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.
Republicans just passed a massive tax cut in 2017 that gave tax cuts to almost 70% of the country. Surely you don't think that many are "rich."
Also, regulations lower the cost of doing business, making MORE of it possible! More hiring, more raises, etc. etc.
Businesses that sold dangerous food would GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
The United States is the richest country in the world for a reason. It's not socialism or communism.
People on the left don't like that there will always be disparities in a capitalist system, it's just the nature of how life works. They don't like income inequality, but again, it is what it is.
With capitalism all boats rise, some higher than others. In a communist or socialism system all boat don't rise, it's an abysmal system where just a small percentage of people thrive, the rest at the bottom don't. Haven't at all.
Silly analysis. "Conservatism" in the political sense simply means adhering to tradition and established norms. "progressivism" simply means favoring more change.
In the USA, Capitalism is at our core, because our country was founded on the idea of INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY and merit, with limited government, rather than the COLLECTIVE GOOD as interpreted by some powerful Monarch.
So capitalism in the USA IS INDEED conservative.
During FDR's day, this country was practically communist. The majority of the people were in labor unions, we had effectively sealed our borders to any immigration. LBJ pushed for massive welfare spending in the "Great Society" programs, forced busing, Roe v. Wade, etc.
If you go back 50 years before that, we had virtually open-borders but restricted citizenship only to white people, women couldn't vote, there were more restrictions on gun-ownership, and men couldn't go shirtless in public. But cocaine was in coca-cola. Heroine and amphetamines were in various "medicines" that could be bought over-the-counter.
If you're defining conservatism in such a vague way, then pretty much anything other than same-sex marriage and transgenderism is conservative(though same-sex marriage has been legal for a while, so maybe it is conservative now too). In fact, both the people in favor of abortion and opposed to abortion are conservative. Both the people in favor of drug-legalization and opposed are conservative. Etc.
By your definition, if you live in Nevada and you're against prostitution you're a progressive, and if you're in favor of prostitution you're a conservative.
During FDR's day, this country was practically communist. The majority of the people were in labor unions, we had effectively sealed our borders to any immigration. LBJ pushed for massive welfare spending in the "Great Society" programs, forced busing, Roe v. Wade, etc.
If you go back 50 years before that, we had virtually open-borders but restricted citizenship only to white people, women couldn't vote, there were more restrictions on gun-ownership, and men couldn't go shirtless in public. But cocaine was in coca-cola. Heroine and amphetamines were in various "medicines" that could be bought over-the-counter.
If you're defining conservatism in such a vague way, then pretty much anything other than same-sex marriage and transgenderism is conservative(though same-sex marriage has been legal for a while, so maybe it is conservative now too). In fact, both the people in favor of abortion and opposed to abortion are conservative. Both the people in favor of drug-legalization and opposed are conservative. Etc.
By your definition, if you live in Nevada and you're against prostitution you're a progressive, and if you're in favor of prostitution you're a conservative.
You obviously don't have a very good understanding of communism if you think the USA, even during FDR's tenure, was "communist."
The 30s and 40s were an era where some of the country's greatest companies started. They were an era where invention was the mother of necessity, only made possible by free people in a capitalistic society.
I mean hell, FDR literally FOUGHT fascistic socialists in WWII. We then went on to fight a cold war against communists.
It's kind of ridiculous to compare 1940s America to the Soviet Union.
Also, I didn't make up the definition of conservative and progressive, just FYI. It's literally what they mean.
You seem to attribute some strange emotional definitions to them...like one philosophy "cares" about you and the other "doesn't." Bizarre.
Baloney. Republicans just passed a massive tax cut in 2017 that gave tax cuts to almost 70% of the country. Surely you don't think that many are "rich."
How large were the tax cuts for low income people vs. high income people? A few scraps to the masses won’t do them much good if it means cuts to social security and other programs that low income people benefit from the most.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord
Also, regulations lower the cost of doing business, making MORE of it possible! More hiring, more raises, etc. etc.
Correct. It also means more dead employees and consumers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord
Businesses that sold dangerous food would GO OUT OF BUSINESS.
