Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    3:52 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Fundamental Differences In Conservative And Liberal Views Back to Topics
SemiSteve
Champion Author
Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Oct 25, 2013 12:24:31 PM

It may be helpful to recognize the fundamental differences in conservative and liberal views.

We seem to be repeatedly revisiting some of the same basic concepts and spending enormous efforts trying to convince the other side why our view makes more sense.

One of them I have noticed is the treatment of the poor.

Conservatives seem to feel that the poor are poor simply because they are lazy. That if they just got determined enough and worked hard enough in the right way that they could climb out of the poverty cycle.

Liberals seem to hold that they are poor because opportunities available to others are not available to them. And they blame the rich policy-makers for systematically doing things that limit these opportunities.

Do you concur?

If so, why do we need to re-argue what has already been covered? This forum is great for learning what makes the 'other side' tick; but would be better if we could move on from the same-old same-old and try to arrive at some solutions or equitable compromise suggestions to send off to our representatives.

What other subjects can you identify the views of both sides on?
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 10:11:56 PM

Made sense to me, SGM. Everything bad comes from liberals. It all started with rock music. Straight from the devil.

***

Oh noooo. Neverrrrr, rjhenn.

***

Yes, life is good, Soylent Grain. But for how many?

sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:24,262
Points:3,207,820
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 5:36:27 PM

I75at7AM had posted it further down in the thread. Now do I have to start doing op. cit. or something?
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 4:38:42 PM

SemiSteve - "it was found that shock value sells"

But that's just capitalism. and we all know that capitalism never has negative effects.
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 4:30:06 PM

Sgm4law - c"here were quotation marks around that statement, you know."

But no attribution.
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:24,262
Points:3,207,820
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 1:54:11 PM

there were quotation marks around that statement, you know.
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 1:19:51 PM

sgm4law - "The left has worked so hard to make us miserable, and has succeeded."

Don't you mean "the right"?
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 1:16:01 PM

I was talking to one of the nurses and she was telling me that her husband liked to watch some RW TV show (I forget which one) )and it seemed to her as if it was designed to make viewers tense, argumentative and hostile. Observing some of the conservatives here, I'd say they probably watch the same show.

[Edited by: rjhenn at 4/1/2015 1:21:04 PM EST]
sgm4law
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:24,262
Points:3,207,820
Joined:Mar 2006
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 11:56:55 AM

"I was watching a movie not long ago, a dated fifties musical short on Turner Classic Movies. It was bursting with life. The kids in the room wanted me to put on something gory, negative, dark, and I said, no, no, watch this, this is great stuff – this is America. And one of the teens replied, no it’s not, that’s from when America was happy. And that struck me. It hit me like a ton of bricks. The left has worked so hard to make us miserable, and has succeeded."

Obviously someone who doesn't have cable tv. All the moronic light-hearted programming for kids arises from liberal tv programmers. Nickolodeon, Disney, etc.

Don't forget movies like Frozen.

I guess it all boils down to people believing what they want to do, and ignoring any facts that are contrary to their position.
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,648
Points:29,440
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 11:47:32 AM

"Or they don't do business with you because you're projecting your behavior onto them. As you keep demonstrating here. "

Then everyone is in agreement. Life is good.
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 11:24:55 AM

SoylentGrain - ""If you don't, then you are dismissed, downplayed, dehumanized, pushed away, thought of as stupid, ridiculed, rejected, insulted, not listened to, talked about, etc."

No, I just don't do business with them."

Or they don't do business with you because you're projecting your behavior onto them. As you keep demonstrating here.



[Edited by: rjhenn at 4/1/2015 11:26:24 AM EST]
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,648
Points:29,440
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 10:27:15 AM

"One thing I have seen in more than one person of strong political conviction is this pompous belief that they are absolutely correct; coupled with an expectation that others, if they are sensible, should naturally align their views with the person. As if there can only be one absolutely correct view, they have it, and if you are smart, then you do to."

These are the people I generally do business with.

"If you don't, then you are dismissed, downplayed, dehumanized, pushed away, thought of as stupid, ridiculed, rejected, insulted, not listened to, talked about, etc."

No, I just don't do business with them.

