Liberals enjoy calling other people, especially conservatives, hypocrites. They enjoy criticizing the morality and choices of others. Many of them even feel a responsibility to involve themselves in the moral decisions and choices that other people make. Yet liberals also seem to have quite a few moral principles and choices of their own that are extremely hypocritical and make no sense. It's time that people gave more attention to their hypocrisy, so here are some examples.
Liberals are obsessed with conserving the environment and saving the Earth. Putting aside that many of their concerns are ridiculous and not based on scientific evidence, let's just examine their objectives at face value. Liberals believe that to save the Earth we must reduce our carbon footprint, stop buying goods from multinationals, and shop from local producers. Does their behavior really match this goal? Are these goals even consistent with each other? Both answers are no. Liberals may feel good about themselves by driving a hybrid car or favoring organic, locally produced food and clothing, but none of these activities significantly reduces a person's carbon footprint.
Advertisement - story continues below
Yes, certain hybrid cars do save some energy, but there are much more significant factors determining a person's carbon footprint. The three most significant factors are how many children you have, how much you spend, and how long you live. There is no evidence at all that I have seen that liberals are actively trying to have fewer children. I don't know if they have more children either, but they're definitely not trying to cut back on the number of children that they have. As far as spending, we know that liberals are in favor of more spending at the government level and also tend to favor consumption over savings and investment. This spending bias is further reinforced by liberal efforts to redistribute income from higher income people to lower income people, who have a much higher propensity to spend and also coincidentally to have more children. Further, liberals are strongly committed to spending as much as possible on health care. Much of this spending is wasteful and produces nothing, but some of it should extend life spans on average and lead to even more energy consumption.
What about that organic, locally grown food or clothing? In that case, although the food may be healthy and clothes may be nice, it's just as likely that the carbon footprint may actually be higher than food or clothing purchased from a large corporation. Here's why. These locally produced items are usually a lot more expensive for the same level of quality. Unless the local producer and seller has a much higher profit margin than the large corporation, market economic principles indicates that the overall cost to produce their goods or services must be higher. If the cost to produce is higher, that means it's very likely that more energy was consumed one way or another in the delivery of those items to the consumer. Overall, it appears that many liberal efforts and behaviors will have the impact of substantially increasing rather than reducing our society's carbon footprint and energy consumption.
Liberals are also obsessed with helping the poor. Their approach to this goal is to tax the top 1 percent as much as possible and give that tax revenue to the poor in social programs. However, there are many reasons why this is not going to help the poor at all. First, the top 1 percent is most capable of legally deferring or avoiding taxes. For this reason, everything else being equal, actual tax collection is not likely to rise very much by targeting tax increases on the top 1 percent. There are many better way to collect more tax revenue. A sales tax, a value added tax, or eliminating tax loopholes are just a few of those. In addition, higher tax revenues are typically not used to help the poor anyway. They are typically used to subsidize politically connected interest groups with expensive lobbyists and to expand the government’s bureaucracy. Neither of these groups is by any means poor.
Advertisement - story continues below
Unfortunately, it gets even worse. Liberals don't seem to understand that the top 1 percent creates most of the private sector jobs in our economy. Increasing their taxes means that they cut back on investing in their businesses, hiring new workers, or giving raises and benefits to existing workers. It may even cause those business owners and employers to lay off workers. By increasing taxes on the top 1 percent, liberals reduce economic growth and the numbers of jobs available. Low income people and their families are the hardest hit from this. It's no accident, for example, that data is being released showing that poverty is hitting an all time high in 2010 after two years of extreme socialist policies. During the Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton years poverty generally fell. Even under Bush II, poverty was much lower than it is now. Poverty has skyrocketed since the socialists have taken power.
The last time poverty was this high in America was 1980, which coincidentally was also after years of socialist policies that were soon reversed by the Reagan revolution. So it also appears that liberals are creating an economy in which the poor are suffering more than they have in decades even as they have this obsession with helping the poor. This situation should remind everyone of Reagan's famous saying that the scariest words he ever heard were, "I'm with the government and I'm here to help you."
Maybe the new saying for our time should be that the scariest words are, "I'm a liberal and I'm here to help you." Liberals should look at themselves and their own behavior and stop trying to tell other people what to do and how to live. All evidence suggests that they have no idea what they're doing and cause more harm than good with their misguided socialist efforts.