Only if the danger is not immediately obvious. Read about the kinds of things were added to foods in the late 1800s.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord
The United States is the richest country in the world for a reason. It's not socialism or communism.
America is not the richest country in the world.
Capitalism is everywhere. Capitalism is no guarantee of wealth, except for a few elites at the top of the food chain. Many nations are quite poor despite having capitalism.
How large were the tax cuts for low income people vs. high income people? A few scraps to the masses won’t do them much good if it means cuts to social security and other programs that low income people benefit from the most.
Correct. It also means more dead employees and consumers.
Only if the danger is not immediately obvious. Read about the kinds of things were added to foods in the late 1800s.
America is not the richest country in the world.
Capitalism is everywhere. Capitalism is no guarantee of wealth, except for a few elites at the top of the food chain. Many nations are quite poor despite having capitalism.
"Low income" people generally don't pay federal taxes anyway. How do you "cut" taxes that don't exist?
People that EMPLOY those people and who pay the most in taxes got tax cuts though, which benefit everyone. Also, 0.0% of social security was cut.
Dead employees and consumers? So your solution is bigger government? How many dead people have governments been responsible for over the course of history? It's an ASTROMICAL number. I'm glad you believe angels in government will save you.
It's not the 1800s anymore. There were a lot of weird things that happened then, and it wasn't because we didn't have enough "government."
America IS the richest country in the world by leaps and bounds. I'm not talking about tiny countries that skew that number. We have the most opportunity and it's why we lead the world in immigration requests by leaps and bounds. Capitalism ISN'T A GUARANTEE OF SUCCESS. I'm surprised you don't understand that? It doesn't guarantee anything, but it allows as equal of opportunity as there can be.
Sir, I wasn’t spinning anything. I took the information directly off the party platform document used in the 1860 Republican party convention. I then linked you to a copy of the original document. You are the one who seems to have difficulty grasping the facts. Not me.
Let's go back through what you actually said...
"Look at the 1860 Republican national platform. Its fundamental principles follow those outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution... state sovereignty, denouncing the threats of disunion... encouragement of American industry."
Which was in response to me saying...
"Do you even know the "roots" of the Republican Party? Do you think Abraham Lincoln was for "small government"? I can only assume you associate the Republican Party with Ronald Reagan. But although Reagan talked a lot about small government, he vastly increased government-spending, and tripled the national debt. He also started the war on drugs."
And my response was because you said...
"If Republicans wanted to start winning big they need to bid the Evangelical Christians adieu and go back to their libertarian small government roots... Legalization of marijuana. Low taxes. Free trade. Fiscal responsibility. Religious freedom. Enough of this anti-Muslim non-sense. Lay off the LGBT. Lay off the anti-abortion. Stop being so draconian about immigration."
The first thing Abraham Lincoln did when he came into office was to the pass the "Morrill tariff". Which was set to triple the former tariff rate on many imported goods.
Abraham Lincoln also passed the "Pacific Railway Act", and otherwise subsidized the railroads, the steel mills, etc, through massive government spending on "infrastructure". He passed the "National Banking Act", which was the precursor of the Federal Reserve system. I'm sure you're also familiar with "greenbacks".
Of the two parties in 1860, the Republican Party was the big-government party, the democrats were the small-government party. The Republican Party wanted to raise taxes, it was fundamentally against free trade, it racked up a massive federal debt. Nor was it a "live and let live" political party.
Secondly, you claim the Republican Party stood for the "fundamental principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution". I don't recall any of these principles being in either document. But even if they were, how insane do you have to be to believe Abraham Lincoln was for states' rights?
You obviously don't have a very good understanding of communism if you think the USA, even during FDR's tenure, was "communist."
I never said it was communist, but Keynesian economic policy meant massive state intervention in the economy, massive regulations, protectionism, labor controls/unionism, gold confiscation, currency manipulation. We looked more like communist China than what we think of as capitalism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord
I mean hell, FDR literally FOUGHT fascistic socialists in WWII. We then went on to fight a cold war against communists.
FDR didn't fight fascist socialists because they were fascist socialists. He fought them because it was in the "national interests". The United States itself is a semi-fascist socialist state.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paracord
Also, I didn't make up the definition of conservative and progressive, just FYI. It's literally what they mean.
Whether that be true or not, don't you think such a definition is a bit convoluted? Let's focus only on just one issue, same-sex marriage. Is it conservative? By your definition, yes. But who actually believes that?
I never said it was communist, but Keynesian economic policy meant massive state intervention in the economy, massive regulations, protectionism, labor controls/unionism, gold confiscation, currency manipulation. We looked more like communist China than what we think of as capitalism.
FDR didn't fight fascist socialists because they were fascist socialists. He fought them because it was in the "national interests". The United States itself is a semi-fascist socialist state.
Whether that be true or not, don't you think such a definition is a bit convoluted? Let's focus only on just one issue, same-sex marriage. Is it conservative? By your definition, yes. But who actually believes that?
FDR is one of the first PROGRESSIVES who tried to drastically CHANGE traditional America in terms of his government spending. Thank goodness his actions were counterbalanced in subsequent years. No one ever said there weren't politicians who like to spend gobs of government money. It's a lot easier to get re-elected as Santa Claus, especially if you're a democrat. No one would compare him to his communist contemporary, Joseph Stalin though. FDR believed in private property and in the founding principles of the United States.
same-sex marriage is not conservative. Where do you get that? It breaks with common traditions that are thousands of years old and don't just originate in the USA even.
Same-sex marriage is not conservative. Where do you get that? It breaks with common traditions that are thousands of years old and don't just originate in the USA even.
Your definition of conservatism was, "adhering to tradition and established norms". What do you mean by tradition? And what do you mean by established norms?
An established norm really just means anything that is established. Is women's suffrage a "tradition or established norm"? If you're defining traditional as "what the country was founded on", then no. And by that definition, if you don't think voting should be restricted to only rich white men then you are not conservative.
If tradition refers to things from before the United States was founded, then capitalism isn't necessarily traditional either. In fact, the founding fathers were the liberals of their day.
How many years have to elapse before something becomes a tradition? Roe v. Wade was almost 50 years ago. So does that make abortion an American tradition?
Your definition of conservative is arbitrary and contradictory. We all know what we mean when we say conservative, and it doesn't mean libertarian.
"Look at the 1860 Republican national platform. Its fundamental principles follow those outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution... state sovereignty, denouncing the threats of disunion... encouragement of American industry."
Which was in response to me saying...
"Do you even know the "roots" of the Republican Party? Do you think Abraham Lincoln was for "small government"? I can only assume you associate the Republican Party with Ronald Reagan. But although Reagan talked a lot about small government, he vastly increased government-spending, and tripled the national debt. He also started the war on drugs."
And my response was because you said...
"If Republicans wanted to start winning big they need to bid the Evangelical Christians adieu and go back to their libertarian small government roots... Legalization of marijuana. Low taxes. Free trade. Fiscal responsibility. Religious freedom. Enough of this anti-Muslim non-sense. Lay off the LGBT. Lay off the anti-abortion. Stop being so draconian about immigration."
The first thing Abraham Lincoln did when he came into office was to the pass the "Morrill tariff". Which was set to triple the former tariff rate on many imported goods.
Abraham Lincoln also passed the "Pacific Railway Act", and otherwise subsidized the railroads, the steel mills, etc, through massive government spending on "infrastructure". He passed the "National Banking Act", which was the precursor of the Federal Reserve system. I'm sure you're also familiar with "greenbacks".
Of the two parties in 1860, the Republican Party was the big-government party, the democrats were the small-government party. The Republican Party wanted to raise taxes, it was fundamentally against free trade, it racked up a massive federal debt. Nor was it a "live and let live" political party.
Secondly, you claim the Republican Party stood for the "fundamental principles outlined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution". I don't recall any of these principles being in either document. But even if they were, how insane do you have to be to believe Abraham Lincoln was for states' rights?
Have you read the Republican party’s 1860 platform from the link that I gave you? Please go read that document before continuing the discussion.
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.
