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.
How is giving farmers and coal miners BILLIONS not picking winners and losers???
I’d like to see you try to live without food and electricity. Go ahead, live in a commune somewhere in the woods without farming or electricity. It can be done...miserably. Put your money where your mouth is.
I’d like to see you try to live without food and electricity. Go ahead, live in a commune somewhere in the woods without farming or electricity. It can be done...miserably. Put your money where your mouth is.
Who says I have to? We have hydro power ten minutes from the metro at Snoqualmie Falls and we can grow food right here. Giving billions to farmers while they still charge for food makes no sense. We could also import more food the way Costco sells produce from Central and South America. Boom, done. Farmers and coal miners can go get jobs and we can use those billions toward paying down the debt. Remember, the $10 billion to coal miners is pension and free health care money because their PRIVATE pension failed. Somehow, for no logical reason, we are now paying for a private pension for them and they will still collect Social Security on top of that.
Let's analyze this and see if he's compassionate, or just wants to be the one who gets to aim tyranny at specific targets:
Quote:
I believe in full LGBTQ rights.
Does this mean actual equality, as in the same NEGATIVE right to not be interfered with, or is positive non-rights like special quotas, named entitlements, and/or government mandated rules on individuals and businesses that remove both freedom of speech and association in the name of political optics? If it's negative rights t not be interfered with and that's it, then count me in. If it is government force applied to everyone to force a cultural narrative, then tyranny, thy name is...
Quote:
I believe we should protect the planet.
Does this mean via your individual actions, or does it mean forcing others to act as you wish? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
Quote:
I believe everyone deserves healthcare.
Does this mean you wish to be a health care provider who ensures this with your own actions, or does it mean you want government to use its monopoly on force and violence to take from others by force to fund it? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
Quote:
I believe all religions are equally valid.
Does that go for radical Islam that dictates stoning women who get raped for the crime of adultery? And by valid, is that a veiled way of saying you think them all equally ridiculous? Just curious if this is compassion and tolerance, or just implied insult.
Quote:
I believe the world is bigger than America.
Anyone with a brain understands this implicitly, and it's insulting to think it's a unique position of only the tolerant Left.
Quote:
I believe to be “pro-life,” means to treasure all of it.
Does this mean the unborn life as well, or just life post-birth canal exit?
Quote:
I believe whiteness isn’t superior and it is not the baseline of humanity.
Everyone outside the couple hundred or so knuckleheads in the various Aryan knockoff cults agrees. Not a unique position of the Left, regardless of what you have been conditioned to think about the Right. In fact, the Right would argue more in favor of that because of their opposition to Affirmative Action and the soft bigotry of low expectations. But that is a quibble for a whole other discussion.
Quote:
I believe we are all one interdependent community.
Does this mean you believe in volunteering your own time, effort and material to the community, or are you advocating government making people do so? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
Quote:
I believe people and places are made better by diversity.
Diversity of thought, ideology, religion, culture and economic class...or just race? Define diversity, and then explain how campus speech codes that classify almost all non-liberal speech as hate crimes fit into that diversity model.
Quote:
I believe people shouldn’t be forced to abide by anyone else’s religion.
So does the 1st Amendment, but it goes further and says that nobody should stopped from having their own religion either. Freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof...and what not.
Quote:
I believe non-American human beings have as much value as American ones.
Again, so do most Americans. Not a unique position of the Left.
Quote:
I believe generosity is greater than greed, compassion better than contempt, and kindness superior to derision.
So does virtually every person on Earth, as well as every religion. But by generosity, do you mean you freely giving of your time, money and effort, or do you mean having government force others to do so as well? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is... Same question and answer for compassion and kindness. If you choose that, good for you. If you try to choose it for anyone else, tyranny, thy name is....
Quote:
I believe there is enough in this world for everyone: enough food, enough money, enough room, enough care—if we unleash our creativity and unclench our fists.
Does this mean you are volunteering to give of your time, money and effort freely, or are you advocating government forcing this equal distribution of stuff? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
See, it's real easy to be "compassionate" when the methodology is "have government force people to act as I wish." It stops being compassion and becomes tyranny, but it is easy. It's harder to simply act as an individual, were you quit whining and demanding of others, roll up your sleeves and just get stuff done. So I would ask the author the above questions related to his various noble, awesome, super duper tolerant stances. Is he speaking for what he would do of his own volition, or what he would have government foce others to do based on his world view?
