Wednesday, September 22, 2004

Bush's Ownership Society

No, he's not advocating slave ownership. So, save it.

I am reminded however that the founding fathers originally required that a person own land in order to vote. The idea being that if you had something vested in the process, you were more likely to vote responsibly. There is a certain compelling logic to that.

This seems to be an approach to 'making society better' that taps into that concept. After all, usually, you don't riot and burn down your own house when filled with outrage about some or other issue.

I've not really seen or heard any feedback, aside from the article below. It has the sound of a good idea; not sure how the proposal works. Some interesting thoughts in the link below.

Bush's ownership society: great idea, if low-income families benefit |

and a followup link is here:

more info

This is one of those things that I think actually matters far more than whether Bush flew all his hours, or Kerry earned his purple hearts. Sadly, such ideas do little to enrage or scandalize the populace, thereby driving up ratings; therefore these concepts are not considered 'news worthy'. Ψ

No comments: