"Liberal?" "Conservative?"

Discussion in 'Politics' started by jonbig04, Nov 10, 2008.

  1. I have come to think that these labels are pointless. Bush is considered by many to be a conservative, despite the fact that he spent more money than all the previous administrations before him. Thats not conservative. I'm sure he is conservative on other issues though.

    Chances are, if republicans were actually conservative they would have gotten my vote, but it seems to me in some aspects they are liberal and some they are conservative.

    Economically speaking, Obama was the more conservative vote. Period. If you voted "conservative", based on economics your vote was actually pretty liberal. If it was based on abortion I would say "conservatives" are still conservative in that regard. My point is only that the liberal and conservative labels are pointless and arbitrary.
  2. I consider myself conservative, on social issues, prob even more conservative than 90 % of the Republicans.....and I voted Obama.
    I oppose Gay marriage but I ABHOR the Iraq War and the Bailout even more
  3. ....shaking head???.....as the war in Iraq and the bailout will both continue for many more years!

    Ron Paul was the right STOP THE WAR and STOP THE BAILOUT vote! Actually, he was the ONLY choice for those ends. :cool:

    See what I mean now by, "blood on YOUR hands"..... :eek:
  4. If raising taxes on a bad economy is conservative than Obama is conservative.
  5. The economy is shitty partly because we are drowning in debt, recognizing that our economy will never get back to normal (ie. when we can drop taxes and still have large revenue bc GDP is growing rapidly) until we pay off that debt and placing that on top of our priorities is not a bad thing. If you were drowning in debt and suffering would you go out and try to make money only? Or would you do that AND start paying down as much as you could as fast as you could?

    If dropping taxes on everyone and then hoping the economy gets better in spite of and before we start paying down our huge debts is conservative then I guess republicans are. If arguing for the same policies that are in place NOW (need I say more than now?) then republicans are conservative. If advocating the deregulatory policies that are the root reason for this financial crisis is conservative, then I guess republicans are. If completely about of control spending with no idea how to repay it is conservative then I guess republicans are.
  6. Ron Paul doesnt know what he's talking about when it comes to this financial crisis. He thinks government should just stay out of the way, which would be nice in a lot of cases, but thats also what started this whole crisis.
  7. Jonbig, the more you raise taxes now the longer the recession will last. The longer the recession will last the longer we are in debt.

    Jonbig let me provde an analogy. Lets say that there is a family of five. Steve the husband just recently was diagnosed with colon cancer. It was caught early so he has a good chance of survival. The only thing is that the medicine he is on makes him so sick and so sedated that he cannot work properly. He loses his job and the family soon goes into debt.

    The family has two choices. The first choice is that they can do everything it takes in order to keep Steve healthy which means going into debt as long as Steve survives and as long as he has a quick recovery. The family has gone over the statistics and they know they can handle this debt because Steve will most likely recover because he has many factors on his side such as still being somewhat young and catching the cancer early. The first choice will lead to Steve being fully healed and the families debt disapeering after about a year and a half.

    The second choice the family has is that Steve becomes very stubborn that the family has to take this budget hit so instead of taking all the recommended medicine and procedures he only takes 30-40%. The family of course is still in debt but not as much as the first couple months with the first choice. Steve being the wishful thinker he is thinks that he will be healthy as a teenager in a couple months with the medicine he is taking. A few months have passed and soon an entire year has passed. At the first choice Steve by this time was fully healed and back working. The second choice with the lack of medicine and procedures has left steve in somewhat of an improved physical state but he still has the cancer. He cannot go back to work and he is reminded by the statistics that the majority of people who have full recoveries take all the recommended drugs and procedures. He finally decides that taking all the recommended procedures and drugs is the right way to go about this.

    Steve is the American economy. In both choices steve was fully healed. In the first choice steve decided to heal himself as fast as possible which meant taking the fastest and best avenues of healing. In the second choice steve decreased his chances of healing because he decided to decrease his RESOURCES of healing.

    There is no question whatsoever that the American Economy will Remain. The only question is how do we get out of this recession as quick as possible and how do we pay back the debt as quick as possible with no negative affects on the economy.

    There are two choices. You can either pay back the debt and increase the length of the recession which means we will actually have the debt on our hands for a longer amount of time or we can increase the efficiency of the economy quicker and than by doing that pay back our debt quicker as well.
  8. Neo you wrote all that to prove to me that it's in our best interest if the recession is shorter? lol Of course I want the recession to be shorter. Thats what everyone wants, thats not where we disagree...we disagree on how to make it shorter. As far as your example goes, we disagree as to what "medicine" he will take.

    Our economy WILL NEVER be efficient unless the debt is paid down. Since you seem to like example: Lets say there is a family of 4 who are suffering under tremendous debt. Now, what do they do? Right now only 5% of their income is going to paying off the debt, and thats not even enough to cover the interest. So in order to get in better situation what do they do? The could go out and work as hard possible and hope they will get raise and another raise and then another raise, that way the 5% of their income will actually start paying down the debt because 5% of their new salary is much more then 5% of their old salary (even though right now NO one is getting raises in the entire company). Or they can allocate a larger percentage of their income to paying off the debt, this way if they dont get lucky and get a raise, the debt will still be paid down. and if they dont get a raise for a long time, things willl still be ok because they have already begun to pay down the debt. They will never flourish under the enormous debt unless they get a sudden increase in pay, which probably isnt going to happen bc their company isnt doing so well either. Families, companies, and countries all cannot hope to survive under ever increasing debt.
  9. Jonbig you are ignoring the fact that increased taxes will hurt the economy.

    In your example all you do is provide the best case scenario of a family getting out of debt.

    The economy is like a person with a disease. Taxes are the disease. The disease hurts the health of the person and the stronger the disease is the longer it lasts. Taxes hurt the economy which mean the recession and debt will last longer.

    Debt hurts the economy but not nearly as bad as increasing taxes on an already ailing economy. No one is going to invade us because we haven't paid back our debt yet.

    We need to get our priorities straight and understand that increased taxes will hurt the economy.

    It is very simple.
    #10     Nov 10, 2008