|
| Thread: Liberals vs. Conservatives |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
posted May 14, 2003 06:18 AM |
|
|
Liberals vs. Conservatives
Let's talk politics!
I'll start the convo. What should the government do about the economy? Pay off debt? Cut taxes and spending? Spend more money to help economy through government programs?
My personal thoughts would start from the basics. Cut down federal taxation and allow the local governments and state governments deal with the local problems rather than state problems. The first thing that the government can do is create something called efficiency to stop wasting money. As for education, I find that the federal department of education to be overspent and flat out useless. The state governments, but especially the local governments can much better take care of such a local issue. I agree with President Bush's plan to set standards of students being required to show that they can prove that they learned something through a test or an application of that knowledge. This will be the new way of graduating. Many students can just sit through class do their work and not learn a thing.
If the department of education funds were cut in half, that money could be more well spent for state and local subsidation for building new schools, paying teachers better, which would create a greater supply of teachers. If teachers were paid decent, many people would be more likely to consider that field breeding better teachers for students.
We should have list of people who think take the liberal or conservative points of view on each topic just to see what our community is like politically.
I'm pretty moderate on public education. I think that good funding should be given to school, but on a local level rather than the inefficient federal level. The federal government should collect some of this money, but not waste it on their stupid bureaucracies. Distribute that money to schools that need it most. Give the teachers better pay.
Liberals Conservatives
Education
RedsoxFan3
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
|
posted May 15, 2003 10:54 PM |
|
|
Well, I for one am conservative. We nned to fight the liberal assault on our boarders, language and culture!
____________
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted May 16, 2003 01:06 AM |
|
|
Personally I tend not to fall into either much, I guess I'm more liberal than conservative, but I tend not to be liberal on all things like crime or sentencing in courts for example....
Mostly though I'm liberal, conservative thought is often good, but preserving things for the sheer sake of it can often be insane. I've lost count of the number of pointless things that exist in the UK simply because they are considered "traditional" and have been done that way for centuries beyond there being any point doing them that way....
There's preservation, but there's also redundancy. In things like the armed forces this has often lead in the past to long outdated and useless practices being upheld such as the continued production of battleships in england during WWII (when it was clear the carrier ruled the seas by then) or the use of cavalry in this century on an insane battlefield like Mons in WWI.
Tradition and conservation have their uses, to a point, at some point new ideas and practices are needed and it's quite rare in my country that they come from our conservative party, who's ideas usually involve harking back to the past rather than looking to the future.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted May 17, 2003 04:56 AM |
|
|
Although I do agree with you that their are a number of things that do seem pointless or reduntant, but in trying to avoid redundancy I often find that many liberals forget the things that have worked well in the past. Or taking a program that was developed during the great depression and trying to use it during a thriving economy. I believe that a driving economy such as the United States is still where it is despite the over taxation of the government. And with these bureaucracies that do NOTHING money can be much more well spent if it is merely collected by the or even not at all and let the states take care of more of these problems. States that are having trouble can be assisted by the federal government. But things run much more smoothly at local and state levels than at federal bureaucracies.
Here is an example of how sad federal bureaucracies are.
Let's take the program Welfare. A noble cause. Good intentions correct? I have no problem with it, just the people who abuse it. It is sad that we spend more money to give them the check every month than we do by actually giving them any money at all. Let me ask you this. Let's say that one person get $10,000 a year, now I'm being generous. It's probably much less. How much do you think is spent on the bureaucracy to give that person the $10,000. Well according to Ross Perot, in the elections of 1992, We would save money if we just send them a check at the beginning of every year for $93,000. How would you like to make 93,000 dollars a year? You could pay a person $40,000 dollars a year and to follow the person on welfare around to make sure they aren't scamming you and give the person $20,000. That's just obsurd.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
SirDunco
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted May 21, 2003 07:45 PM |
|
|
Redsoxs, how can you talk about liberals when your american...There aren't any larger Liberal parties in the US...a paradox.
I dislike right-wingers of almost anysort. Especialy the current administration of the US. But currently it seems that there isn't any difference between the left and the right in some countries...
____________
|
|
Khayman
Promising
Famous Hero
Underachiever
|
posted May 21, 2003 08:32 PM |
|
|
How I Wish This Was True...JK!
Quote:
Redsoxs, how can you talk about liberals when your american...There aren't any larger Liberal parties in the US...a paradox.
Perhaps you have a different meaning for the term 'liberal' than I do. I would venture to say that the Democratic Party in the U.S. is predominantly liberals. In my opinion, I would also go out on a limb and say that the Independent or Green Parties are composed primarily of liberals as well. Just take a look at the Americans who post here on HC, and you will realize that not only are there many liberals (I dare not say Democrats), but they greatly outnumber the conservatives (I dare not mention Republicans). Of course, you will always have your liberal conservatives and conservative liberals, but to say that there are no liberal parties in the U.S. just doesn't make sense to me.
