Coercion and Incentive Are Not Interchangeable Terms

January 10, 2012 07:22

[A] substantial number of productive Americans are, for all intents and purposes, on strike. And despite what progressives continue to believe, no amount of coercion, whether it comes in the form of Obamacare, FinReg, rapacious public sector unions, or any other spirit-sucking entity masquerading itself as “social justice” will ever replace good-old fashioned incentive. – Canada Free Press


By Arnold Ahlert at Canada Free Press



Oddly enough, a study was done in 2008 by Arthur Brooks, a Syracuse University professor who discovered, much to his chagrin, that “evil” conservatives contribute about 30 percent more to charities than our oh-so-caring liberal counterparts:

“When I started doing research on charity, I expected to find that political liberals — who, I believed, genuinely cared more about others than conservatives did — would turn out to be the most privately charitable people, he said. “So when my early findings led me to the opposite conclusion, I assumed I had made some sort of technical error. I re-ran analyses. I got new data. Nothing worked. In the end, I had no option but to change my views.”


But it gets worse, comrades. Conservatives donated more to charity — despite the fact that liberal family incomes were 6 percent higher on average.


None of this should surprise anyone who truly understands the progressive mindset, which can be reduced for these purposes to three words: talk is cheap. And none are cheaper than those who profess to be the doyens of societal generosity — underwritten by Other People’s Money.


Help Make A Difference By Sharing These Articles On Facebook, Twitter And Elsewhere: