluntly, without nuance, with a lot of skepticism and, frankly, anger. These are people who aren’t doing well and haven’t been for a long time. To them, it beggars belief to be told they benefit from and are orchestrating a massive racist conspiracy.
Anyway, that’s my answer to OP’s question about what would resonate with this group of people. Stop calling them racists all the fucking time. It is not helping anyone. ( Unless your goal is to eventually start Civil War II. Then it’s on point.)
If the left can demonstrate a little empathy, they might find their superior policy positions gain mindshare in the heartland.
Thank you for your response, but honestly, can't they see for themselves? Why would they need to believe anybody's claims if they can just listen to what the guy says?
Personally I suspect that most people do realize, but they choose to ignore it and that's hard to empathize with.
Second, claims of racism are thrown around...rather casually these days. You have to understand that not too long ago in the South, we dealt with assholes lynching black people. Just 20 years ago in Texas, James Byrd was brutally murdered (dragged to death behind a vehicle) by actual white supremacists. His attackers picked him at random and murdered him in the most brutal way imaginable for no reason other than Mr Byrd was black. That’s the sort of racism we’re unfortunately used to. These days, Banh Mi sandwiches of insufficient authenticity are racist, to hear some in the media tell it. It desensitizes people to any and all claims of racism. If 20 years ago, we had people being murdered in klan-style lynchings and today college kids cry racism over sandwiches (or Halloween costumes or pick your favorite stupid example from Reason Magazine or Campus Fix) then clearly this is a solved problem is sort of the logic. The issues I discussed in my earlier posts further exacerbate the problem.
Finally, you said you suspect that most people do realize Trump is racist but they choose to ignore it. You have articulated no basis for this belief. The sort of thing is something I hear frequently from my liberal friends. They can’t imagine why anyone is against immigrants freely entering the country: the must be racist. They can’t imagine why anyone would oppose abortion: they must want to control women’s bodies. They can’t imagine why anyone would be opposed to gun control: they must not care about their fellow citizens being killed. My experience with conservatives from flyover country is they are nothing like the caricatures that are portrayed in the popular press. Their positions are earnestly held. Nothing makes them shut down to conversation faster than someone trying to paint them as being evil. If you want to change their mind about something, you might try taking their positions at face value. You’ll get a lot farther, at the very least in understanding what they really believe and why.
[1] As far as I can tell, anyway. Hopefully this is obvious, but I’m trying to relate what I hear from my neighbors to an audience that might not normally have any interaction with people from my part of the country.
Wow, tone deaf.
When you reach 40-50, look yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if you really want to drop your career, start retraining in an entirely new field, and try to find a job against younger folk fresh out of school. I sure as hell don't (and I have an elite education!) and I would wager that most college-educated people don't, let alone everyone else.
And then there's the people who, you know, didn't actually enjoy education and were relieved when they got out of high school, a.k.a. the vast majority of the population. You think they actually want to go back to school?
> What could I help to advocate for that would help, without making presumptuous assumptions about needs?
Our unwanted President at least knows what to say, even if he can't/won't accomplish it: "JOBS, JOBS, JOBS" (https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/11471503334849167...). People living hand-to-mouth do not give a hoot about anything but ensuring a stable (and hopefully growing) paycheck, so nearly nothing on the progressive platform is of interest to them.
But it seems like all the right is offering is a false enemy to hate (immigrants, globalism) and empty sentiment rather than a policy. "Education doesn't solve my problems so I'll choose to hate immigrants" isn't exactly an especially helpful belief system. Trump can't bring the factories back. Heck, he is even hurting farming with tariffs.