Liberals vs. Conservatives

[billvon 3,119]

>Liberals will seek bigger government and more taxes.

I'm a liberal and in general I look for smaller government and less taxes. But that's because I'm a liberal by the dictionary definition, not a liberal in the sense that liberals=left wingers=democrats.

lib·er·al adj.

1
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

2
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
c. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
d. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.

>Conservatives will focus on bigger business.

Again, that may be true in some cases, but that's not really contained in the definition.

con·ser·va·tive adj.

1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2. Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
3. Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.
4. a. Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
b. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement.
5. Conservative Of or belonging to the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom or the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada.
6. Conservative Of or adhering to Conservative Judaism.
7. Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative use of natural resources.

[rehmwa 2]

So, we can call ourselves whatever we want, just pick whatever definition makes us happy.

So by the starting definition in the post, you are conservative. But you want to call yourself Liberal because it's more trendy.

That's not confusing. (and you can't have your right/left wing social programs without having to pay for them)

I'd like to be the political orientation of "Chocolate Kings" defined as "those wishing for less taxes and minimal government involvement in social issues"

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

I just don't see why the next generation should succeed or fail based on what schooling their folks can afford to give them.

Not really on topic, but digression is fun -

It's natural selection - kids succeed or fail based completely on what the parents give them - genetics, moral upbringing, emotional stability or not, work ethics, good examples, a healthy and learning environment, protection, clothes, food, and even money if you got it, but success is likely more based on what you do at home than by government sponsored education. The private sector will respond to poor education. Likely faster than public education...

also - if we are responsible about having kids, then we consider if-we-can-afford to give them a good education before we -choose- to have them. Since we have birth control, then having kids is really now a choice isn't it?

I know, it's seems pretty harsh, but why should you put thought and savings and effort into giving your child an advantage, and then have it eliminated by using your own income for someone else's kid when that someone didn't do jack - that's pretty harsh also.

Your point assumes that we have to depend on the taxation of the next generation to support us and also that welfare should be a permanent fixture of government programs...... That's very telling in itself.

I think the evidence of the past is that the private sector didn't do a very good job with the children of the poor. Occasionally one of them would get lucky and be picked up by a sponsor (Michael Faraday comes to mind) but that was very much the exception rather than the rule.

I came from a poor family, my education was 100% paid for all the way through PhD. Was it a good investment by society? Well, I'm 58, have never had one day on unemployment, payed over $350,000 in income taxes over the last 10 years, and have a healthy retirement account so I won't be a burden in my dotage, so I'd say it was.

Would private sources have picked it up? I doubt it, the return simply takes too long. Only governments can take such a long view.

I also dispute your assertion on "natural selection". Can you cite one study that indicates that genius is passed on in any form (genetic or behavioral) from parents? Nothing at all in the parentage of people like Newton, Feynman, Hawking, Einstein, etc. suggested that these kids would turn out to be geniuses and make huge contributions to our civilization.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[rehmwa 2]

The list had more than just genetics in it and I specifically noted the home environment being most important to a child's future 'success', not IQ, assuming IQ equates to success is an elitist assumption.

As one of those who worked full time while taking full time classes (we were very poor but the PELL and National Merit sure helped); I am to read this as we should appreciate your free ride through your PhD while now pulling down a 6 figure income at a tax supported institution.

There certainly is a privileged class in this country.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[billvon 3,119]

>But you want to call yourself Liberal because it's more trendy.

No, I call myself liberal because of the real definition of the word. I pretty much ignore other people's made-up, trendy definitions. I mean, I could claim that you're a terrorist, and justify it by saying that "I define people whose DZ.com handles start with R to be terrorists" but that would be sort of silly.

I mean, you do agree that words mean things, right? And you can't just change them when it suits your political goals, right?

[rehmwa 2]

I like silly. And 'terrorist' also has had many definition revisions, You and I may very well fall into that category for someone, somewhere.....

Quote

I mean, you do agree that words mean things, right? And you can't just change them when it suits your political goals, right?

I wish this was true, but this (people change definitions) is exactly what people do . That's why it's more fun to discuss details. Most people are pretty much on the same side and nice to know once you meet them face to face.

That's why I leave during semantics arguments, they are stupid even though some people actually do make a living in that area....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

The list had more than just genetics in it and I specifically noted the home environment being most important to a child's future 'success', not IQ, assuming IQ equates to success is an elitist assumption.

As one of those who worked full time while taking full time classes (we were very poor but the PELL and National Merit sure helped); I am to read this as we should appreciate your free ride through your PhD while now pulling down a 6 figure income at a tax supported institution.

Quote

Which tax supported institution is that? I teach the children of this country at a private university.

