>I agree that this is another depressing example of "false consciousness",
>which I think has mostly do with people believing that tax cuts in these
>times offer a more promising way of improving their take home pay than
>fighting for higher pay and improved social benefits. This view is
>reinforced both by the decline of working class economic and political
>power, and ruling class promotion rather than resistance to tax cuts. The
>fact that there may be more than offsetting cuts to social programs doesn't
>occur to many working people, or are regarded as something uncertain and far
>off whereas well-defined tax cuts promise immediate relief. Some popular
>support for tax cuts is also animated by hostility within the working class
>towards the poor, especially racial and ethnic minorities and new immigrants
>("them") who experience higher than average unemployment and are seen as
>disproportionately and undeservedly benefiting from "too high" taxes and
>government spending.
It's worse than that: people support eliminating the estate tax (aka "death tax") because they think their own taxes are too high, *even though the repeal would have no effect on their own tax bill*. Bartels calls this "unenlightened self-interest." And he marshals evidence showing that it's not just a matter of being poorly informed; there are real conceptual difficulties linking A and B to C.
Read the paper <http://www.princeton.edu/~bartels/homer.pdf>; it's extraordinary. I wonder if Canadians and others would react the same way as Americans, or if this is yet another case of American exceptionalism.
Doug