Emily Thurston
Aug 31, 2018 · 2 min read

I think we simply have a difference of opinion on the purpose of governance. But there’s always room for improvement in transcribing my thoughts and opinions, so I’ll give it a go. (“It depends” is always appropriate when discussing complex problems.)

Concerning displacement, ascribing “fault” would miss the mark. I can’t pin gentrification on any one policy, action, or institution. But I can stress the very-real-and-urgent need to consider income inequality, demographic/migration patterns, and climate change when formulating economic policies or engaging in urban planning.

Context is everything. Again, I can’t claim that tax hikes are either right or wrong, but I can support or protest a tax proposal based on the likelihood of its consequences. Following your lead…If the tax hike goes to road maintenance where it is truly needed (rather than requested / I won’t automatically assume funds flow where they should), and if it brings equitable education to all neighborhoods, then great! …But not so great if it also displaces hardworking families.

I don’t know the specifics of the tax hike in Philly — whether it be proportional to income, based on property values, or is structured around other factors — but speaking generally, if a policy somehow fuels inflation in low-income neighborhoods or threatens homeownership/tenancy, then it is arguably unethical. And I would be in favor of restructuring such a policy to mitigate against the negative consequences faced by at-risk groups.

Think about all the people in social work, teaching, repair work, personal care services, garbage and janitorial services, etc. Not to mention people who have recently been laid off, those with disabilities or illnesses limiting their income, single parents with multiple jobs, pensioners…

I don’t expect everyone to make as much money as they need. Nor, in some cases, as much as they *should.* Individual economic outcomes are a matter of choices, effort, timing, and luck. So I don’t think it’s about “getting in line with the times or moving out.” That’s not a nuanced enough view. Life is messy and unpredictable. Often cruel or unfair.

This inherent chaos drives me toward a liberal stance on governance (and human interactions). Give respect to those who deserve it — on the basis of one’s character, not one’s income. Give support to those who need it — for anyone, at any time, may fall into such a category (thankfully, this also applies to climbing out). In sum, governments should prioritize the people’s security and well-being as much as (I’d prefer more than) economic stimulus.

Went for clarification. Achieved…verbosity?
Anyway, have a pleasant weekend!

    Emily Thurston

    Written by

    A kind and intelligent human. Lifelong learner. Comfortable with my bundle of contradictions.