"They pretend to share views with the strong-minded one, but deep down, they believe otherwise. "

I, especially, don't conduct business with people who think they can BS others. If a person doesn't have the courage to tell you what they think, there's an honesty and character issue at play. This is really easy to spot.

SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Apr 1, 2015 7:17:25 AM

I do business with, and associate with, people on both sides of the political center. People are individuals. Each is unique.

One thing I have seen in more than one person of strong political conviction is this pompous belief that they are absolutely correct; coupled with an expectation that others, if they are sensible, should naturally align their views with the person. As if there can only be one absolutely correct view, they have it, and if you are smart, then you do to.

If you don't, then you are dismissed, downplayed, dehumanized, pushed away, thought of as stupid, ridiculed, rejected, insulted, not listened to, talked about, etc.

Others, with a wider range of acceptance, but not wanting to feel the wrath and scorn of such strong-minded individuals, may 'play along' with them simply to avoid confrontation or rejection. They pretend to share views with the strong-minded one, but deep down, they believe otherwise. The strong-willed person believes everyone in their 'circle' is of a like mind with them, but that may not be the actual case. Although they never really know.
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,648
Points:29,440
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2015 6:58:05 PM

"Where do you see any conservatives or liberals,for that matter,with either common sense or creativity? "

Almost every creative person with common sense I do business with or are friends are conservative. Don't really have any liberal friends or business associates to make a comparison to.
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2015 6:44:02 PM

Oh, I think plenty of that exists on both sides of the political spectrum to some degree. It is simply clouded by opinion more or less depending on how far away from the center.
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2015 3:11:18 PM

SoylentGrain - "the part that relates to common sense and creativity."

Where do you see any conservatives or liberals,for that matter,with either common sense or creativity? Neither is usually something you find in dogmatic extremists.
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,648
Points:29,440
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2015 12:54:07 PM

The amygdala also performs a primary role in the processing of memory and decision-making. That would be the part that relates to common sense and creativity.

Back to my original analogy: it does little good if you can name every tree in the forest if you get lost in the woods during the process.
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2015 12:16:45 PM

Makes sense Marty. Conservatives seem to have a huge weakness for conspiracy theories.
SoylentGrain
Champion Author Illinois

Posts:1,648
Points:29,440
Joined:Nov 2012
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2015 12:04:46 PM

"The amygdala is an almond-shaped structure deep in the brain that is active during states of fear and anxiety. Liberals had more gray matter at least in the anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain that helps people cope with complexity."

Another tak on the finding: the peanut brained conservatives recognize the consequences of getting lost in the woods and the big brain liberals can't see the forest for the trees.
MiddletownMarty
Champion Author Connecticut

Posts:23,923
Points:341,485
Joined:Jul 2008
Message Posted: Mar 23, 2015 10:54:30 AM

Conservatives Big on Fear, Brain Study Finds


"Peering inside the brain with MRI scans, researchers at University College London found that self-described conservative students had a larger amygdala (link is external) than liberals. The amygdala is an almond-shaped structure deep in the brain that is active during states of fear and anxiety. Liberals had more gray matter at least in the anterior cingulate cortex, a region of the brain that helps people cope with complexity."
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2015 6:22:00 PM

"Be your own harshest critic. I say the same things about my own ideas."

You don't have ideas.

All you do is cut down others.

You may think you have ideas but if you don't tell anybody it is nothing but a whim.

***

I-75, you think the unhappiness in America is caused by liberals????????

Why not? You guys blame everything else bad on us.

Surprised you are not hanging this one on Obama.

Hollywood produces what sells. Movies and TV were in their infancy when I Love Lucy and Wizard Of Oz were produced. After we got tired of laugh tracks and Opey grew up it was found that shock value sells. (originated by Hitchcock)

So a few Friday the Thirteenth's and Texas Chainsaw's later we are in the gutter.

But at least some corporations are making a lot of money for their few pampered executives.

btw, There are a lot of conservatives in Hollywood.

If you don't believe me just ask yourself.

Did I fire 5 or 6 shots?

I really can't remember.

So just go ahead.

Make my day.
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:75,658
Points:3,250,295
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2015 12:49:00 PM

This next piece of commentary is about the newly adult generation, and its seemingly dark outlook on life, and life in America.

It hit me like a ton of bricks. The left has worked so hard to make us miserable, and has succeeded.

