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.
Kids are liberal with their parent's money. Once they become adults and accumulate something worth "conserving" they see the light. Liberals have all these ideas but expect other people to pay for them. Conservatives live within their means.
I'm good as saving money too but I still don't consider myself conservative. I don't mind paying taxes or giving money to causes like finding cures for things etc. being conservative means following a set of strict guidelines and I personally think for myself so I don't identify as conservative.
I think we need to make a distinction between social and economic liberals and conservatives.
I personally think that if a person is not socially conservative, they are somewhat uneducated in economics and finance, and if a person is not socially liberal, they are somewhat closed minded and bigoted.
"Anyone who is not a liberal while young has no heart and anyone who is not a conservative when older has no brain"
I disagree with the right-wing misconception of the quote, thinking you become conservative with age and wisdom.
In reality, younger people change the world as they see fit, as you get older, it breaks your heart to see the next generations change the world as they see fit, making you feel like you have no place in it anymore. This causes you to want to preserve some of the ways in which you made the world.
This is what it means, not the silly idea right-wingers have of the quote.
Its a cute and clever statement by a great political mind but it is just a catch phrase. First of all, in the time of Churchill liberal and conservative ideals were much simpler to define.... and he was talking more to the British political system. Americans have bastardized the definitions of "liberal" and "conservative"... it is much more complex than a catch phrase.
That statement says more about charity versus pragmatism. I just think the world is much more complex than putting those two words against each other. We can have charitable conservatives and pragmatic liberals... we can also have selfish liberals and reckless conservatives.
I am sure that I am more Conservative in some ways than I was 10 years ago. This doesn't mean I would vote Republican though. I think that is another misconception about the quote. It is often used by Republicans to imply that something is wrong with you if you are over a certain age and don't vote Republican.
I am sure that I am more Conservative in some ways than I was 10 years ago. This doesn't mean I would vote Republican though. I think that is another misconception about the quote. It is often used by Republicans to imply that something is wrong with you if you are over a certain age and don't vote Republican.
Yep, I know plenty of older people that vote Democrat and no they aren't on welfare. That seems to be an argument of Republicans, that if you're a Democrat, you must be on welfare.
I'm a free thinker and the democratic party lines up more with my intellectual curiosity and willingness to learn and try new things vs the Republicans who seem to despise education and praise the lord with outdated dogma.
Bill Clinton was a Democrat who turned a deficit into a Surplus. that's why I think it is really stupid when people blindly follow parties.
The liberal policies of today are dependent polices. If one gets beyond the rhetoric its clear that liberal polices are failing around the world as it drives only more dependences in individuals and the ones supplying are getting fewer. The world is changing and liberals in America are two decades behind.Even China is switching to a polices of capitalism after decades of socialist failure.Party name really means little is the actual polices that are shifting just as Republican and democrats have shifted many roles since the 30's.All politics starts at local levels to state levels then Federal. Looking at local and state level shifts last mid term we saw the US map turning red like in few times in history driven by the debt of wealth sharing since the mid 60's. Reality and rhetoric are two different things as always.
The liberal policies of today are dependent polices. If one gets beyond the rhetoric its clear that liberal polices are failing around the world as it drives only more dependences in individuals and the ones supplying are getting fewer. The world is changing and liberals in America are two decades behind.Even China is switching to a polices of capitalism after decades of socialist failure.Party name really means little is the actual polices that are shifting just as Republican and democrats have shifted many roles since the 30's.All politics starts at local levels to state levels then Federal. Looking at local and state level shifts last mid term we saw the US map turning red like in few times in history driven by the debt of wealth sharing since the mid 60's. Reality and rhetoric are two different things as always.
China is communist which is not the same as Socialist no matter what you say. Places like Norway and Sweden are not failing at all and have a high quality of life. same with places like Australia and Canada. The Scandinavian countries actually have more freedoms than we do in America. Imagine that.
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.
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.
