<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: I&#8217;ll See Your New Deal and Raise You an Ownership Society</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.juliansanchez.com/2006/12/08/ill-see-your-new-deal-and-raise-you-an-ownership-society/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.juliansanchez.com/2006/12/08/ill-see-your-new-deal-and-raise-you-an-ownership-society/</link>
	<description>Just another geek in the geek kingdom</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 05:38:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry</title>
		<link>http://www.juliansanchez.com/2006/12/08/ill-see-your-new-deal-and-raise-you-an-ownership-society/comment-page-1/#comment-1389</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 03:36:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://juliansanchez.com/?p=1448#comment-1389</guid>
		<description>&quot;Mostly, though, this little team-up might be attractive to liberals for the same reason conservatives have kept our quarrelsome asses around all these years: We&#039;re good intellectual cover. However thin on the ground, we&#039;re overrepresented in the fusionist conservative movement&#039;s intellectual caste.&quot;

I&#039;d have to say about this specific feature, that liberals don&#039;t need it.  Republicans have needed this for two reasons - first, to justify actual justifiable policies, which would hurt some people (the old gains are diffuse/losses are concentrated).  The second is to justify policies which help the elite at the expense of everybody else.  This, and the culture war, were very important to the GOP, since its policies were very pro-elite/anti-majority.


</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Mostly, though, this little team-up might be attractive to liberals for the same reason conservatives have kept our quarrelsome asses around all these years: We&#8217;re good intellectual cover. However thin on the ground, we&#8217;re overrepresented in the fusionist conservative movement&#8217;s intellectual caste.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;d have to say about this specific feature, that liberals don&#8217;t need it.  Republicans have needed this for two reasons &#8211; first, to justify actual justifiable policies, which would hurt some people (the old gains are diffuse/losses are concentrated).  The second is to justify policies which help the elite at the expense of everybody else.  This, and the culture war, were very important to the GOP, since its policies were very pro-elite/anti-majority.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Barry</title>
		<link>http://www.juliansanchez.com/2006/12/08/ill-see-your-new-deal-and-raise-you-an-ownership-society/comment-page-1/#comment-1388</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Dec 2006 20:40:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://juliansanchez.com/?p=1448#comment-1388</guid>
		<description>Ramesh&#039;s comment only makes sense if one ignores the history of both the Bush administration, and the GOP Congress.  It&#039;s not honestly deniable now that the GOP is the party of crony capitalism, unaccountability and massive (deficit-funded) spending.  Which I expect to continue in the future. after Reagan and Bush II, it&#039;s a clear cut way to govern - spend like crazy, and push the bill off to one&#039;s successor.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ramesh&#8217;s comment only makes sense if one ignores the history of both the Bush administration, and the GOP Congress.  It&#8217;s not honestly deniable now that the GOP is the party of crony capitalism, unaccountability and massive (deficit-funded) spending.  Which I expect to continue in the future. after Reagan and Bush II, it&#8217;s a clear cut way to govern &#8211; spend like crazy, and push the bill off to one&#8217;s successor.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