"I was watching a movie not long ago, a dated fifties musical short on Turner Classic Movies. It was bursting with life. The kids in the room wanted me to put on something gory, negative, dark, and I said, no, no, watch this, this is great stuff – this is America. And one of the teens replied, no it’s not, that’s from when America was happy. And that struck me. It hit me like a ton of bricks. The left has worked so hard to make us miserable, and has succeeded."

"If you had to boil the culture down to its essential oils, it would be last Sunday’s Oscars – oh, how that once mighty American art genre has fallen.
American traitor Edward Snowden got an Oscar; American hero Chris Kyle got the middle finger. Even the traitorous far-left journalist Glenn Greenwald got an Oscars shout-out. Of course Hollywood would reward vicious traitors. There was no way the Hollywood establishment was going to give an Oscar to Clint Eastwood after he so delightfully skewered Obama’s empty chair. And their disdain for Americanism and the military is infused in everything they churn out."

Strong stuff. Anyone here dare to refute what is openly apparent to some?
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,971
Points:1,643,335
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2015 9:04:37 AM

There is a difference in allot of people working on a solution then having their solution rammed down our throats
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:32,364
Points:3,613,620
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 27, 2015 12:00:15 AM

SemiSteve, our resident and self-proclaimed idea man said: "AC-302, No huge idea is entirely envisioned in every detail from the start."

--Didn't say that either. Rome wasn't built in a day, and neither will your poor-farm idea. But my point is that if some guy sitting in his shorts typing on a laptop can come up with these VERY OBVIOUS questions, then that's a problem for your idea. All I'm saying is don't come up with fool "polyana" ideas, then tout how they're going to solve the nation's problems.. then get PO'd when others say to you: "Well, have you thought about..X...?"

Be your own harshest critic. I say the same things about my own ideas. If I see the obvious holes, I point them out. And more than once I've said: "I haven't got a solution" or "I don't know what the right answer is.." There's nothing wrong with saying you don't know, when you don't, and I'd encourage everyone to do it more often than trying to BS one's way through.
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:75,658
Points:3,250,295
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Feb 26, 2015 12:38:35 PM

Popcorn, while your modern story is highly accurate and very entertaining, you must be flailed for giving spiders a bad name!

This next article is about the Republican candidate for 2016 race, but it has a large measure of measurement of the conservative movement today.
Sorry if it seems one-sided. I will quote the choice passages.

America's Future Depends upon Which Republican Wins

"But there’s tension in the Republican alliance, primarily because being pro-business and pro-free markets are not the same thing.
Many Republicans -- establishment, big-government Republicans -- view the interests of America’s biggest businesses as America’s interest..."

"Most noticeably, since 2009, at least, the establishment side of the GOP coalition -- the pro-business, big government side -- has butted heads with free market, limited-government conservatives."

"...a significant part of the GOP is very comfortable with current spending practices, debt accumulation, pork and market-distorting preferential regulations, cronyism, farm and other subsidies, tax loopholes and federal “insurance” such as “too big to fail.”"

"Conservatives understand how the government distorts free markets at taxpayer expense and want to stimulate economic growth by cleaning up America’s fiscal, tax and regulatory messes."

"U.S. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) has correctly observed: "Americans intuitively understand that crony capitalism is not a form of private enterprise, it's a form of public corruption."

"Because the economy has been anemic and middle-class income is suffering, the party and the nation have reached inflection points."

"Today, pro-business and pro-market Republicans disagree, not just on tax, regulatory and spending reform, but on immigration and income gaps."

Conservatives are not in charge of the Republican Party today, despite what you may read and hear (around this forum). If a true conservative can manage to get the Republican nomination, it would be an uphill battle for that person to get elected President, and an ongoing battle with Congress and the Bureaucracy to effect any real changes.
PopcornPirate
Champion Author New Jersey

Posts:5,971
Points:1,643,335
Joined:Nov 2006
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 9:48:06 AM

Steve
Most topics you are very Liberal on but this topic of the poor. You are SPOT ON.
Some do not deserve help
It is the old story of the Ant & the Grasshopper
ORIGINAL VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the ant is warm and well fed.

The grasshopper has no food or shelter, so he dies out in the cold.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be responsible for yourself!

