Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-29-2014, 03:15 PM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,237,274 times
Reputation: 9845

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Modern-day liberals truly hate capitalism. They despise its ability to reward success and punish failure. They find it detestable that people should be able to accumulate wealth in their own self-interests and pursuits of profit.

They claim to be champions of “social justice,” “equality,” and “fair shares.” However, they base their attacks on the radical idea that we should treat people as individuals, not collective. Equality in all scenarios is achieved only through oppression.

Consequently, Liberals are enemies of freedom, and work in absolute contrast to their name, liberal, which is derived from the Latin word liber, meaning “free.”

Where is the crazy icon when you need it?

Oh yes sure, liberals hate freedom. That makes perfect sense.

.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-29-2014, 03:49 PM
 
Location: San Francisco, CA
15,088 posts, read 13,455,042 times
Reputation: 14266
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
Capitalism sides with the people who work hard and produce, people that make a difference in their lives and to lives around them.

Capitalists don’t see wealth as a cause for jealousy as liberals do. Hate for a certain people or group of people will get you nowhere in life, and if you make them your enemy, you can be certain they will not cooperate.

The liberal case for treatment of the poor and demonization of the rich is not sustainable, nor is it plausible. What must be understood is that capitalism is the true form of progress. This is why liberal-progressivism is oxymoronic and an enormous contradiction.
You seriously need to get out more.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 04:49 PM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,302 posts, read 2,356,621 times
Reputation: 1230
Pure capitalism is simply a true free market, which is: everyone is free to trade with whoever they want with no restrictions. Those involved come to an agreement to trade one thing for another (money, items, labor, whatever).

What most people call capitalism is crony capitalism, where corporations are working with government to get special benefits and protections. This is the type that exists in the US and that most people are complaining about when you hear anti-capitalist arguments.

Communism is on the opposite end, where government runs everything. Individuals have little to no say, but the upside it that they supposedly are taken care of by their leaders who make the decisions for them.

Socialism has many forms/degrees, but the general idea is that everyone must contribute some of what they earn to the government, who will in turn use that money to help whoever is deemed "needy".
================================================== ===========
Personally, I think communism is too controlling and doesn't work. Too much corruption, and there is the danger of sacrificing individuals' rights to benefit the "greater good", which led to a lot of mass murder of citizens in communist countries.

Socialism has its heart in the right place, but I don't think its very effective (or moral, but that's another topic). Instead of having everyone give their money to a middleman (politicians) who then skim some off the top and then decide how to use the rest of it, wouldn't it make more sense for everyone to help people around them themselves? Whatever you paid in taxes...add that to the money you have now. Much easier to help others in need now right? BUT people will say "Well everyone will just keep the money if they arent forced to give it to the poor", to which I would say "Would you do that? Also, if the majority of the country is voting for social programs and electing candidates who want to help the poor, why would you say that nobody wants to help the poor? Over half the population wants the poor to be helped, but without government doing it they would just sit around wishing they could help?" I think it's a lot of wasted time and money using politicians to do what citizens can do quicker and more efficiently.

With true capitalism, you have greater responsibility for your actions, and some people don't like that. The reward is great if you make good decisions, but if you make the wrong decision it could affect the rest of your life negatively. I think that's fair. The safety net is maintaining good relationships so that others will help if you need it. If they don't, you can't force them to give you their money or assistance. Yes, they'd be selfish, terrible, greedy, blah blah...I agree...but that still doesn't mean you can steal their money. I could go on, but I'll stop before I get even more carried away
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 05:03 PM
 
Location: Madison, WI
5,302 posts, read 2,356,621 times
Reputation: 1230
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
Where is the crazy icon when you need it?

Oh yes sure, liberals hate freedom. That makes perfect sense.

.
Obviously liberals don't hate freedom, but I think there are 2 kinds of people...

Some think of freedom as being able to make your own choices, not being forced into doing things by others, and overall just being free from coercion.

Some think of freedom as being free from consequences. For example, if someone goes to college and gets a degree that doesn't have much value to employers, they don't feel very free because they have a ton of debt restricting their actions and they aren't making enough money to live how they want.

Most conservatives are the first type, and liberals are a mix of both I think. The reason conservatives get so upset is that they see the 2nd type as a big issue. You can make whatever bad decisions you want, and the people that made good decisions will be forced to bail them out. That doesn't seem very fair.

I also understand the liberal perspective that some people are just unlucky and some are born into better situations than others. I personally don't think that's a reason to coerce people into helping, but I can understand that line of thinking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 05:29 PM
 
22,923 posts, read 15,497,191 times
Reputation: 16962
Quote:
Originally Posted by petch751 View Post
The fact is I paid a hell of a lot more in taxes than you. Yet get a whole lot less for my dollar than you.
You would not recognize a fact if it hit you upside the ear evidenced by the FACT you know absolutely nothing about my financial status but are prepared to state as fact you pay more for services than I have/do.

