User Tag List

First 2345614 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 375

  1. #31
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Risen View Post
    The simple fact is that even the poor of this country are RICH compared to many in other countries. American's don't know how good they have it or how much worse it can always be, because they live in a ridiculous bubble.
    That's.... true. But it's like comparing an abused american woman to women to various countries where they have no rights. Not really an endorsement.

    As far as the ineffectiveness of our social nets, social welfare and capitalism don't go well together.
    They go quite well together, actually... in practice. The problem with the 'philosophy' of capitalism, like communism, many prefer black and white systems. So rather than divide up the pluses and minuses, the system is always seen as perfect, with any attempt to deal with the negatives as a moral travesty.

  2. #32
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    That's.... true. But it's like comparing an abused american woman to women to various countries where they have no rights. Not really an endorsement.



    They go quite well together, actually... in practice. The problem with the 'philosophy' of capitalism, like communism, many prefer black and white systems. So rather than divide up the pluses and minuses, the system is always seen as perfect, with any attempt to deal with the negatives as a moral travesty.

    I think history has proven that small-to-moderate welfare-state safety nets are far preferable to comparable government direction of the economy. You don't want the government running businesses or nationalizing entire industries.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  3. #33
    Senior Member ptgatsby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    ISTP
    Posts
    4,474

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    I think history has proven that small-to-moderate welfare-state safety nets are far preferable to comparable government direction of the economy. You don't want the government running businesses or nationalizing entire industries.
    I think that's what I was saying, except from the other end... I take it to mean you agree that a middle ground is better than the absolute political philosophy (which carries a moral undertone)?

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    That was my point. It's the overall status of the economy that determines such things, not the amount of money the government throws at the problem.
    Yes.... but the subtext was that cutting benefits helped - it doesn't. Most poverty help just reduces suffering for a segment of the population. Poverty is just a measuring issue - there will always be some at the bottom of the heap. The question is how much worse off - hope as well as QOL - are they than the general population.

    Perhaps, but relative poverty is just that, relative. You can be below the poverty line in the United States and have an apartment, a phone, a car, a microwave. Hell, you're MORE likely to be obese.
    Yup. But... compare apples to apples - 1st world countries to each other, not a 1st world country to the alternatives in 3rd world countries.

  4. #34
    Minister of Propagandhi ajblaise's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    7,917

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    Or you could drastically delimit the amount of power the government has over society, which would coincidentally limit the amount of power corporations can wield through legislation. Haven't you ever read Kolko?
    Pure capitalism only works in a purely ethical world. It's the last thing we want, if the goal is limit their power.

  5. #35
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ptgatsby View Post
    I think that's what I was saying, except from the other end... I take it to mean you agree that a middle ground is better than the absolute political philosophy (which carries a moral undertone)?

    No, I was just saying that it's a sliding scale. Some freedom is better than none. More freedom is better than some. I am far more concerned about things like Obama and crew taking over businesses and using tax money to bail out poorly-functioning companies than I am concerned about, say, the Department of Health and Human Services. I'd prefer a libertarian country, but I will take a freer, less socialized mixed-economy for now.



    Yes.... but the subtext was that cutting benefits helped - it doesn't. Most poverty help just reduces suffering for a segment of the population. Poverty is just a measuring issue - there will always be some at the bottom of the heap. The question is how much worse off - hope as well as QOL - are they than the general population.
    I think that cutting benefits helps in a wider sense. The people who transitioned to paying jobs are definitely better off, and, if governments aren't doing anything, it's better not to have them than to have them, especially with the outrageous public debt we have in this country.



    Yup. But... compare apples to apples - 1st world countries to each other, not a 1st world country to the alternatives in 3rd world countries.
    We have a wider spread than most 1st world countries, but I wouldn't trade that for what they have in continental Europe. Not by a damn sight.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  6. #36
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Pure capitalism only works in a purely ethical world. It's the last thing we want, if the goal is limit their power.
    That makes no sense. Explain what you are trying to say.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  7. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,128

    Default

    Risen, not necessary to label me naive... especially since you have no idea what I've experienced or am aware of.