************************************************************
MODERN VERSION:
The ant works hard in the withering heat all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter.

The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away.

Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while others are cold and starving. CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast.

How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears on Oprah with the grasshopper, and everybody cries when they sing, "It's Not Easy Being Green."

Jesse Jackson stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the group singing, "We shall overcome." Jesse then has the group kneel down to pray to God for the grasshopper's sake.

Nancy Pelosi & John Kerry exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share.

Finally, the EEOC drafts the Economic Equity and Anti-Grasshopper Act retroactive to the beginning of the summer. The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the government.

Hillary gets her old law firm to represent the grasshopper in a defamation suit against the ant, and the case is tried before a panel of federal judges that Bill Clinton appointed from a list of single-parent welfare recipients.

The ant loses the case.

The story ends as we see the grasshopper finishing up the last bits of the ant's food while the government house he is in, which just happens to be the ant's old house, crumbles around him because he doesn't maintain it.

The ant has disappeared in the snow. The grasshopper is found dead in a drug related incident and the house, now abandoned , is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the once peaceful neighborhood.

MORAL OF THE STORY: Be careful how you vote.
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,974
Points:157,015
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 8:16:48 AM


"Steve, to help the poor and needy is a noble and worthy cause. But not all poor and needy deserve our assistance."

Finally the point is being understood, Steve wants to help those that need it and devise a plan to stop the multigenerational recipients from being just that.

Who do dose it start with all that are being helped right now.

Just because two people come from a different political spectrum dose not mean they disagree on an end result.

[Edited by: streetrider at 2/25/2015 8:17:37 AM EST]
BigJake
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:7,307
Points:1,915,805
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Feb 25, 2015 8:00:37 AM

Steve, to help the poor and needy is a noble and worthy cause. But not all poor and needy deserve our assistance.

Some are interested in getting everything they can without working for it nor earning it - they want it handed to them. They are fully capable of earning more than they have but they have chosen not to.

And there are others that are just too dumb to help. They consistently have made bad life decisions (skipping school instead of going to school, hanging with their buds drinking alcohol and doing illegal drugs instead of getting and working a job) and now are incapable of being anything more than an anchor to society.

If you want bi-partisan support, then you need to identify those that are worth helping because many of the poor do not deserve it.
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2015 8:58:38 AM

The ones who don't have all those things and the taxpayers who are supporting them and are indirectly paying for some of those things by bankrolling the government assistance which makes them possible.
BigJake
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:7,307
Points:1,915,805
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Feb 24, 2015 8:17:57 AM

Steve, if Cirdan's post is correct, who are you trying to help?
Cirdan
Champion Author Nevada

Posts:2,710
Points:143,525
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2015 11:48:45 PM

Kind of depends on how you define "poverty." Found an article written by a self-described Columbia educated liberal Democratic, New Yorker, and Jew:

"According to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Residential Energy Consumption Survey for 2005 (the last year I could find in detail — but it doesn’t matter what year, because those who say that poverty causes crime have said it for a hundred years and continue to say it), among all poor households:

Over 99 percent have a refrigerator, television, and stove or oven. Eighty-one percent have a microwave; 75 percent have air conditioning; 67 percent have a second TV; 64 percent have a clothes washer; 38 percent have a personal computer.

As for homelessness, one-half of 1 percent living under the poverty line have lost their homes and live in shelters.

Seventy-five percent of the poor have a car or truck. Only 10 percent live in mobile homes or trailers, half live in detached single-family houses or townhouses, and 40 percent live in apartments. Forty-two percent of all poor households own their home, the average of which is a three-bedroom house with one and a half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

According to a recent Census Bureau report, 80.9 percent of households below the poverty level have cell phones."

Original article

[Edited by: Cirdan at 2/23/2015 11:51:12 PM EST]
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2015 3:49:07 PM

AC-302, No huge idea is entirely envisioned in every detail from the start. We didn't begin with the modern cars we have today. We began with a chassis, an engine, a seat and a way to steer. As these contraptions were tried out, innovations improved them.

And so it could be with my idea.

It is unclear to me what you mean by 'put it out there'.

Would that mean communicating the idea here in a discussion forum where it might get brainstormed and improved a bit or would that mean going directly to a representative and pushing for government to jump in pronto?

