Republicans, Democrats split on why people are rich or poor | Pew Research Center

English: The "substantive" conceptio...

English: The “substantive” conception of equality of opportunity, in contrast to the “formal” conception, focuses on fairness before a competition begins by trying to help disadvantaged persons have a better chance at the upcoming competition. Examples include “affirmative action” programs, educational assistance and other ways to help applicants disadvantaged by circumstances beyond their control be more “equal” at the starting point. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is a brilliant, thought-provoking, must-read article published by Pew Research. It argues that beyond partisan differences over economic policies, there are stark divisions on a fundamental question: What makes someone rich or poor?

Source: Republicans, Democrats split on why people are rich or poor | Pew Research Center

I particularly like Pew Research because its view are evidence-based and not loose opinion without argument.

The findings will be of interest to North American readers. But more importantly, many of the issues are generalizable to other countries, especially the UK after the general election, where prime minister, Theresa May, is being propped up by the Conservatives because they are fearful of the results of an early election.

My political views are well known but for simplicity, I restate them below:

  1. Libertarian, rather than authoritarian
  2. Internationalist and Pro-Europe
  3. Right of centre , favouring strongly individualism compared to state
  4. Strongly anti-bureaucracy, favouring small government
  5. Pro democracy
  6. Anti corruption
  7. Pro Keynesian and anti monetarist (I favour a belt & braces approach with sound monetary policy, good fiscal discipline but leaving room for state intervention where necessary)
  8. Pro Monarchist

As a lifelong conservative, I believe passionately in hard-work and personal fulfillment. But I’m a one-nation conservative, who supports social safety nets for the less fortunate. I come from an average middle-class, post-war family and was a product of state education. Like many people of my generation, I have scars, deep experiences and passionate viewpoints. When I was younger, I soon spotted the magic doors that opened for the privileged.  But my generation were much luckier than today’s young.

Young people today are polarized between two groups. Firstly, there are those with wealth, privilege and private education, for whom work experience and career opportunities abound – my insights and experiences are deep, having been a tutor at an elitist French Grande Ecole for many years. Secondly, there are the rest, the proletariat, or the ‘great unwashed’ (an expression that my fellow blogger, John Gelmini, favors). Ordinary people, without privilege, are at a serious disadvantage – this is more noticeable today than for my generation. Of course, there are contextual changes, including the impact of technology, widespread tertiary education, travel and multi-culturalism.

Returning to the Pew article, for many more successful people, hard-work is closely correlated with success. But it’s not really a level-playing field. I suggest that for my generation, there was greater equality of opportunity for those prepared to work and take reasonable risks. Today, since the economic crisis of 2008, it is much harder for young people, without privilege and family wealth. Young people seem to have lost faith in traditional political parties and are being swayed by the Pied Piper promises of the populists. It’s significant that we now have populists on both the right and left of the political divide, for example, Trump in the US and Corbyn in the UK. Corbyn owes his power base to shadowy Far-Left elements infiltrating the UK’s Labour Party – in the US, it’s the Far-Right supporting Trump. The problem is that for both the Far-Left and the Far-Right, the end justifies the means, truth and evidence are suppressed in favor of political expediency.

For me, the answer is to move away from the traditional political parties, with their vested interests and shadowy practices. Macron’s example in France provides a benchmark. For example, I sense that it’s the ‘Last Chance Saloon‘ for the UK Conservative Party – they must become popular with young voters.

Let me ask an open question:

So beyond rich and poor, how do governments offer greater equality of opportunity?

Thoughts?

 

 

 

 

 

May’s two chiefs of staff quit as she tries to placate the Cabinet | Coffee House

This is a brilliant analysis from the Spectator. It reports that Theresa May’s two chiefs of staff Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill have resigned. It argues that the pair have good claim to be the most powerful special advisers in British political history, their hold on Mrs May was even greater than that of Alastair Campbell and Jonathan Powell on Tony Blair.

Source: May’s two chiefs of staff quit as she tries to placate the Cabinet | Coffee House

There are some real mainstream nuggets in this article. Most importantly, the view that Tories prefer to prop up ‘weak and wobbly’ May because they are afraid of losing an early election.

This brings me to a couple of reflections of my own.

Firstly, I was shocked at May’s campaign strategy. It was like a three hundred year old set piece battle in the digital age of thought sensory armaments. Secondly, I endorse Steve Hilton‘s view about acting on data and hard intelligence. I sense that May’s stubborn personality prevailed over evidence based analysis – if true, these are potentially dangerous times, relying on a mortally wounded May, fronting the UK government.

Secondly, my Machiavellian  instincts have kicked in and I’m looking for the power. Clearly, May has no power – she’s a puppet, perhaps a bit like Jeremy Corbyn? Are we about to watch a new political satire? Instead of puppets Punch and Judy, it will be ‘Jeremy and Theresa’? Well, we all know, or are fairly confident, that shadowy Far Left radicals are pulling Jeremy Corbyn’s puppet strings. But what of May?

Well, it’s probably too early to call. Power needs to be three-fold. Firstly, there will be a need to stand up to May in cabinet and sway others. Secondly, there will be a need to have support from other Conservative MPs. I’m not sure if Conservative Party members views will count for much because they will be struggling to understand Corbyn’s meteoric success. Thirdly and most importantly, he/she will need to appeal to young voters who were swayed by Corbyn’s Pied Piper tunes – this is the real wild-card.

It’s early days but I’d expect Boris Johnson to start flexing his political muscles in Cabinet very soon. He’s a maverick, a wild-card, Pro-Bexit, unpredictable and often unscripted but he’s a big beast, a real bruiser and particularly photogenic.

So how do we expect the satirical political puppet show, ‘Jeremy and Theresa’ to end?

Thoughts?