Quote:The common red / blue difference is in beliefs in how effective the government can be.Are you sure about that? Seems to me folks on the red side have no problem with government in the military and criminal justice sphere. We maintain by far the largest military establishment on Earth. Did the Red side oppose the Reagan buildup? Did they oppose the Gulf War, Afghanistan or Iraq? Did we not engage in a massive expansion of the correction system in the 1990’s. Was that opposed by the Red side?
The Red side opposes government doing stuff they don’t approve of. So does the Blue side. Here is where you could invoke values. For example, much of Trump’s appeal is because a lot of folks are sick and tired of progressives stuffing PC down their throats. Now we are supposed to celebrate men wearing dresses? What the fuck is wrong with America?
Quote:For someone embracing red beliefs, government is inefficient, corrupt and ineffective.When it is doing Blue team projects. Conservatives don’t make as a big issue about inefficient, corrupt and ineffective Defense or Corrections spending. And ditto for the Blue team.
Quote:Tax and spend is anathema.Yes because of what they want to spend it on.
Quote:When in doubt, cut taxes and force the government to cut services.On stuff they don’t like, such as programs for the poor, education, safety, environmental, and the regulatory state in general. They generally have supported expansion in Defense outlays. Blue folks will say similar things about spending on Red priorities, but the fact is the Blue team has a lot more priorities they want paid for by other people than does the Red side. So they do not beat that drum nearly as much.
Quote:On the blue side, there is a belief that the government can do much good.Is that really a belief any more, or just wishful thinking? I support the ACA because (1) it was my team and (2) the Medicaid expansion benefits family members. I do not support it because I know it is a good program. Those folks I know who are not on Medicaid and who use the system do not have good things to say about it, even with the subsidies. I know exactly how they feel. When I was in grad school I went without insurance during the years I was on a NSF fellowship (TAs got employer-provided insurance). When I had been in college (and was on my parents plan) there were student medical insurance plans offered that were very reasonably priced. The reason was they could only be used by a student population who were young and healthy. But then the state government mandated that these plans cover mental health issues. Now students are at a higher risk of this, and so the premiums shot up to unaffordable levels. Now the government is mandating that my 20’s self should buy this expensive insurance that covers stuff I don’t have to worry about. I would also note that back in my 20’s I was a big fan of Free to Choose.
I was unwilling to subsidize other people’s health care back then when I was poor. Now that I am rich I have no problem with that and am perfectly willing to pay the taxes for single payer. But I can completely understand other rich folks who object to being forced to subsidize other people, particularly when it is in a program rife with rent-seeking. They see it as theft—that is, immoral. Here’s another values issue. If we get single payer someday it’s is not going to be because the folks who objected to it on moral ground have changed their minds. It will be because they were defeated.