I have done the former but not the latter.

So I have an idea on how to address poverty. I brought it to a group of people who like to discuss politics. (but sadly some of them only want to argue rather than actually try to solve problems) It helps me to hear impressions of it and possible ideas for improvement. That way the idea can be molded into something that has already taken some possible problems into account.

Then maybe it will be ready to 'put out there' for serious consideration by the powers that be.

OK, so how would the safety of women and children be assured?

How about seperate dorm areas?

"... what is the incentive for someone to move on?" [and out of the facility]

Well, first of all, any private rooms would be small. Those who have qualified for a private room would probably be working outside jobs and paying rent to the facility. They would also be required to do chores at the facility. There would be no private bathrooms. Residents would not find this to be an idyllic life. Also, they would be pressured to keep moving up the economic ladder, the goal being to earn enough so that they could afford their own place. Moving out of the facility and into their own place would get them more space, private bathrooms, fewer rules, etc.
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 23, 2015 12:52:26 AM

AC-302 - "--But again, how do you guarantee their safety, or the safety of women and children from those who would do them harm?"

Can anyone do that now?
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:32,364
Points:3,613,620
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2015 6:21:12 PM

Streetrider - I agree that it needs to be privatized. I think it's the only way to get efficiency into the system.

SemiSteve said: "They start out sleeping on a cot in a large nonprivate room with lots of cots. As they pitch in on facility maintenance, cleaning and cooking chores they have a chance to work their way up to a shared and eventually a private room."

--But again, how do you guarantee their safety, or the safety of women and children from those who would do them harm? You have some big ideas, and i applaud that. But you must not leave it to others to pick holes in them. You should look for the holes in your own ideas, and figure out how to plug them, or at least acknowledge that you don't have that solution BEFORE you put something like that out there.

Again, if you have your collective, then what is the incentive for someone to move on? Here, now, what if 2 unmarried residents have relations, and the girl gets pregnant? Then what? Is the kid taken away from them?

There's lots of things to think about in this circumstance. In many ways, your idea, in this iteration, sounds a little like an Israeli kibbutz, but one where the government "owns" it, not the people. Key difference in the meaning of success.
streetrider
Champion Author Gary

Posts:10,974
Points:157,015
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2015 10:53:32 AM

Steve

We kind of think alike on this. Many tax payers are totally fed up with multi generational welfare. It will continue to grow unless we change.

We both believe there are people that need help, others need shown the way.

I think the only way to change the current system is to privitise it.

This way you get lobbyist fighting to get it done.

However, I do disagree with your method if motivating to better private accommodations they need to be private from the start.

If I had my way we would keep two systems going, all those that fall into multigenerational welfare folks would be the first to be given a chance, (made to), optional to the homeless to go live in the new self sufficient community.

Without getting into details about housing etc. They would be involved in building the buildings.

Yes all would participate in working learning skills, schooling and work ethics, learn right from wrong etc.

They would end up being a self sufficient community.

Instead of paying people to sit around creating trouble and more welfare babies.

Are there not many self sufficient communities within in our country now?

They don't rely on outside help. I can think of one close by here, the Amish.

Some will eventually leave with skills and a work ethic.

Our cost is to get them to the point of self reliance.

Which can be much cheaper than what we are giving out now.

There is a need to help establish these type of communities otherwise our burden continues to increase.

Just my two cents





[Edited by: streetrider at 2/21/2015 10:59:37 AM EST]
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2015 9:04:59 AM

Picture this. The dole is phased out as these facilities are being built. Eventually the dole is essentially cut off with the exception of those who are truly physically or mentally incapable of work.

Now slackers have a choice. They can become street people; or try to fit in at one of the centers, something that has to be earned. They start out sleeping on a cot in a large nonprivate room with lots of cots. As they pitch in on facility maintenance, cleaning and cooking chores they have a chance to work their way up to a shared and eventually a private room.

If they don't work hard they don't move up.

Typically the ones with the private rooms also have outside jobs, are paying some rent to the facility, and have the fewest chores.

[Edited by: SemiSteve at 2/21/2015 9:12:36 AM EST]
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:26,253
Points:3,981,240
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2015 9:04:31 AM

Does your political view point determine the vehicle you buy?

