Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Liberal/Conservative/Emotion/Logic argument is tired as hell....not to mention that it's such a silly and gross generalization that i'm surprised that folks advance it anymore.
I get what the OP is trying to say here, but...ehhh
Do you agree that “rugged individualist conservative” and “sheep collectivist liberal” is just a myth?
Here are my arguments:
1. Conservatives need a community/network support to thrive. This is why you meet more conservatives in church, PTA or any other community organization. Liberals, on contrary, prefer worship God (if they have faith) by themselves and avoid church or other gatherings.
2. Even in high school, future conservatives are more likely choose playing team sports when future liberals join art clubs that promote individual expression.
3. Conservatives are more likely to cling to family values and have big families. Liberals even if they have a family, still prefer to have some personal freedom. Conservative woman very likely will put pressure on a guy to marry her, when liberal woman would question if she wants to get married at all.
4. Liberals prefer macro management, when conservatives want to know every detail and micromanage. This is why liberals are OK to pay taxes and let Government to do the rest, when conservatives prefer to control every penny they spend themselves.
5. Libs want Government to maintain safety net in case someone needs it. That way it assures that everyone would get help when needed based on standard criteria without violating person’s privacy. Conservatives, in contrary, prefer charity because it allows them to know who and why is getting their money and deny payment if they feel that than person does not deserve it.
Naturally, conservatives often view individualistic liberals as arrogant, cold and elitist. Liberals see community driven conservatives as being manipulated by churches and other organizations, e.g. “sheep without ability to think independently”.
Obvious, that collectivists conservatives make base of American communities, when individualistic liberals contribute as geniuses, prodigy artists, inventors or (oh, yeah!) outcasts and wackos.
Again, actually READ the post in which I explained the problem. I am not going to repeat myself to save you the trouble of click back a few pages.
You mean the example based on fiction? How about something real? Too uncomfortable to provide one?
Quote:
So how much do you personally help others? You didn't answer the question.
I don't help others. I help myself. Helping others, and especially assigning a quantitative value to it, is something a "conservative" does.
Quote:
Give me a single example of an inefficient government run organization that was reformed to the point where it was performing better than a private counterpart. Just one. Any country, any government, any time period.
Taking care of elderly and the poor. Now show me how private enterprise in a free market would be a better option for these... using the best logic you can claim to be capable of, complete with examples.
Quote:
It was a yes or no question. Right now, are you a college student at a liberal arts school?
The way you dodge questions, you could be a politician.
Yes, I'm a college student at a liberal arts school that was established in person by Karl Marx. Does that help your case?
I heard an interesting young female calling into Medved recently. Her point was essentially that while conservatives tend to rely on logic, liberals tend to 'think' via emotion. Hence in order to win over liberals, conservatives need to learn how to deploy emotion in debates instead of depending so much on logic.
I can come up with a handful of emotional "issues" off the top of my head that conservatives hold near and dear:
WMDs
death panels
contraception
birth certificate
secret muslim
Zimmerman is innocent
I could probably come up with a few more if I thought about it.
Bush's entire presidency was based on one emotion - fear. Fear was used to convince the country to go to the wrong war. Fear was used to allow expansion of the executive power to invade our privacy.
I am not completely drinking the Obama Kool-Aid. But why are conservatives so hung up on the deficit? It didn't bother you when Reagan and Bush senior ran it to the moon. but he came into office during a sh*t storm, and is trying to rescue a collapsing economy.
You mean the example based on fiction? How about something real? Too uncomfortable to provide one?
Based on fiction? How out of touch with the real world are you? Saying things like this are why I am convinced you are a student, or if not, someone who has never had a professional job. Read these links then claim what I am saying is fiction.
I don't help others. I help myself. Helping others, and especially assigning a quantitative value to it, is something a "conservative" does.
This is flat-out one of the most ignorant things I have ever read. First of all, how can I take your views on social welfare seriously if you don't bother to do anything yourself? Talk about hypocritical thinking. Second, measuring your results is the only way to insure you can reproduce them in the future.
Quote:
Taking care of elderly and the poor. Now show me how private enterprise in a free market would be a better option for these... using the best logic you can claim to be capable of, complete with examples.
Let's take social security vs. investing in the stock market.
Suppose you were born in 1960 and averaged $45,000/year over the course of your working life. On the money you paid into social security, you would receive a 2.09% return on your money.
Now suppose you invested in the stock market using the same monetary and time based figures. Over that same time period, that same person would have received an 8.9% return on his money.
Forcing people into social security is forcing retirees to have 4.25x less money every month!
Go ahead, do the math if you don't believe me, but that is one extremely clear example of organizational atrophy by the government causing pain and suffering to individuals. You claimed that assigning quantitative values to helping others is something only a 'conservative' does. In this case, assigning quantitative values shows how one of your precious government welfare systems is causing the average retiree to suffer.
So PLEASE, do the math and try to prove me wrong.
Quote:
Yes, I'm a college student at a liberal arts school that was established in person by Karl Marx. Does that help your case?
If you are actually a college student, that tells me everything I need to know. Get back to me in five years.
Based on fiction? How out of touch with the real world are you? Saying things like this are why I am convinced you are a student, or if not, someone who has never had a professional job. Read these links then claim what I am saying is fiction.
This is flat-out one of the most ignorant things I have ever read. First of all, how can I take your views on social welfare seriously if you don't bother to do anything yourself? Talk about hypocritical thinking. Second, measuring your results is the only way to insure you can reproduce them in the future.
Let's take social security vs. investing in the stock market.
Suppose you were born in 1960 and averaged $45,000/year over the course of your working life. On the money you paid into social security, you would receive a 2.09% return on your money.
Now suppose you invested in the stock market using the same monetary and time based figures. Over that same time period, that same person would have received an 8.9% return on his money.
Forcing people into social security is forcing retirees to have 4.25x less money every month!
Go ahead, do the math if you don't believe me, but that is one extremely clear example of organizational atrophy by the government causing pain and suffering to individuals. You claimed that assigning quantitative values to helping others is something only a 'conservative' does. In this case, assigning quantitative values shows how one of your precious government welfare systems is causing the average retiree to suffer.
So PLEASE, do the math and try to prove me wrong.
If you are actually a college student, that tells me everything I need to know. Get back to me in five years.
Overly emotional, aren't we?
The question was: "You mean the example based on fiction? How about something real? Too uncomfortable to provide one?"
As for social security versus investing in stock market, what percentage of people do you think fully understand the latter? SS does not prevent someone from engaging in stock market. Even this liberal arts student from Karl Marx Institute as you believe to be, can do that, so can you and many others (but not all). But relying on stock market without a social safety net can be a real threat to many people. It is why every developed country in the world strives to have safety nets.
So, where exactly do you see "social programs" being a good thing?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.