A critique of progressivism (v1.0)

Progressives focus a lot on social policy. Some of them are focused on increasing freedom and rights and equality (non-economic) which have little fiscal impact and I have no concerns there but am sympathetic.  

The concern I have is with economic equality policies. The constitution does not guarantee economic equality. It is not a right. Specific policies can be crafted on a one-on-one basis by congress, and they need justifications. Just a moral justification is not sufficient. An argument, say, of good practical rational governance is good (what can one do with the homeless anyway?). It is perfectly legitimate for other congressmen to question the economic impact or seek other justification. Increasing taxes to pay for it will be resisted by the public (few want to pay more taxes) so the justification has to be good and the taxes structured to reduce resistance. Deficit spending would just aggravate an already huge debt problem. It is best if the benefit to the country or the wider economy (ideally quantified) can be identified and clearly explained.  For example, "child day care assistance frees up many more women to enter the workforce to boost the economy".  Or for example "studies have shown that 2-year pre-K schooling significantly boosts the performance of students later in life utilizing human potential better for the economy".  Or for example "free 2-year community college allows poorer workers to have a college education and a saleable skill to succeed in a capitalistic society and boost the economy".  All three were progressive ideas in the build back better bill that failed to advance. These are also like demand side economics pioneered by Keynes (this new flavor is called Bidenomics) but this new flavor needs to be put on a firmer theoretical footing before rolling out policies.  We have no real data on how effective BIdenomics is in the real world because build back better with key policies did not advance and others are slow in rolling out. I personally am sympathetic to safety net policies for the poor, old, sick, disabled and unemployed. Also, I support any reasonable steps that can be taken to cut the cost of essentials for struggling families without racking up a lot of debt (like childcare/family, healthcare, eldercare, education, housing and food/energy). 

Suggest rhetoric needs to be toned down somewhat in some quarters. All law enforcement is not bad (defund the police?) because of some unjustified killings. That is an overreaction.  Also, billionaires and rich capitalists are not bad just because they are rich. This is scapegoating. They play a vital role in our capitalist economy. The "other side" is not bad or immoral because they are concerned about economic impact of a progressive policy. Corporations and rich people exploiting every legal loophole to pay less tax need not be villainized. That is exactly what they will do in a capitalistic system. The onus is on congress to craft suitable tax policies and the IRS to have the resources to enforce. 

Illegal immigration is a very hard problem (see immigration essay). Suggest progressive focus on congressional solutions to it instead of focusing on messaging. Foreign policy is focused in advancing the countries interests - not some arbitrary progressive goals divorced from the countries interests. 

The planet is undoubtedly a major concern. The science of climate change is very clear. But it is a huge problem that the whole world needs to go at in tandem together. Also, the smooth transition from a fossil fuel energy driven world to a clean energy driven world has to be carefully handled. No quick or easy answers. Impatience is not helpful but organizing around it helps. 

From what I read in the news; the legislature under GOP control is dysfunctional right now. Little will be done. Even passing next year's budget will be a big hurdle. 

Blog comments welcome. But keep discourse civil!!