Compare this map to a red/blue state map.
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:26,253
Points:3,981,240
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2015 8:53:04 AM

"And at some point, you can expect lawsuits about discrimination (age, race, sex, etc.)."

Farming is one of the ten most dangerous occupations in the US. It has a fatality rate of 20.2 per 100,000 workers (source: cdc.gov).
BigJake
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:7,307
Points:1,915,805
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Feb 21, 2015 8:32:22 AM

Steve, I did not say that they refused to work - they are working but barely. And when you insist that they work harder, they claim you are expecting too much, you are being unfair and unreasonable.

And at some point, you can expect lawsuits about discrimination (age, race, sex, etc.). All of this while they are at your pseudo-business/community and being supported by taxpayers.

Your idea is good in an ideal world but we do not live in that world. In this world, many of these people work hard at doing nothing and contributing nothing and will continue to do so. And your vision will not change this.
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 6:45:25 PM

It would only have farming as one of the choices of work if it was rural or on a large enough property to do that.

Residents who refuse to work are thrown out.

The taxpayers support the facilities.

Taxes could be reduced because the dole would be ended; and all the money currently going into the dole would saved, leaving plenty to run the facilities and have savings left over to reduce the deficit, the debt, and eventually taxes.

[Edited by: SemiSteve at 2/20/2015 6:46:49 PM EST]
BigJake
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:7,307
Points:1,915,805
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 6:20:45 PM

rj,

1) What happens when the residents of the poor farm, or whatever other pseudo-business/community you are creating, do what they are doing now - relying on others to do the work resulting in the necessary work not getting done?

2) Who supports them until they become profitable? Also, (my follow-up question) why should they become profitable since they already are receiving support?

3) Who is putting up the capital for this pseudo-business/community? Also, (again my follow-up question) is there return on investment to the original backers of this pseudo-business/community?

How is that for starters?

Just because I haven't been posting does not mean I haven't been following alone (SemiSteve likes to think of himself as a moderate but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure out he is a liberal in a tax-n-spend some-more disguise.
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:26,253
Points:3,981,240
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 5:33:21 PM

Cons eat libs for breakfast {:>)
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 4:19:42 PM

BigJake - "AC's questions do need to be addressed. What does happen in those cases."

What cases?

Please be sure that you know what the original proposal was before answering.
BigJake
Champion Author Minnesota

Posts:7,307
Points:1,915,805
Joined:Jul 2001
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 1:00:57 PM

AC's questions do need to be addressed. What does happen in those cases.
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 20, 2015 12:39:10 PM

AC-302 - "--You picked a solution that ends up as a socialist collective. OK. let's say we do set up a "poor farm"."

That, and the rest of your post, shows that you didn't even read Steve's idea. You just fixated on the word "farm" and built your own delusion off of that.
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:32,364
Points:3,613,620
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 11:23:49 PM

SemiSteve said; "The thing that baffles me, rjhenn, is that when I switched my view on the form that government assistance should take a few years ago I expected to see a lot of support from conservatives for ending the dole."

--You picked a solution that ends up as a socialist collective. OK. let's say we do set up a "poor farm". 1) If the residents refuse to actually work and can't raise any food, and don't really give a rip, then what? Are you willing to let them starve, or would you then give them food?

2) If it takes a year to reap a crop, then what? Are you going to support them for that amount of time?

3) What about the modern farming tools? Are you going to expend, say $450K on a new combine for them, and another $100K for a tractor? Or are you expecting them to basically have small gardens and do all work by hand?

4) How are you going to guarantee the safety of women and children on the farm?

5) How are you going to prevent people from growing "weed" or even opium? (coca won't grow in most places in the US, so not a problem there)

There are a lot of other problems with your poor farm idea.

However, I'm more in favor of some kind of job retraining for those who need it. This might come with some support as well. After this, they must go into the service, or get a skill that leads to a job - then get a job. If we cut off welfare after 2 years, then that will force people to go look for work - which ought to be the end game. (getting people to stop laying about on the dole, and getting them and their offspring to be productive, constructive, tax paying citizens)
e_jeepin
Champion Author Michigan

Posts:4,958
Points:143,690
Joined:May 2007
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 12:38:27 PM

" But with or without my plan they still are afraid to come out and say 'cut 'em all off!' "

Um, why would anybody propose to just cut em all off? Why are you demanding we come out and say this?