____________
"You must gather your party before venturing forth."
|
|
goodpig
Adventuring Hero
The King of Pork!!!
|
|
posted May 21, 2003 10:37 PM |
|
|
I'm with Wolfman as far as my political affiliation...
____________
Qui n'a plus qu'un moment a vivre N'a plus rien a dissimuler.
Atys
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 23, 2003 05:25 AM |
|
|
Interesting posts. PH and Khayman I found your particularly relevent.
One thing I would like to add...in the USA conservativism is not necessarily equated with tradtionalism. As far as social norms coservatives here are typically traditional...but as far as reform (non-tradition) on social programs and fiscal matters the republicans have been leading the way with welfare reform, tax reform, social security reform, military reform, etc.
I find it intersting that what was "progressive" at one point becomes "traditional" later on. The democrats have had many social programs take root in the last 100 years...which now are the more traditional viewpoint...so the republicans are now the ones on the cutting edge...and if republicans maintain their power for a while..then it will be the democrats turn to be "progressive" again.
____________
Humans are gods with anuses -Earnest Becker
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted May 24, 2003 02:36 AM |
|
|
Well I can only speak of my experience of my conservative party. They tend towards right wing answers to everything, like locking up asylum seekers, severe sentencing for criminals etc. They also have a massive tendancy for moralising, almost always accusing the other parties of destroying Britain as we know it and using this rhetoric to fight change they don't support.
As for the whole progression thing, they tend away from it, but their current stances are mostly unpopular, they're about as rabidly anti-euro (currency) and european community in general as it's possible to be whilst still remaining mainstream. They were in power for 18 years from 1979, Thatcher being their main leader. The labour party became progressive and regained power with many "new" ideas.
As for a counter-progressive revolution, at the moment there's no sign of it here, the conservatives are still trying the same policies that proved unpopular when they were kicked out, and their main form of debate at the moment consists more of arguing with anything the government propose and not saying exactly what they would do instead. It seems likely that unless Blair annoys more people by being mad enough to drag Britain into another unpopular war that the conservatives may spend 18 years out of office.....
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
SirDunco
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted June 01, 2003 05:30 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Redsoxs, how can you talk about liberals when your american...There aren't any larger Liberal parties in the US...a paradox.
Perhaps you have a different meaning for the term 'liberal' than I do. I would venture to say that the Democratic Party in the U.S. is predominantly liberals. In my opinion, I would also go out on a limb and say that the Independent or Green Parties are composed primarily of liberals as well. Just take a look at the Americans who post here on HC, and you will realize that not only are there many liberals (I dare not say Democrats), but they greatly outnumber the conservatives (I dare not mention Republicans). Of course, you will always have your liberal conservatives and conservative liberals, but to say that there are no liberal parties in the U.S. just doesn't make sense to me.
For American standart the Democratic party is liberal...but for world standart it is a centrist party.
The truth is that the US has such a weak left is because of tradtion. There has never been a major leftist tradition(the 50's maybee), unlike in Germany or England for example...
P.S. Dargon the us welfare system is suited for the middle classes. Yet it is interesting that a considerable percentage of US citizens, live below the line of poverty(and these are people who have usualy 2 or 3 jobs...)
____________
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
posted June 06, 2003 03:31 AM |
|
|
<~Striving to become the very successful liberal by public entertainment while under going halogenetical euphoria. Yes, I'm bad to an extent, but good too. This world would be pathetic without liberals so I'm going to become a college educated one.
____________
What are you up to
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted June 07, 2003 06:29 PM |
|
|
|
After learning that liberals arent about *liberty, I should make a correction. I dont care much about liberals or conservatives, or democrats & republicans for that matter. I'm down with individual life with peace, freedom and happiness.
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted June 11, 2003 04:59 AM |
|
|
Quote:
After learning that liberals arent about *liberty, I should make a correction. I dont care much about liberals or conservatives, or democrats & republicans for that matter. I'm down with individual life with peace, freedom and happiness.
Congradulations! You're a conservative! We base more things on the individuals success from hard work and freedom.
I'm not a believer in laissez-faire, because it doesn't work. Look at the 1890's and the Populist movement. The government must interfere when the economy is in crisis or when people are taking advantage of others, such as swindlers, cheating in the stock market, requiring people to have car insurance and banks to be FDIC insured. I don't believe in the way the welfare system is run, the way people become dependant on the system, and can't get off it. The way the government wastes money.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted June 14, 2003 12:30 PM |
|
|
Quote
"P.S. Dargon the us welfare system is suited for the middle classes. Yet it is interesting that a considerable percentage of US citizens, live below the line of poverty(and these are people who have usualy 2 or 3 jobs...)
