Quote:
Originally Posted by bradleym
Agreed in most respects -- I too value fiscal responsibility, human rights, rule of law, etc.
Yet both you and GrussGott repeated something that, while sometimes true, is not exclusively true...
You say 'liberals' "only want stuff without calculating the profit too often" and GG said (I think) that Democrats are the party of wealth destruction.
I try not to be partisan, and I don't think either of you are partisan (or perhaps your partisanship aligns with my own...), but those statements reflect partisan propaganda more than reality.
I think you would agree that the other statements you make reflect the conclusion that the more productive citizens there are in a society compared to non-productive the better off the society.
Therefore, 'programs' that spend societal resources to that end might actually be cost-effective, especially in the longer run. For example, there is a pretty straight line between spending on Headstart and spending on juvenile detention and prison 15-20 years down the line.
Other forms of assistance -- some effective, some not (different discussion) -- can be viewed in the same way, leading to your goal "...move up to the next bracket and for them to pay more taxes instead of being at risk of being a part of our social security system". I'm all for that -- that is 99% of the reason I frequently support such programs..
Yet 'conservatives' (that term again, sorry) will characterize such spending as woolly-headed handouts that create dependence or permit fraud -- i.e. 'welfare queens'. While again, sometimes true, not true generally, and the babies all get thrown out with the bathwater.
But this is back to the primary point -- what does 'conservative' even mean? -- which recalls the last half of your posting. At this point it seems to include numerous negative philosophical conclusions that lead to primary focus on abortion, lbgtq, bathrooms, guns guns guns (for protection), god & country, etc. Lots of fear there, which I think isn't/shouldn't be part of the calculus of budgets, etc.
Perhaps what GG is really describing is 'Liberal' with big-L (sounds oddly like a JK song my kids used to play), and signaling a return to public sphere / private sphere distinctions so we can exercise a bit more pragmatism and less partisanship -- probably putting words in his mouth.
Not sure if I'm making sense here -- got no sleep last night, having terribly allergies this morning, worried sick that my car is non-CP (lol) but at least no one can buy an F80 in SSII anymore...
Oh, and by the bye, I'm a devout capitalist who suffered massive wealth destruction (temporary thank god) about 10 years ago -- was that all the Democrats fault?
|
Oh screw you hippie, do you know how many times a day I run out of vocabulary?!
You're right of course and that was not my meaning, in our system we have liberal fiscally conservative party too so I basically can just run my mouth here for all I want.