The conservative position on this issue is crystal clear -- regardless of what you claim.

A safety net is not unreasonable not is ANYBODY against it. Nobody proposes eliminating it. However, what we have today is a fishing expedition -- bait and switch -- vote this way and get something (entitlement bribery).

Vote your check, vote Democrat, and vote often.

Agreed. teach a man to fish -- but we disagree what you consider teaching (or fishing for that matter)

SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 12:10:36 PM

The thing that baffles me, rjhenn, is that when I switched my view on the form that government assistance should take a few years ago I expected to see a lot of support from conservatives for ending the dole.

Surprisingly that is not the case.

Despite how much they rail against it when asked point blank if it should be abolished they quickly change the subject and avoid answering.

I have proposed many times what I feel might be a better and more effective approach to ending poverty but get few takers. My plan is based on 'teaching a man to fish' instead of 'giving him a fish' but when it comes right down to it most conservatives are quite reluctant to support a plan which attempts to do exactly that.

But with or without my plan they still are afraid to come out and say 'cut 'em all off!'

Perplexing. Do they want to support the needy or not?

I am getting the idea that they just really don't care what happens to people and simply prefer to believe that 'the market will eventually correct this' or 'it will all work out if we just get government out of the way'.

At which point I tend to point at places where there is little or no government involvement in the situation (like Somalia) and what really happens when there is not enough government oversight is that thugs rule.

And that seems to be the essence of conservative thought. 'Let the strong prevail and the rest be fodder for them.'

Which is, of course, the epitome of Koch brothers' philosophy.

[Edited by: SemiSteve at 2/19/2015 12:12:58 PM EST]
rjhenn
Champion Author Des Moines

Posts:29,800
Points:2,964,380
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 11:20:30 AM

Cirdan - "Biased, simplistic, and wrong."

So, just like many of posts from self-described conservatives?

"There's a difference between a hand up and a hand out. Liberals simply refuse to believe that if the Government hands out money people will line up to take it, whether they need it or not."

The problem with that evaluation is that too many conservatives seem to be against a hand up as well as a hand out. It should be every man for himself; greed is good; worship the rich, for they are the source of all that is good.

The fact that a healthy economy depends on the wealth being spread out (meaning well-paid workers, not the typical conservative myth of "the Government hands out money") escapes them completely.
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 7:06:30 AM

Does that mean you would favor ending the dole, Cirdan?
Cirdan
Champion Author Nevada

Posts:2,710
Points:143,525
Joined:May 2006
Message Posted: Feb 19, 2015 12:50:16 AM

Biased, simplistic, and wrong.

There's a difference between a hand up and a hand out. Liberals simply refuse to believe that if the Government hands out money people will line up to take it, whether they need it or not.
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:20,578
Points:478,585
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 18, 2015 1:41:43 PM

Liberals feel that the system produces poverty because:

1. The rich have squeezed the job market so that too few jobs are available and they don't pay enough.

2. Racial, gender and sexual orientation discrimination.

3. The schools are bad.

4. Poor neighborhoods are plagued with gangs, drugs and violence.

5. Non-nutritious foods in poor areas. Food deserts make it hard to learn and excel.

6. Money pressures and food stamp requirements force parents to be seperate and kids to be raised by singles, often placed in day-care or in front of a TV instead of having quality time with parents.

Conservatives feel that the poor are just lazy; and don't want to work. Or they just make bad choices. Or they don't want to do what it takes to get a good job. Coming from a rough neighborhood is no excuse for getting into trouble and having a criminal record (which precludes advancement.) The poor simply make bad choices early in life which haunt them forever (such as not striving in school, getting sucked into gangs, or getting pregnant, or simply not realizing that they should leave poor areas and set out on their own, clean themselves up and knock on doors until they find good work.)

Or perhaps they don't manage meager assets well, don't save, or overspend on niceties, go into debt for frills, all of which ensure they will never build wealth and are always one job loss away from financial ruin.

Liberals think the government can help reduce poverty; conservatives think there is nothing which can be done; and if the government tries to help it only makes the problem worse.
Post a reply Back to Topics