Progressive Politics

Assistance implies that it is temporary, that it is help to help themselves.

Welfare implies that it is continuous.

If you have to continually support a part of the population then you have a systemic problem. The correct solution would be to change the system. People who support the continuation of the current system either profit from it or don't see an advantage in a change.

One of the main reasons why USAID was the first part of the government targeted was because of things like this.

If you frame their work as "Assistance to disasters" or other variations, plus the context of it being under 1% of the Federal budget, Americans were find with it. If you call it "giving taxpayer money to foreigners" then it's wildly unpopular.

Which is to say that the lesson is that most people are idiots and have no idea what's going on in the world. Framing a narrative can get the same individual to simultaneously support and hate literally the same thing. It can get people to support policies and actions that directly harm them.

Could you share the source for the graph please?

IIRC "ACA" and "Obamacare" had similar divides. Propaganda is a helluva drug.

If it's the particular words that are the issue you have a bigger problem than just helping the poor, which is a laudable goal. Hups, I just used an obscure word and alienated the dummies.

A favourite cognitive bias is the role of emotions in persuasion and decision making. Arguments are much more persuasive if they make us feel good, regardless of the evidence.

It's interesting to watch an AI reason these issues because we're reasonably sure it doesn't have feelings and should be immune to the pitfalls of having an ego.

Americans, what a bunch of morons

Soon there will be a critical mass of people who have nothing left to lose

because welfare has been propagandized as used by "lazy and homeless, and poors, and blacks" its usually based on racism as well, the true welfare queens are Conservative voters.

Fox News: "Write that down. WRITE THAT DOWN!"

Ah, ~40% of Americans are complete fucking morons, that sounds about right.

~40% of Americans also read and write at an elementary school level or worse, but I'm sure that's just a coincidence.

... I think we've found the mythical 'independent, median voter'.

• Help the poor
• Healthcare for everyone
• Good treatment at work.

I like the idea, but I don't think those are very well phrased.

Take "help the poor". When you say "the poor" it sounds like you're talking about a certain group of people who are born poor and die poor. Often the characterization is "the poor" are that way because of personal failings, like that they're lazy. Nobody wants to think of themselves as poor, and they definitely don't want to consider themselves part of "the poor". So, even poor people are going to have a bad reaction to being told that we should "help the poor".

IMO, a better slogan would be something like "Help people who fall on hard times." because it makes it more clear it's temporary help, and that it's not their fault. I think poverty should be eliminated, and billionaires should be, ahem "eliminated", but I think the average American would be much more likely to accept a social safety net rather than expected to continuously help "the poor".

For "healthcare for everyone", I think the issue is that it sounds like people are imagining high-end luxury healthcare for everyone at no cost. Something like "basic healthcare for everyone" is something more Americans would accept, and is more likely the kind of improvement you could actually get from American voters. Those of us who live in developed countries are used to the idea of "equal healthcare for everyone", but I don't think you could get that past the average American voter.

As for "good treatment at work", what American actually thinks that they'll get good treatment from their employer? Americans are used to thinking that it's a doggy dog world out there, and don't expect loyalty or love from an employer. What's reasonable is fairness, so why not "fair treatment at work" or "fair treatment for workers"?

People are emotional creatures.

Someone was joking in another thread, but maybe we should seriously consider just taking socialism and calling it, like, americanism.

One of many lasting “gifts” of Reagan.

They got me! I have to admit, "welfare" leaves a bad taste in my mouth where "helping the poor" sounds fair enough. I grew up under Reagan, heard the bullshit, know it's bullshit, I get it.

And you know damned well what those words really mean. Welfare = black, poor people = whites. (That's from a GenX perspective.)

Propaganda works

I’ve always said that if you really wanted communism or socialism to take off in the states you’re gonna have to call it something else

I also don’t use cis because the machine has already made that a thing people don’t want to be called

"Think of how stupid the average person is, then realize that half of them are stupider than that." - George Carlin