Apparently you think I and other smart but poor children would have been better leaving school at 13 to be employed as gas station attendants or shoeshiners for the rich. - well, the government apparently disagreed.

Quote

There certainly is a privileged class in this country.

Yes, like Leona "Taxes are for the little people" Helmsley

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[billvon 3,119]

>I wish this was true, but this (people change definitions) is exactly
>what people do.

Well, I try not to, because it makes discussions essentially impossible. "You're cypres dependent." "Am not." "You are, you said you depend on it." "Depending on something doesn't mean I'm dependent." A pointless discussion.

>That's why I leave during semantics arguments, they are stupid even
>though some people actually do make a living in that area....

I think we can avoid many of those arguments by sticking to the real definitions of words.

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

It's natural selection - kids succeed or fail based completely on what the parents give them - genetics, moral upbringing, emotional stability or not, work ethics, good examples, a healthy and learning environment, protection, clothes, food, and even money if you got it, but success is likely more based on what you do at home than by government sponsored education. The private sector will respond to poor education. Likely faster than public education

Natural selection no longer applies to our society. Through science, engineering and medicine we are all more dependant on the works of other people than we are on ourselves.

Poor families and rich families can give equally stable home lives, it counts for nothing without some level of education.

The private sector will only pay for what it needs. Since they will only sponsor kids that they want to use then will we see 2'nd grade kids signing contracts promising to work for XYZ Ltd for ten years upon completion of X years of schooling.
What happens to the people who do not get sponsored schooling at a basic level. A two tier society of the educated and the non educated with the lower level unable to cross the barrier and rise up.

Quote

also - if we are responsible about having kids, then we consider if-we-can-afford to give them a good education before we -choose- to have them. Since we have birth control, then having kids is really now a choice isn't it?

Which class of society has the highest level of teen pregnancy, rich or poor?

Quote

I know, it's seems pretty harsh, but why should you put thought and savings and effort into giving your child an advantage, and then have it eliminated by using your own income for someone else's kid when that someone didn't do jack - that's pretty harsh also.

You are assuming that all lower income families are lazy welfare bums. Absolutely not true. It is the nature of capitalism that someone is always on the bottom. Besides, it requires a lot of money to put a family through school. It's not just trailer trash that will miss out.

Quote

Your point assumes that we have to depend on the taxation of the next generation to support us and also that welfare should be a permanent fixture of government programs...... That's very telling in itself.

No, I am saying that without freely available gov't funded schools you will end up having to support a whole lot more welfare bums than you do now. Either that or deal with a massive degeneration in living conditions in big city areas. The streets of NY will once again be war zones.
Yes I do support SOME welfare programs, medical most of all.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I think people who disagree with the far right (key word 'far') confuse that with "Republican" without noting that similar social engineering (replace religious programs with political correctness or whatever) of the left is the exact same thing - social liberalism.

Also, you can't forget about the European lingo. "Right wing" has a more perjorative sense to it. I knew this because some of my English acquaintances called me a right winger. It didn't bother me. Then, some time later, a friend told me that they all think I'm a right winger. I said, I am. Then he explained that a lot of "right wing" deals with elitism and racism and such.

I told him elitists and racists are called "Liberals" in the states. (They are. Conservatives don't say that African Americans and Hispanics can't make it.)

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Conservatives don't say that African Americans and Hispanics can't make it.)

40 years ago conservatives said African Americans and Hispanics SHOULDN'T make it, and did everything in their power to prevent them making it. Now they have changed their tune to "let them make it but without any help from my taxes".

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[newsstand 0]

From dictionary.com

Quote

lib·er·al (l b r- l, l b r l)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.
2.
a. Tending to give freely; generous: a liberal benefactor.
b. Generous in amount; ample: a liberal serving of potatoes.
3. Not strict or literal; loose or approximate: a liberal translation.
4. Of, relating to, or based on the traditional arts and sciences of a college or university curriculum: a liberal education.
5.
a. Archaic. Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
b. Obsolete. Morally unrestrained; licentious.

n.
1. A person with liberal ideas or opinions.
2. Liberal A member of a Liberal political party.


con·ser·va·tive (k n-sûr v -t v)
adj.
1. Favoring traditional views and values; tending to oppose change.
2. Traditional or restrained in style: a conservative dark suit.
3. Moderate; cautious: a conservative estimate.
4.
a. Of or relating to the political philosophy of conservatism.
b. Belonging to a conservative party, group, or movement.
5. Conservative Of or belonging to the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom or the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada.
6. Conservative Of or adhering to Conservative Judaism.
7. Tending to conserve; preservative: the conservative use of natural resources.

n.
1. One favoring traditional views and values.
2. A supporter of political conservatism.
3. Conservative A member or supporter of the Conservative Party in the United Kingdom or the Progressive Conservative Party in Canada.
4. Archaic. A preservative agent or principle.

