To the editor: Sadly for contributing author Josh Hammer and fellow conservatives who persuade themselves that there’s an endlessly rising base of voters who’re keen to commerce their very own financial safety for the chance to punish the “woke” left, there’s nonetheless a tricky option to be made (“Democrats are spiraling into irrelevance. Good riddance,” July 18). That selection comes from the cruel actuality that wealth inequality is staggeringly high, is repugnant to the majority of Americans and is increasingly related to conservative fiscal insurance policies that reward predatory financialization on the direct expense of social security nets.
Why ought to any of us worry the exodus of the one-percent’s capital from politically left cities when so many people battle to afford lease, groceries, healthcare, childcare and transportation even with their presence? What fleeing grocery chains can’t get replaced by community-run co-ops that care about regionally sourced natural produce forward of income? What landlord might be worse than the sort who denies six roommates a two-bedroom house as a result of each doesn’t individually make 3 times the lease?
If I’m lastly entitled to the essential requirements of life as a result of they’re authorities sponsored, why would I whine a few CEO’s tax price? Or my neighbor’s gender id? Conservatives anticipate us to commerce probably the most primary types of private safety in an effort to punish who they see because the much less deserving. Are they keen to take part in authoritarianism to maintain up the charade that their insurance policies signify hope for the folks they refuse to assist?
Matthew Neel, Sherman Oaks