You made a bunch of assumptions about my worth versus your worth that would have made Nostradamus proud based on what exactly, I have no idea.

How is it you can jump to conclusions like that and still expect to retain any credibility?

You totally missed the point of living in a societal make-up that pays taxes for everything governed.

If all conservatives think as you do it's no wonder you're relegated to the cheap seats in the rear of the stadium. Don't worry though, Liberals won't leave you behind regardless if the wheels fell off your wagon.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 06:02 PM
 
13,711 posts, read 9,237,274 times
Reputation: 9845
Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
Some think of freedom as being able to make your own choices, not being forced into doing things by others, and overall just being free from coercion.

Most conservatives are the first type, and liberals are a mix of both I think. The reason conservatives get so upset is that they see the 2nd type as a big issue. You can make whatever bad decisions you want, and the people that made good decisions will be forced to bail them out. That doesn't seem very fair.

I also understand the liberal perspective that some people are just unlucky and some are born into better situations than others. I personally don't think that's a reason to coerce people into helping, but I can understand that line of thinking.

That's the problem. Most conservatives (by your admission) thinks of freedom as having the right to do whatever they want to do. Sorry, that's not how freedom works.

"Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought."
Pope John Paul II

Freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought. - Pope John Paul II at BrainyQuote


Quote:
Originally Posted by T0103E View Post
Some think of freedom as being free from consequences. For example, if someone goes to college and gets a degree that doesn't have much value to employers, they don't feel very free because they have a ton of debt restricting their actions and they aren't making enough money to live how they want.
Liberals think freedom is free from consequences?? Which right-wing think tank said this?
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 06:06 PM
 
10,553 posts, read 9,653,382 times
Reputation: 4784
Quote:
Originally Posted by rishi85 View Post
I have been looking for definition all over the internet but it confuses me some more.
From what I understand...communism is where the earnings are shared. So if person A works his derriere off and person B decides to lazy around, they both still get the same amount of money. The money owed to person A is divided. Such is how China and Russia function.

Capitalism is you get what you deserve. Hence capitalist entreprenuers are dime a dozen in the west. You show your talent and you earn a living.

Socialism is...I have no clue. They say Obama is a socialist who will ruin America. What exactly is socialism and how does it differ from the two above.

I am watching the Matt Damon film Elysium which, all pundits are claiming is a socialist agenda ridden work.

In layman's terms....anyone.
Capitalism - money for the few based on labor by the many

Socialism - we all work towards a communal good -- there are no very rich people nor very many poor people

Communism - a failure despite theoretical good intentions
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 07:55 PM
 
5,915 posts, read 4,814,595 times
Reputation: 1398
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRhockeyfan View Post
But how will they produce a baby with no roads or running water provided by the government?
I don't know if you're familiar with the human reproductive system but a human baby can be produced without roads or running water.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 08:16 PM
 
Location: Oceania
8,610 posts, read 7,897,480 times
Reputation: 8318
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRhockeyfan View Post

Capitalism can be unfair and lead to crippling inequality.

Communism can punish success.

Socialism can be inefficient.
When hampered by governmental regulations


Then you have the other two - their definitions can be combined and shared.

But it goes far deeper than these three examples. Dig deeper; it is all on the interweb.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-29-2014, 08:21 PM
 
7,359 posts, read 5,465,596 times
Reputation: 3142
Quote:
Originally Posted by beb0p View Post
Where is the crazy icon when you need it?

Oh yes sure, liberals hate freedom. That makes perfect sense.

.
It does. As a general rule liberals think because they want people to have as much sex as they want with whoever they want with no consequences that this somehow makes them champions of freedom. But that's not the be-all and end-all of freedom, and in nearly every other area of life liberals oppose freedom. They oppose letting people keep the money they earn. They oppose letting business hire and promote who they want. They oppose letting people choose to own firearms. They oppose letting people who don't want to pay for birth control or abortion refrain from paying for it. They oppose letting people make their own healthcare choices. They oppose allowing diversity of thought on college campuses.

The liberal support for freedom is a smokescreen. Liberals support only freedoms which coincide with their own ideology. When it comes to giving freedom to people who don't act or think like the liberals themselves do, then their support for freedom evaporates.

There is a saying "I don't like what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". That is real support for freedom. Liberals do not have that. Supporting homosexual marriage is a joke. Real freedom is supporting people doing things you hate. That's the real test of whether you support freedom. Liberals fail that test.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top