I'll take liberal any day.

"Truth is tough. It will not break, like a bubble, at a touch; nay, you may kick it about all day like a football, and it will be round and full at evening."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes

[Paige 0]

indeed! nice avitar

Tunnel Pink Mafia Delegate
www.TunnelPinkMafia.com

[tunaplanet 0]

How about we believe what we want to believe without templates and not label us a certain name. There's a concept for ya.

Forty-two

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

Conservatives don't say that African Americans and Hispanics can't make it.)

40 years ago conservatives said African Americans and Hispanics SHOULDN'T make it, and did everything in their power to prevent them making it. Now they have changed their tune to "let them make it but without any help from my taxes".

I disagree. Tell me how many Republican southerners believed that way. Or was it the legendary Southern Democrats who tossed up roadblocks? Jim Crow sure as hell wasn't a Republican thing, now was it?

Of course, a party realignment occurred back in the 60's. You are correct that no party realignment has occurred since then.

40 years ago, Democrats said, "You cannot make it." They still do. This would be the same as your teachers and leaders and family members 40 years ago saying, "You cannot do physics, little Johnny. Don't you understand that? Some Republicans out here will tell you that you can if you work hard and invest in your education. They are setting you up for failure, and only want you to sell out. Come with me, little Johnny Kallend. I'll show you something you can do, and in exchange I just want you to vote for me, because they do not understand you. I'll give you their tax money. You wouldn't vote for evil people like that who think you can actually do this, would you? They are using you. Remember, effort is the first step towards failure. They want to see you fail!!! Don't let them get away with it. Come to our side and you won't need to try. It's their fault you are like this."

Actually, it's rather nice to see a tacit admission on your part that Republicans have always known that Hispanics and African-Americans can make it. According to your statement, so knowledgeable and fearful of their power were the Republicans that Republicans tossed up roadblocks. Meanwhile, the Dems reinforced the "You can't, because you are black or hispanic. Don't even try, because you are not good enough."

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

>1) We would like less government to be able to keep our freedoms.

I agree

>2) We would like to stop being FORCED to pay for other poeople to sit on thier ass collecting money from us. I guarantee that if the programs that enabled people to do that were halted - people would have to go get jobs. It would just happen.

Except for those who are mentally or physicaly handicapped. I have n problem supporting them in finding suitable employment.

>3) If it's mine - it's mine - not yours.

Sounds logical to me.

>4) if there is more money in the corporation then there are more jobs to be had. It's pretty simple math.

I don't agree with this one. More money in a corporations means bigger paycheques, specially for those in senior management positions.

>5) We want to keep our guns.

I don't have any, so no need to keep mine either.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

In some places the lights are deliberately set to increase congestion, particularly around shopping malls.

I would like to find out where you get this from.

In my line of work - managing shopping centres - I actually lobby local government to easy congestion around the sites I manage. When people conceive a mall to e difficult to get to, they will go somewhere else. You want people to get to your property as easily and quickly as they can.

Generally local government understands that when my malls do better, I can afford to give them more taxes too.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Don't spend what you don't have.
Don't expect others to keep you...

Your list reminded me of this:

Lincoln's Ten "Cannot's":


You cannot bring about prosperity by discouraging thrift.

You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong.

You cannot help small men by tearing down big men.

You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich.

You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer.

You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income.

You cannot further brotherhood of men by inciting class hatred.

You cannot establish sound security on borrowed money.

You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man's                      initiative.

You cannot help men by having the government tax them 

to do for them what they can and should do for 

themselves.

You cannot escape the responsibility of tomorrow by evading 

it today.


(Abe Lincoln, taken from his numerous commentaries.)

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Quote

In some places the lights are deliberately set to increase congestion, particularly around shopping malls.

I would like to find out where you get this from.

In my line of work - managing shopping centres - I actually lobby local government to easy congestion around the sites I manage. When people conceive a mall to e difficult to get to, they will go somewhere else. You want people to get to your property as easily and quickly as they can.

Generally local government understands that when my malls do better, I can afford to give them more taxes too.

Kallend is right on this (well, on this one you are. Sigline for ya?). City planners want people to notice the businesses. This brings in sales tax dollars. I know this because I know my old hometown's mayor pretty well and was involved in numerous discussions.

It is a money thing.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[Nightingale 0]

speaking from the point of view of an educator, little Johnny sure as hell can't do physics if he is continually sent to schools in condemned buildings with no textbooks and poorly trained teachers. With the right tools, however, he could probably do pretty much whatever he set his mind to.

