but since the right consider work requirements one of its biggest successes there are some much more pressing issues with trying to get them to accept a basic income guarantee.
You just have to make an argument that would appeal to a conservative, which I think Paine’s would. Amusingly enough, Bill O’Reilly basically bought Paine’s argument with respect to the guaranteed payments from Alaska’s oil fund, saying “It’s our oil”. Paine’s argument was “It’s our land.” It’s really not a great leap.
Conservatives reject liberal arguments because they’re not based in anything Conservatives recognize as justice. Your need for food does not justify your stealing my dinner. They may wish to give to charity to help the poor, but they reject having their money taken by force by the government to help the poor. It’s the difference between giving a gift and being robbed.
Is that really an adequate steelman of conservative or libertarian thought? It sounds only one stepped remove from “Low-wage workers are just lazy!” and two steps from “Low-wage workers are racial untermenschen!”.
With educated, intellectual-level conservatives I find common ground quite often, since they tend to have fairly elaborate value systems that leave a lot of space for common ground. With libertarians—ie: pure proprietarians who value only private property at a political level—no, there can’t be any common ground. They have One Single Rule, and I believe more things than that matter.
You just have to make an argument that would appeal to a conservative, which I think Paine’s would. Amusingly enough, Bill O’Reilly basically bought Paine’s argument with respect to the guaranteed payments from Alaska’s oil fund, saying “It’s our oil”. Paine’s argument was “It’s our land.” It’s really not a great leap.
Conservatives reject liberal arguments because they’re not based in anything Conservatives recognize as justice. Your need for food does not justify your stealing my dinner. They may wish to give to charity to help the poor, but they reject having their money taken by force by the government to help the poor. It’s the difference between giving a gift and being robbed.
Is that really an adequate steelman of conservative or libertarian thought? It sounds only one stepped remove from “Low-wage workers are just lazy!” and two steps from “Low-wage workers are racial untermenschen!”.
If that’s what “Don’t rob me” sounds like to you, then you’re unlikely ever to have any common ground with conservatives or libertarians.
With educated, intellectual-level conservatives I find common ground quite often, since they tend to have fairly elaborate value systems that leave a lot of space for common ground. With libertarians—ie: pure proprietarians who value only private property at a political level—no, there can’t be any common ground. They have One Single Rule, and I believe more things than that matter.