Slog

News & Arts

The Stranger Suggests

Critics' Best Bets
Music Arts & Food


Line Out

Music & the City
at Night

Monday, February 13, 2012

Required Reading: The Self-Delusions of "Self-Sufficient" Americans

Posted by on Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 6:00 AM

The New York Times:

LINDSTROM, Minn. — Ki Gulbranson owns a logo apparel shop, deals in jewelry on the side and referees youth soccer games. He makes about $39,000 a year and wants you to know that he does not need any help from the federal government.

He says that too many Americans lean on taxpayers rather than living within their means. He supports politicians who promise to cut government spending. In 2010, he printed T-shirts for the Tea Party campaign of a neighbor, Chip Cravaack, who ousted this region’s long-serving Democratic congressman.

Yet this year, as in each of the past three years, Mr. Gulbranson, 57, is counting on a payment of several thousand dollars from the federal government, a subsidy for working families called the earned-income tax credit. He has signed up his three school-age children to eat free breakfast and lunch at federal expense. And Medicare paid for his mother, 88, to have hip surgery twice.

Don't stop there, and don't miss the map.

 

Comments (25) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
STJA 1
Great article, isn't it?

"I don't need help."

/takes credit so kids can play ball
Posted by STJA on February 13, 2012 at 7:02 AM
2
Hypocritical much?
Posted by Patricia Kayden on February 13, 2012 at 7:03 AM
3
Nice color scheme there, Arizona. Looks like you DO need the feds after all.
Part of me would love to see the outcry if the gov't cut off payments to that state - or any of the states - that bite the hands that feed them.
Posted by StuckInUtah on February 13, 2012 at 7:52 AM
4
Ah, the 'liberal' times.
Medicare is 'described as an insurance program' because that's what it is. This is a poorly disguised attack on Social Security and Medicare, both social insurance programs, done by conflating them with 'safety net' programs like the EIC.

Americans are embarrassed to need safety nets, but feel no similar compunction about insurance.
Posted by dirge on February 13, 2012 at 8:00 AM
gloomy gus 5
Quite an opening for politicos to reframe the situation. Time to retake the field from those who won office by the poisonous "national debt = sky falling" rhetoric.
Posted by gloomy gus on February 13, 2012 at 8:01 AM
6
I liked the way the article pointed out that the very people who are getting helped are increasingly resentful of that help and upset that they can't take care of themselves... It's a nice change from portraying Republicans as rich people who don't care about the poor.

Posted by EricaP on February 13, 2012 at 8:10 AM
7
This explains why we've heard Michelle Bachman saying "everybody needs to pay something" in taxes. She needs to scare struggling people into thinking their taxes are going to go up to plug the budget deficit. Nobody except lying liars who lie is calling for significant tax increases on the middle class. It's about the people earning $250K/year and up, none of whom are hurting in any part of the country. They're the ones who have benefited the most from what this country has to offer, and they're the ones who can afford to pay their fair share.
Posted by Prettybetsy on February 13, 2012 at 8:12 AM
Cato the Younger Younger 8
I read that article yesterday and just laughed my ass off. Americans are about the stupidest people on the planet.
Posted by Cato the Younger Younger on February 13, 2012 at 8:12 AM
rob! 9
Slog commenter d.p. gets credit for putting this link in yesterday's Morning News post.

Be sure to watch the short video clips at the top as well, for maximum flavor.
Posted by rob! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZBdUceCL5U on February 13, 2012 at 8:16 AM
Keister Button 10
Oh yeah, this is the special conservative American logic.
"I'm proud of my son who's putting his life on the line in Iraq or Afghanistan, but I'll disown him if he comes back needing veterans' benefits and disability."
"Marriage is a holy sacrament meant for a man and a woman who want to have babies. I'll just ignore the fact that between my childless children there have been six marriages."
"I'm voting for Whitey Mumford because he believes in gun rights." One year later: "Dang that Whitey Mumford! He cut my seniors' benefits! What about my smokes, cable and expensive prescriptions?"
"Here is a woman posting on Facebook how she lost four of her friends to Maurice Clemmons' gunfire. She's asking how Mike Huckabee could have let this guy out. As a good Christian, it makes sense for me to get all my relations to flame her in her hour of grief for dissing Mike Huckabee."

Posted by Keister Button on February 13, 2012 at 8:17 AM
Canadian Nurse 11
This is the kind of reporting that can actually, slowly, change minds. Great reading.
Posted by Canadian Nurse on February 13, 2012 at 8:18 AM
12
"Support for Republican candidates, who generally promise to cut government spending, has increased since 1980 in states where the federal government spends more than it collects. The greater the dependence, the greater the support for Republican candidates.

Conversely, states that pay more in taxes than they receive in benefits tend to support Democratic candidates. And Professor Lacy found that the pattern could not be explained by demographics or social issues. "

Erp?
Posted by Lorran on February 13, 2012 at 8:20 AM
sikandro 13
Great article.
Posted by sikandro on February 13, 2012 at 9:35 AM
14
wow

what a bozo.

don't he know in the Qunited States of Gommorica

EVERYBODY sucks Uncle Sam's titty?
Posted by slurpslurpslurp on February 13, 2012 at 9:51 AM
this guy I know in Spokane 15
Anyone else notice how the gay-marriage states look especially healthy?
Posted by this guy I know in Spokane on February 13, 2012 at 10:18 AM
16
@4,

Republicans, and especially teabaggers, have been increasingly attacking Medicare and Social Security as welfare programs. It's extremely relevant that a Tea Party supporter's mother relies on Medicare. Without Medicare, she would be entirely dependent on her son to survive.
Posted by keshmeshi on February 13, 2012 at 11:01 AM
17
Fine. Let's cut off all these stupid tea bagger mother fuckers from government entitlements. Just create a checkbox on their tax forms. They get 20% of the federal income taxes. And that's it.