It isn't just to have kids from the ghetto compete with kids from Beverly Hills with the way our current system is set up. The kids from the ghetto do not have the same educational opportunities, and I invite anyone who believes otherwise to substitute teach in LAUSD for a while. I truly feel that if all schools were created equal, our nation's youth would have much more equal opportunities in college and in life, rendering affirmative action for the most part unnecessary.

Give kids what they need to learn, and give teachers what they need to teach, and a lot of socioeconomic inequality problems will solve themselves.

as a sidenote: I do not support affirmative action. I am all for giving OPPORTUNITIES to minorities. Affirmative Action, the way it is currently implemented, is not an opportunity, it is a handout. By having universities admit students who would not otherwise make the cut, they are setting these students up for failure, because they are not properly prepared. Ditto with AA in the workplace.

[rehmwa 2]

This was fun, I went to lunch and POW.

John - I was also poor and smart and grants and scholarships helped. You're on a roll today but I can't keep going. I was pointing out consistency of positions, not advocating a position.

Jaree (Jakee?) - I put words in your mouth so you reciprocated, fair enough - but I don't think all the poor are welfare bums - I was one of the poor. Still, repeat here (I was pointing out consistency of positions, not advocating a position. And pointing out two sides of the argument - you pick yours).

Bill - semantics sucks, good luck with that dictionary

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Kallend is right on this (well, on this one you are. Sigline for ya?). City planners want people to notice the businesses. This brings in sales tax dollars. I know this because I know my old hometown's mayor pretty well and was involved in numerous discussions.

Congestion does not bring sales tax dollars, it drives it away. A congested site does not perform as well as an easily accessed site. I know this because I have experience with both types of sites.

Please keep in mind that slowing down traffic along a strip of road with a high retail density is not the same as causing congestion around shopping centres, which is what Prof. Kallend suggested.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Congestion does not bring sales tax dollars, it drives it away. A congested site does not perform as well as an easily accessed site. I know this because I have experience with both types of sites.

A lot of things happen because people have bad theories. I believe Lawrocket in that city councils will cause congestion because they "believe" it will help business. In this case, it pretty clearly loses the merchants your business (and mine also - I'll go elsewhere to avoid the crunch).

I like what Lawrocket and Nightengale have to say.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[livendive 8]

I'm pretty conservative on most social issues. I think people should be free to say what they want, read what they want, use drugs, get abortions, own guns, marry as they see fit, and just generally pursue happiness in whatever way they see fit, provided it doesn't intrude on others' freedom to do the same.

I guess I'm fairly moderate on economic issues. I'd like to see us (our government) pay off our bills and then restrict ourselves to break even/surplus spending except in national emergencies. I don't like seeing massive industry bail-outs. If they can't cut the mustard let 'em fail and be replaced. I like a reasonable amount of welfare type assistance (social security, welfare, unemployment, medical assistance), key word being reasonable.

I'm pretty liberal when it comes to laws that prevent one person/company from preventing other people/companies from pursuing happiness. Environmental laws are necessary, as are fraud laws. I'm on the fence with regard to anti-trust issues. In any case, individual and corporate crimes that harm others should be strongly punished.

Blues,
Dave

"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!"
(drink Mountain Dew)

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Conservatives don't say that African Americans and Hispanics can't make it.)

40 years ago conservatives said African Americans and Hispanics SHOULDN'T make it, and did everything in their power to prevent them making it. Now they have changed their tune to "let them make it but without any help from my taxes".

I disagree. Tell me how many Republican southerners believed that way. Or was it the legendary Southern Democrats who tossed up roadblocks? Jim Crow sure as hell wasn't a Republican thing, now was it?

Of course, a party realignment occurred back in the 60's. You are correct that no party realignment has occurred since then.

40 years ago, Democrats said, "You cannot make it." They still do. This would be the same as your teachers and leaders and family members 40 years ago saying, "You cannot do physics, little Johnny. Don't you understand that? Some Republicans out here will tell you that you can if you work hard and invest in your education. They are setting you up for failure, and only want you to sell out. Come with me, little Johnny Kallend. I'll show you something you can do, and in exchange I just want you to vote for me, because they do not understand you. I'll give you their tax money. You wouldn't vote for evil people like that who think you can actually do this, would you? They are using you. Remember, effort is the first step towards failure. They want to see you fail!!! Don't let them get away with it. Come to our side and you won't need to try. It's their fault you are like this."

Actually, it's rather nice to see a tacit admission on your part that Republicans have always known that Hispanics and African-Americans can make it. According to your statement, so knowledgeable and fearful of their power were the Republicans that Republicans tossed up roadblocks. Meanwhile, the Dems reinforced the "You can't, because you are black or hispanic. Don't even try, because you are not good enough."

I didn't say Republican or Democrat, I said conservative. I thought you lawyers were good with the fine print details. Anyway, the premise of your post is flawed.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.