Is The GOP Right on Household Economics?

Image from http://www.goodenoughmother.com/2011/04/the-death-of-the-home-cooked-meal/

“Household economics”, right-winged candidates enjoy and often pledge to implement this economic ideology in the offices that they hold. The practice of tightening your belt when times are rough, and doing the opposite when money is in abundance. “Household economics” sounds great to the right-winged base in this country because it touches on that average American lifestyle after making the claim that the democrats in Washington are hurting our businesses by providing all of these social programs and turning America into a Socialist country. But how different is this “household economics” theory from actual Socialism or State Capitalism?

Thinking, at the surface, the way an average American household is ran should be how our government executes their duties. But if you look deeper than that, “household economics” is a right-winged nightmare!

The problem with the government from a right-winged stand point is that Capitalism is slowly, but surely, getting weaker and weaker by the fiscal year. Corporation Tax Loopholes are threatening to be sealed shut, Corporate Tax rates are estimated to go up, regulations to prevent a company from stomping all over the consumer are being considered in Washington,  and the government isn’t doing its part to help the “Job Creators” . Businesses are scared, thus suffering from a sort of job-creating disability.

How do they plan to fix this? Believe it or not the same way Liberals, Progressives and Democrats want to, with “household economics”. “Household economics”: the idea that an average American family’s form of running a family to make sure it gets everything it needs in a cost effective way, strangely enough, directly reflects that of Socialism.

Consider the following scenario:

John and Ashley have three children: Katherine, Amanda, and Brian. The typical American family of 5 live in a suburban middle class home. The average income for Amanda is $70K and John is $75K. Their children attend public school, have friends, and all visit the doctor regularly. Brian, age 13, goes to soccer practice every day and comes home knowing there is food in the refrigerator. Little Katherine goes to a private day care down the street, and Ashley is having her first sleep over. The parents provide the home to sleep in, the family car to ride in, and the food in the refrigerator. Now, keep in mind, all of these things where purchased by and owned by the parents for the family to make use of as they see fit and all of the family is covered by a healthcare plan provided by John and Ashley. Sound familiar? This is exactly a Socialist household in every sense of the word. Of course what the Right mean when they say “household economics” is when times are tough financially, and the family begins to make cuts and tighten its belt. Does this mean the family cuts out the health care plan? Or maybe the cut back on the food the parents provide? Absolutely not! So what does the family cut back on? Maybe a large expensive watch that dad wanted. Maybe that new outdoor patio set mom has been eying. Or maybe the family will have to postpone their big trip to Europe. They are right, this is how a government should function: providing the necessities for what its citizens need such as food, water, heating oil, education and other needs of the “family”; and in a penny pinching time, cut the big luxuries like Tax Breaks for the millionaires, our military empires, useless farm subsidies, and other things that are not needed in our budget.

Now on the other side let’s check out what a family would look like under what the GOP and conservatives ideal of “household economics”. Consider this scenario:

So the same family in the very same situation, only this time Brian has started an in home company selling food to his younger sisters for a flat monthly rate. He pays his own health care bills and is saving up to purchase a car. He also pays for his own education therefore, the parents do everything in their power to sanction and ensure that he is taken care of. Meanwhile the children who are too young to work or start their own business fall by the way-side and are constantly sick since they cannot afford healthcare. They can’t go to school because they are not allowed to utilize the family car and have no sense of guidance therefore, have no chance at prosperity. The child that is most beneficial to the family is the one that gets all of the parent’s attention and love. This is a prime example of a Capitalist household. So where is that happy medium? A parent ensuring that all of the children are loved and cared for equally, while also allowing individual prosperity. For example, if young Katherine opens a lemonade stand and earns a little of her own money.

So, the next time you hear a “Sarah Palin” or a “Michelle Bachman” talk about “household economics” to the White House, Liberals and Progressives agree with him. In fact Democrats should run on that exact same platform.

Edited By: Alexis Atherton