"
I think it might be helpful if you stated facts versus fantasy. The USA has extremely low poverty..and the majority in poverty are NOT working at all...let alone 2-3 jobs...that is a joke.
Moreover...the majority of the people in the USA who qualify under "poverty" have TV's, Microwaves, food, housing, etc....hardly poor by the common understanding.
Most of our poor...are very rich when compared with the rest of the world. I find it funny how people try to distort the reality of what the USA is like. The USA has the HIGHEST standard of living for their citizens in the world...so stick that in your pipe and smoke it
____________
Humans are gods with anuses -Earnest Becker
|
|
Saruman
Famous Hero
On academic leave
|
|
posted June 16, 2003 12:26 AM |
|
|
I'm afraid I don't know much about Americain politics, except from what I hear on the news (Which leeds me to believe that Bush is a moron who is about to follow in this father's footsteps.). If I did know more, I could provide a strong opinion. Would anyone care to fill me in?
____________
Thank god I'm an atheist.
|
|
Aquaman333
Famous Hero
of the seven seas
|
|
posted June 16, 2003 04:53 AM |
|
|
While the nation does need Liberals and Leftists, I think the lefties whine and are too babyish. They always resort to name-calling and protests. "Yes, of course I'll join your cause. Your clogging up the street and making me late for work, I'm having a revelation.!"
____________
"Brian, look! There's a message in my Alphabits! It says,
"OOOOOOO!"."
"Peter, those are Cheerios."-Family Guy
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted June 16, 2003 05:37 AM |
|
|
Quote:
I'm afraid I don't know much about Americain politics, except from what I hear on the news (Which leeds me to believe that Bush is a moron who is about to follow in this father's footsteps.). If I did know more, I could provide a strong opinion. Would anyone care to fill me in?
You obviously don't know how liberal the media is. You must here issues from not just the liberal or as I like to call the "emotional" baises.
Here is where liberals get confused. People think that conservatives have no emotion and are heartless. This is just the liberals name-calling. I am one of the biggest idealists I know, but I don't come up with irrational decisions. They may be radical at times, but still logical. It's just that cause and effect is not based on emotion. It's based on logic. It is this way that one must handle a situation. Let's say for example abortion. This is a very touchy issue. I personally believe that it should be illegal except under certain circumstances. Every women is allowed one and only one abortion. This way we can give everyone their humanity. People make mistakes. But most importantly, babies from raped women can have abortions no matter what.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
Aquaman333
Famous Hero
of the seven seas
|
|
posted June 16, 2003 07:48 AM |
|
|
|
One thing I am happy about in the Liberal v. Conservative issue is that more conservative media is coming in with The Savage Nation and Scarborough Country.
|
|
bort
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Discarded foreskin of morality
|
|
posted June 16, 2003 04:14 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Let's say for example abortion. This is a very touchy issue. I personally believe that it should be illegal except under certain circumstances. Every women is allowed one and only one abortion. This way we can give everyone their humanity. People make mistakes. But most importantly, babies from raped women can have abortions no matter what.
For cryin' out loud, have some moral consistency. If you believe sentient human life begins at conception than how can you allow every woman to have "one and only one" abortion (and I'm sure women everywhere are glad to have one's as magnamonious as you parceling out control of their bodies to them like that)? That would imply that everybody gets to kill one person for free. If you don't believe that a fetus is sentient human life, than how can you justify illegalizing abortion at all? Would it be to penalize women for having sex while letting the guys get off (pun intended) free? You didn't mention if the pregnancy endangers a woman's life, does that count towards her abortion ration?
____________
Drive by posting.
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted June 16, 2003 11:58 PM |
|
|
I don't believe that it is a created at conception, but during beginning of the pregnancy by the parents of the fetus. I am very against abortion, but I also realize that it would be worse to bring an unwanted, abused, unloved child into the world. It is this reason that I think that the mother should have a choice in the matter. Although the man should have a choice as well, but this is not yet possible.
I find it sickening when I hear of stories of how some people have had several abortions. This killing of babies is horrible and I think they should not be able to take any more loss of life. Something must be done to keep them from killing more children. I think that there should be some kind of limit on the number of abortions. And there should be some way of punishing both men and women for this matter. For example, a man who impregnates several different women who have abortions should be punished for their carelessness also. There should be no double standards for this matter. It is so complicated that I don't think that there is a fair way to handle abortion.
I should have explained myself better.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
|
|