    That said, I will answer the below question:

    I don't go around calling the eugenicists, the extreme environmentalists who value mother nature over humans, or the democratic types who believe in an irrational fantasy utopia through government control "sociopaths". Why would you venture so close to comparing those who wishes to uphold an economic system that leads to prosperity through the free will of people, and a limited government that doesn't intervene except when necessary, to "sociopaths"?
    1. I never 'ventured close to comparing those who wish to uphold an economic system that leads to prosperity through the free will of people, and a limited government that doesn't intervene except when necessary, to "sociopaths."' What I said was that I could see why a sociopath might be a republican today.

    2. "An economic system that leads to prosperity through the free will of people, [etc.]" is not what the Republican party is interested in. They may think they are, but they are actually interested in an economic system that leads to bust, depression, and bancruptcy (look at Iceland's bankrupt system for a perfect example of what happens when you follow such an economic policy).

    3. Even if I HAD called all Republicans sociopaths (I wouldn't though, because I understand the meaning of the word), it would be very different from calling environmentalists sociopaths, or utopian democrats sociopaths.
    This is because environmentalists (let's say ones who might value nature over humans, a rare few) care about the good of the entire planet, at the very least. I may not agree with their priorities, but from my point of view even their extreme perspective would still be a whole lot better than valuing one tiny wealthy class over another huge poor class, as neoconservatives do (proven by actions and policies, and stated beliefs).

  8. #38
    Order Now! pure_mercury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    MBTI
    ESFJ
    Posts
    6,946

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by maliafee View Post
    Risen, not necessary to label me naive... especially since you have no idea what I've experienced or am aware of.

    That said, I will answer the below question:



    1. I never 'ventured close to comparing those who wish to uphold an economic system that leads to prosperity through the free will of people, and a limited government that doesn't intervene except when necessary, to "sociopaths."' What I said was that I could see why a sociopath might be a republican today.

    2. "An economic system that leads to prosperity through the free will of people, [etc.]" is not what the Republican party is interested in. They may think they are, but they are actually interested in an economic system that leads to bust, depression, and bancruptcy (look at Iceland's bankrupt system for a perfect example of what happens when you follow such an economic policy).

    3. Even if I HAD called all Republicans sociopaths (I wouldn't though, because I understand the meaning of the word), it would be very different from calling environmentalists sociopaths, or utopian democrats sociopaths.
    This is because environmentalists (let's say ones who might value nature over humans, a rare few) care about the good of the entire planet, at the very least. I may not agree with their priorities, but from my point of view even their extreme perspective would still be a whole lot better than valuing one tiny wealthy class over another huge poor class, as neoconservatives do (proven by actions and policies, and stated beliefs).


    You are very, very naive.
    Who wants to try a bottle of merc's "Extroversion Olive Oil?"

  9. #39
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,128

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pure_mercury View Post
    You are very, very naive.
    *chuckle*

    I love how people who think they're right think other people are naive. What the hell do you know about me?

    Thanks anyway.

  10. #40
    Habitual Fi LineStepper JocktheMotie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    8,193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ajblaise View Post
    Back in the classical liberalism days, I would have agreed with you on economic matters. But since the industrial revolution, private business interests have risen drastically in power and started having much more control and influence over people's daily lives and their standards of living.

    So liberalism, in order to keep upholding freedom as a principle, had to change, and use government and labor power as a check against business power.
    Never would I advocate zero governmental restriction when it comes to maintaining a capitalist society. People are idiots, there needs to be some basic protection and general axioms/standards set, and a strong central government is the perfect entity to do that. Things like minimum wages, are good fundamental ideas.

    However, I do not believe in material equality. Just because I have something, does mean someone else deserves it too. I believe that government should enable every individual an equal chance at succeeding, not that they should enable every individual access to the services of others. That's where I differ from social liberals.Also, what I think people actually need to succeed is far different than what most liberals think people need to succeed.



Similar Threads

  1. Why are you here?
    By rhinosaur in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 05-19-2011, 06:08 AM
  2. Religion... why?
    By wyrdsister in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 175
    Last Post: 01-28-2010, 04:31 PM
  3. Why I am here
    By HilbertSpace in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-25-2007, 01:18 AM
  4. Why?
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 04-24-2007, 06:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO