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.
Logically, you cannot prove negatives, you can only prove affirmatives. For instance, I cannot prove that a certain ornament isn't hanging on a tree, because that's a negative. It's like proving the no rain fell on Monday. No matter how many locations can demonstrate that no measurable rain fell on Monday, there is always a possibility that it some unmeasurable trace fell, or that some location wasn't included in the reporting. That's why logic states that negatives cannot be proven, only affirmatives can be proven.
Any political party more conservative than the current batch of Republicans would be wearing black shirts and goose-stepping their way down the street.
Here's the thing. When you only listen to fellow high schoolers you don't mature intellectually. If you keep this up into your 20s it becomes an embarrassment to family and remaining friends. Later in life the term arrested development is spoken in whispers. Stop now while you have a chance at a normal life.
They believe we can spend our way out of debt. They believe taking money from one part of the economy to give to another part somehow makes the economy bigger. They believe people who have never run a business can run a business better than people who have spent their whole lives running businesses. They believe that what appears to be a 20-year spike in global temperatures (a spike itself that hundreds of scientists dispute) can mean doom for a planet whose temperatures have swung much more widely for 6 billion years -- but that an eight- or ten-year flattening or even drop in temperatures can be ignored because it doesn't comport with the "models" based largely on the previous 20 years. They believe that punishing "developed" nations for carbon consumption is a good idea even if it means that developing countries without the same environmental controls will take over the production/manufacturing forced away from the developed countries. So, somehow, in the name of saving the environment from carbon emissions, they would create even more carbon emissions (and other, real pollution) elsewhere -- and call it progress.
No one believes you can spend your way out of debt. Liberals believe that by investing in the future, a stable economic state will be reached, allowing for more consistent tax revenue paired with maximum economic growth, which will allow for budget surpluses, and the combination of that and the tax revenue can be used to address the issue of debt. Beyond this, investing in higher education and healthcare reduced the burdens on many, allowing them to have more disposable income to stimulate the economy, theoretically creating economic growth. While I have plenty of issues with some of this, you shouldn't frame their view in such a dishonest way.
In terms of the public sector, the principles of business don't apply. It's not that they think non-businessmen can run a business better; it's that some things shouldn't be run like a business. Well, that's not totally true. That's my view, the liberal view is some weird space between capitalism and socialism. I'll say it's Rawlsian economics, which would actually mean the private sector simply has to sometimes answer to the public, meaning business is run by businessmen. Whereas I believe some things simply shouldn't be for profit.
As for environmental crises, no one is doing well on that because neither the liberals or the conservatives are willing to actually address the underlying issues. Carbon emissions play a role, and the liberals get that, but so does mass deforestation to make room for oil pipelines, agriculture, and housing. If anything, that's way worse that everyone driving cars. Or the massive farms that are just cesspools of methane gas. Or mass use of pesticides. No one is willing to tackle these issues because they're simply too hard to tackle. So, I guess I agree, liberals need to step their game up.
Here's the thing. When you only listen to fellow high schoolers you don't mature intellectually. If you keep this up into your 20s it becomes an embarrassment to family and remaining friends. Later in life the term arrested development is spoken in whispers. Stop now while you have a chance at a normal life.
You resurrected a 6-7-year-old thread to say that?
There's been a lot of this sort of thing going on around the forum, lately.
Any political party more conservative than the current batch of Republicans would be wearing black shirts and goose-stepping their way down the street.
You, like most on the left, are conflating social conservatism with fiscal conservatism..... probably intentionally.
They believe we can spend our way out of debt. They believe taking money from one part of the economy to give to another part somehow makes the economy bigger. They believe people who have never run a business can run a business better than people who have spent their whole lives running businesses. They believe that what appears to be a 20-year spike in global temperatures (a spike itself that hundreds of scientists dispute) can mean doom for a planet whose temperatures have swung much more widely for 6 billion years -- but that an eight- or ten-year flattening or even drop in temperatures can be ignored because it doesn't comport with the "models" based largely on the previous 20 years. They believe that punishing "developed" nations for carbon consumption is a good idea even if it means that developing countries without the same environmental controls will take over the production/manufacturing forced away from the developed countries. So, somehow, in the name of saving the environment from carbon emissions, they would create even more carbon emissions (and other, real pollution) elsewhere -- and call it progress.
There is no "dispute" at the Pentagon, nor at insurance companies, regarding global climate change. Both believe it is a major issue and both are taking this issue seriously.
However, an article that ridicules using debt to fund fiscal stimulus at a time when lack of demand in the private sector caused an economic downturn, is an article preaching economic illiteracy. That is what is laughable.
During the 2008 - 2010 period, deficits were caused by a weak economy causing lower government revenues. Reducing the time of economic recovery by having the government borrow money (at low interest rates) to put Americans back to work an have them pay taxes that raise revenues, stood on sound economic ground.
Let us also realize that debt never really has to be paid back. In 1948 the U.S. government owed 120% of GDP due to war debts. In dollar terms, it was about $200 billion. That debt was never paid off and somehow disaster did not loom. What happened was economic growth made that $220 billion irrelevant compared to the economy. But the idea that the economy is a zero-sum-game is ridiculous. Spending billions of dollars of borrowed money to defeat the Nazis was a better use of money than keeping it in private hands.
Today's $19 trillion in debt also never has to be paid off, as long as deficits are kept below the rate of economic growth it will become irrelevant too.
150 years ago, the government built canals that facilitated people, equipment and goods to move from industrialized areas to wilderness areas. They took tax money and used it to build infrastructure that grew the economy. We can then conclude that "taking money from one part of the economy to give to another part somehow makes the economy bigger." The same thing can be said of the interstate highway system. It was a government expenditure that took tax money away from parts of the economy and spent it on a public investment that produced higher economic gains.
If that article is supposed to prove that liberal ideas don't work, it falls flat on its face.
Last edited by MTAtech; 04-26-2016 at 04:59 AM..
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.