No medicare. No medicaid. No Social Security. No lunch programs. Disallow their children to attend public schools. No federal subsidized foods.

Let them pay 20-30% more for food and gas and force them to waddle their obese diabetic asses down the grocery store for their shit filled Hot Pockets. Then they can die more quickly at a non-federally extended and fiscally responsible age.

Fuck these stupid worthless pieces of shit. Let them reap what they sow.
Posted by tkc on February 13, 2012 at 12:07 PM
Fnarf 18
Man, eastern Kentucky is not doing too good. Look at that: the only two counties in the country I could find where MORE THAN HALF of all county income is gummint benefits. Owsley County is over 53%. I see in Wikipedia that it is the poorest non-Hispanic county in the country; there are two poorer counties but they are mostly Hispanic, and Hispanic people don't get benefits for the most part, even when they're eligible for them, which they often aren't. But DAMN.

These dark-red areas are mostly places that have been abandoned by America, abandoned by the 21st century. Lots of Indian-reservation counties too, I see.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on February 13, 2012 at 12:10 PM
19
But you don't get it. The Tea Baggers DESERVE every government handout - they and the rich WORK HARD and PAY TAXES.

It's those lazy bastards who don't pay taxes -- of a different color, or speaking Mexican, and/or illegal -- who are taking, taking, taking and sucking up the rich/tea bagging hard workers' tax dollars!

I've heard variations of this from a Chinese taxi driver, a white guy on disability insurance, a white middle-aged woman applying for welfare, and so on and so forth.
Posted by judybrowni on February 13, 2012 at 12:16 PM
Fnarf 20
@18, PS -- Owsley went 76% for McCain in '08, natch.
Posted by Fnarf http://www.facebook.com/fnarf on February 13, 2012 at 12:23 PM
21
I don't know about the rest of you but when I read this article I didn't get my normal impression of "cut off everyone else but don't touch my benefits". It sounded like all of these people really didn't want to be taking checks from the government and they were willing, even eager, to see cuts to the programs that benefit them even though it would cut their benefits. That actually shows consistency of beliefs that surprised me.

That said, all of these people continued to accept the checks. That guy saying he got government checks for his disabled daughter said he shouldn't get as much as he did but he is still accepting the check. The guy getting free lunch for his kids said he didn't think they should get free lunch but he still applied to get free lunch for them.

I think it's interesting when Republican candidates talk about Obama creating dependency on the government to get people to vote Democratic when it appears that greater dependency on government actually leads to voting Republican.
Posted by Root on February 13, 2012 at 12:56 PM
COMTE 22
The cognitive dissonance on display in this article is amazing, but not surprising in the least. These are the "real 'Murkins" whose belief in "personal liberty uber alles" is, apparently, only just now beginning to rot at the foundations; or at the very least, they're just now beginning to notice the incremental deterioration that's been going on since the late 1970's. Their wages have stagnated (assuming they even have jobs), their employment prospects have gradually diminished, their sense of independence has begun to atrophy; and yet, despite every bit of evidence for their demise pointing straight at the Republican oligarchs they perpetually vote into office, they continue to blame Democrats for "forcing" them into the government safety net against their collective wills.

One can only hope at least some of them are starting to realize that the "it's better to die on ones feet than to live on ones knees" paradigm they've been sold by the GOP is literally killing their prospects for a better future, and that, if it weren't for the safety net they so despise, not only would they have been kicked to their knees a long time ago, but the boot wielded by the 1% would already be shoving their faces into the mud of economic serfdom by now.
Posted by COMTE http://www.chriscomte.com on February 13, 2012 at 1:03 PM
23
This article summed up the reasons why I haven't been able to vote Republican in over 10 years. My basic attitude about how things should be is pretty conservative. I hate deadbeats and freeloaders. I believe in the right to bear arms and the war on drugs. On the hand I think grannies should be able to go to the doctor and I want a struggling small business owner with a big family to have enough money to send his kids to soccer camp. As long as the Republican party stands for taking those things away I can't support them.
Posted by Ken Mehlman on February 13, 2012 at 1:59 PM
24
As rob! and I discussed yesterday, and as @22 says, the interesting thing about the article and video interviews is the total absence of knowing hypocrisy or race-baiting of the kind @19 seems to expect.

This is really about people being unable to reconcile an ideological myth they've been force-fed with the real harm wrought by those they've elected in service of that myth. They only desire self-sufficiency, and they can't figure out that the system has been structurally reconfigured such that their best efforts will fall short.

They blame themselves, not any urban or foreign bogeyman, yet in the short term their reflex is to double down on their ideological absolutes. What these people need is education -- a media that values proof of cause-and-effect over "balanced" regurgitation of false claims -- not accusations of xenophobia or blogger fantasies of punitive excision from the dole.

Posted by d.p. on February 13, 2012 at 2:55 PM
25
@21 "That said, all of these people continued to accept the checks."

Yeah, well, I think I should pay more in taxes, but I don't pay more than I owe. That's because I think the system should change, so all people who are doing well pay more in taxes -- I don't think it would help matter much if I alone paid more than I owe in taxes.

Similarly, these people would like to get less in benefits, but not if it's just them. They want all the people in their community to get less in benefits, so they all stay on a par with each other, with less government involvement. No one wants to see their kid be the only one who can't afford to be on the sports team. But if none of the kids had that kind of money, they could all just play together, for fun.
Posted by EricaP on February 13, 2012 at 3:34 PM

Add a comment

Advertisement
 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy