Why is the Republican party so content with denying healthcare as a human right, and trying everything they can to harm people who need any sort of assistance? Like… How do they do it? How much are we talking here when we speak about tax savings for them?
Pretend I am rich? Like how much money am I getting back by Republicans kicking men off healthcare or destroying insurance for those who need it most. It must be alot right?
For the rich: money reduces empathy. There a a few funny studies on the matter, including one on lottery winners. Plus the very wealthy live in their own bubble.
For the poor: propaganda. Lack of education in logic, sociology, macroeconomics, human relationships. A complete education is not all math and literature and hard science.
The power-hungry want power, control, coercion. Through media power, cronyism they allied with the ultra rich who have power and want docile workers.
The dominated Republicans are fighting the ghost of people abusing the system, afraid of change, hiding in conservatism, backing into 1930s racism. They didn’t think the powerful Republicans would cut their help, only do something about their fears.
It’s not about economics: healthcare and general welfare have a net positive impact, up to the point of housing homeless people costs globally less than having them on the street.
Personal gain is really at stake only when said service is repurchased by friends of the government, e.g. medical research, police, military, roads anything can go. Helping the poor can’t really be sold. Policing them, yes.
Does money reduce empathy or is lack of empathy just a serious advantage in acumulating money?
Yes.
But foremost, money makes you an asshole, as measured with people who had little/no control over their wealth (e.g. lottery winners.)
Or those were previously just assholes without money? Nice people who win the lottery likely don’t stay rich for long because they use that money to help people they know.
One of several studies:
https://docs.iza.org/dp7934.pdf
So I read the study, first of all the paper aknowledges that there’s a several point swing in voting preference between non winners and people who won less than £500 which strongly implies people who play the lottery are more likely to vote right wing to begin with. Secondly even for large wins the swing was only around 18%. At worst money does not make everyone a bad person, more like 1/5 people.
So you read one study, and didn’t know social science are about mean changes overe a population and not absolute changes on individuals.
Good start, now I’ll let you dig some more on the issue.
It outright says:
“13% of non-winners switch to favour the right-wing. By contrast, nearly 18% of the winners who get more than 500 pounds switch to the right-wing party”
That is a description of induviduals, 18% of people become more right wing, not 100% of people become 18% more right wing.