Let's analyze this and see if he's compassionate, or just wants to be the one who gets to aim tyranny at specific targets:
Does this mean actual equality, as in the same NEGATIVE right to not be interfered with, or is positive non-rights like special quotas, named entitlements, and/or government mandated rules on individuals and businesses that remove both freedom of speech and association in the name of political optics? If it's negative rights t not be interfered with and that's it, then count me in. If it is government force applied to everyone to force a cultural narrative, then tyranny, thy name is...
Does this mean via your individual actions, or does it mean forcing others to act as you wish? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
Does this mean you wish to be a health care provider who ensures this with your own actions, or does it mean you want government to use its monopoly on force and violence to take from others by force to fund it? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
Does that go for radical Islam that dictates stoning women who get raped for the crime of adultery? And by valid, is that a veiled way of saying you think them all equally ridiculous? Just curious if this is compassion and tolerance, or just implied insult.
Anyone with a brain understands this implicitly, and it's insulting to think it's a unique position of only the tolerant Left.
Does this mean the unborn life as well, or just life post-birth canal exit?
Everyone outside the couple hundred or so knuckleheads in the various Aryan knockoff cults agrees. Not a unique position of the Left, regardless of what you have been conditioned to think about the Right. In fact, the Right would argue more in favor of that because of their opposition to Affirmative Action and the soft bigotry of low expectations. But that is a quibble for a whole other discussion.
Does this mean you believe in volunteering your own time, effort and material to the community, or are you advocating government making people do so? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
Diversity of thought, ideology, religion, culture and economic class...or just race? Define diversity, and then explain how campus speech codes that classify almost all non-liberal speech as hate crimes fit into that diversity model.
So does the 1st Amendment, but it goes further and says that nobody should stopped from having their own religion either. Freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof...and what not.
Again, so do most Americans. Not a unique position of the Left.
So does virtually every person on Earth, as well as every religion. But by generosity, do you mean you freely giving of your time, money and effort, or do you mean having government force others to do so as well? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is... Same question and answer for compassion and kindness. If you choose that, good for you. If you try to choose it for anyone else, tyranny, thy name is....
Does this mean you are volunteering to give of your time, money and effort freely, or are you advocating government forcing this equal distribution of stuff? If the former, count me in and good for you. If the latter, tyranny, thy name is...
See, it's real easy to be "compassionate" when the methodology is "have government force people to act as I wish." It stops being compassion and becomes tyranny, but it is easy. It's harder to simply act as an individual, were you quit whining and demanding of others, roll up your sleeves and just get stuff done. So I would ask the author the above questions related to his various noble, awesome, super duper tolerant stances. Is he speaking for what he would do of his own volition, or what he would have government foce others to do based on his world view?
I agree with most of this here.
The article lists things that all sound good, I mean for the most part. I think most fair minded people would agree that a lot of those items in that article are a net positive to society.
The problem is is that when you get down to brass tacks and enlist government to "enforce" these ideals, that's where the problem lies. The nuts and bolts of things is really the issue. How does this stuff really apply to people, who decides what, and how much etc etc.
I think most of the stuff that "bleeding heart liberals" want and advocate for all come from a decent place in the heart. I don't begrudge them that.
The way people try and go about trying to implement those ideals is the problem. It's the reason why we have sayings like the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
"Socialism is not in the least what it pretends to be. It is not the pioneer of a better and finer world, but the spoiler of what thousands of years of civilization have created. It does not build, it destroys. For destruction is the essence of it. It produces nothing, it only consumes what the social order based on private ownership in the means of production has created." ~ Ludwig von Mises
"Under capitalism everybody is the architect of his own fortune." ~ Ludwig von Mises
3. Attacking religious values is not inclusive, it is eliminating morality and sense of right and wrong in the nation.
4. Families with "two mommies" is not healthy for any child or the future of the nation
I don't need an ancient piece of toilet paper to tell me what is right and wrong. Don't get me wrong I support people's right to practice. In fact I am an admirer of certain musicians who are/used to be devout. Actually that's a huge reason why I'm anti religion because they are some of the people that got attacked by other religious people so if you think having religious values in general are not exclusive you are in denial.
So make people take a test before they get married and have children because heterosexual marriage is often unhealthy. Personally I envy the children who have two mommies or two daddies just as much as I do as a few other children.
How is giving farmers and coal miners BILLIONS not picking winners and losers???
Approximately no one supports those things (if they even exist, which seems extremely dubious in the case of the coal miners).
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.
