Posted on 07/14/2015 11:17:02 AM PDT by Rummyfan
It is a supreme irony of modern American life that the political movement that terms itself “progressive” is, in the economic realm at least, increasingly passionate about the status quo. Speaking today about the burgeoning “gig economy,” presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton could not help herself but to set modernity firmly within aging ideological tram-lines. Developments such as AirBnB, Zaarly, Uber, DogVacay, and RelayRides, Clinton conceded, are not likely to “go away” any time soon. But they are worrying nonetheless. Indeed, the “sharing economy,” she proposed, is “polarizing” and it is disruptive — guilty of no less than “displacing or downgrading blue-collar jobs.” Technological advances, she concluded, must not “determine our destiny.”
And who should “determine our destiny”? Why, Hillary Clinton of course!
In the eyes of us free-marketeers, the teams behind the host of new peer-to-peer services are no less than digital liberators. For us, the arrival of a system such as Uber is salutary, not scary: It is an end to waiting in the rain for a state-approved cab; it is the key to a transportation experience a cut above that which is provided by the cartels; it is the source of golden opportunities for those who wish to construct odd or custom-built work schedules or to make money without answering to a boss. That a few ingenious programmers have found a way around the artificial scarcity, state-union collusion, and high barriers to entry that The Man has seen fit to impose is, in our view, an extremely positive development. More of this, please.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
So does she.
The ugly goes through and through.
I was thinking that it belongs in 1930s Moscow.
This is true. The irony is the “gig economy” innovators still support her or her side no matter.
They know her rhetoric is empty and she will be pliant.
She’s a nasty piece of work. Nuff said
They are also known as Luddites.
Everything comes around into fashion again. And sadly, class warfare is at the top of the charts again.
Here’s the biggest problem for Hillary: she may have trouble attracting younger voters like what Barack Obama did in 2008 or Bill Clinton did in 1992 and 1996. Meanwhile, the most viable candidates on the Republican side in 2016 will be between 45 and 54 years old.
I thought Hillary born in the 30’s......
The RAT party is a coalition of interest groups. Conflict of interest between member groups is inevitable.
The reincarnation of Eleanor Roosevelt.
Her a$$ is in 1930’s America.
And it spreads across 1940’s America, 1950’s America and 1960’s America, all the way to the present day where liberal Oompa-Loompas shoot it up with novocaine, cover it with vaseline and shoehorn it into pastel kevlar pantsuits. “Please breathe out, my queen.”
Well Said
I would bet a fair amount of money that she has no idea what most of those apps are. It is likely that she is reading what a speechwriter told her to say and I’d bet she had to be taught to pronounce the names, too.
... and when was the last time she had to ride in a cab? Uber or other?
I wouldn’t take that bet.
You would win.
Per some of her released emails she had difficulty with the fax machine while at State. And that’s 80s-90s technology.
Or The Reichstag
It is a supreme irony of modern American life that the political movement that terms itself “progressive” is, in the economic realm at least, increasingly passionate about the status quo.
The word “progress” appears in the Constitution, exactly once:
The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries . . . (Article I, Section 8)So the idea of progress is one of "the blessings of liberty” which the framers sought to “secure . . . to ourselves and our posterity.”Thus it is a unique form of American “conservatism” which clings to an old-time religion of freedom to do things differently than they have been done in the past, and hope for progress of, by, and for the American people.
Our “conservatism” is progressive, and our “progressivism” is backward looking, prepared to countenance price controls to prevent change - because “progressives” distrust change and do not trust “the progress of science and useful arts.”
Thus do “progressives” fear and oppose change, and “liberals" oppose freedom.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.