but what is really more compassionate when it comes to results?
the parent that buys their teen everything because they want their kid to "have the best start at life" cars clothes games etc.
or
the parent that forces their teenager to fend for themselves by denying them extravagance , thus the teen learns self reliance and can navigate the world away from mom's purse strings gets his own job and buys his own car
in the long run....the teen who has self reliance is the better adjusted human
the teen who is dependent on mom really never develops needed skills to "leave the nest" in comfort...but has nice clothes /cars etc.
the difference in philosophies is simple
teach a man top fish vs giving a hungry man a fish that you stole from your neighbor
giving the fish makes you "feel compassionate" but only fills the belly today
teaching the hungry man to fish and leaving him to fend for himself seems cold at first glance because you leave him to his own devices (with the freedom to fail)...but his self worth improves ...his motivation is high and his tomorrow is less uncertain with a new skill
liberalism is blind to the benefits of individual liberty....under which the "freedom to fail " (as well as the freedom to succeed ) is essential
liberalism has noble intentions but doesn't care about results
"the great society " failed
the war on poverty failed
FDR's programs increased dependence on the government (failed)
Mao's cultural revolution failed (miserably)
Lenin and Stalin got millions killed with "great intentions " for their brand of marxist socialism
but the record of history is crystal clear....the only system to raise the vast majority of poor from the kind of crushing poverty that existed through out man's economic evolution through civilization
is free market capitalism
with its inherent flaws
individual liberty raises more people from poverty than socialism
results are more important than "feeling good about the attempt"
Crapola. I know folks on both sides of the political aisle that raise their kids this way. It's not a political thing.
***********************
What is the essence of America? Finding and maintaining that perfect, delicate balance between freedom "to" and freedom "from." ~Marilyn vos Savant, in Parade
Crapola. I know folks on both sides of the political aisle that raise their kids this way. It's not a political thing.
****************
but both sides do not treat their neighbors the same
one side wants to steal your fish to give it to the "poor"
the other side wants the poor to fish on their own with VOLUNTARY help from willing neighbors
Ha, and I suppose the right way is to raise them with right wing hatred, arian philosophy and send them off to military schools. LOL!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are all equal, but we definitely are not the same"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ha, and I suppose the right way is to raise them with right wing hatred, arian philosophy and send them off to military schools. LOL!
******************
the reason why you suppose that is because you either cannot read or you don't pay attention...
and your blind partisanship gives you a skewed perspective of what real conservatism is
not Aryan philosophy... (that's crap)
not hatred (that's unnecessary and wasteful of time and energy)
how about individual liberty
private property rights
limited government
rights to self protection
equal protection under the law (regardless of race gender or income)
I see gillis has the ususal blah blah blah's today.
***********************************
I've learned that the people you care most about in life are taken from you too soon and
all the less important ones just never go away.
And the real pains in the ass are permanent.
Only the kind of freedom you preach, Gillis. Unrestricted and unregulated freedom never works, it only ends up harming everyone but the crooks who preach it.
When haven't you? Everytime someone mentions any kind of regulations or restrictions you start screaming slavery, socialism, or some bullshit about personal property rights, Gillis.
the reason why you suppose that is because you either cannot read or you don't pay attention... and your blind partisanship gives you a skewed perspective of what real conservatism is
not Aryan philosophy... (that's crap)
not hatred (that's unnecessary and wasteful of time and energy)
Bullshit!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"We are all equal, but we definitely are not the same"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When haven't you? Everytime someone mentions any kind of regulations or restrictions you start screaming slavery, socialism, or some bullshit about personal property rights, Gillis.
********************
never said unrestricted freedom
but i do understand the crush of incremental regulation
one little law at a time...
then...all your freedoms gone before you know it
i believe that if you remove an individual liberty you should have a constitutional reason for it
or historical precedent of its success as a policy.
along with relevance and serious need to restrict that freedom
you have to convince me of its necessity
because i read history
i know that it is blood that undoes freedom restrictions
This message has been edited by gillis7 on Aug 28, 2009 6:28 PM
but both sides do not treat their neighbors the same
Yes, they do. You are wrong about nearly EVERYTHING, gilligan, and anyone with a functioning brain (which leaves out most of the neoCONs on this board) can see that for themselves.
but both sides do not treat their neighbors the same
Yes, they do. You are wrong about nearly EVERYTHING, gilligan, and anyone with a functioning brain (which leaves out most of the neoCONs on this board) can see that for themselves.
*********************
JANIE
post one thing i've written ...then your explanation of specifically why its wrong
use facts now, not just insults...insults do not prove the argument incorrect or disprove the logic
conservatives do not want their neighbors to be forced to pay for the lives of those in society who are unwilling to produce for themselves
conservatives are charitable ....but know the difference between forcing their neighbors to pay for health care for moochers and deadbeats and giving to those who cannot fend for themselves out of real compassion
conservatives know that socialized government control over the lives of Americans and the loss of individual liberty inherent in such policies will kill incentive to produce ....by removing the reward of freedom to control one's own property.
conservatives know that their neighbor's liberty is more important than the government's power to control centralized planning over the economy...
conservatives have learned from the history of socialism
gillis, your post is no more than a silly fantasy about liberals.
none of it is true that i can see.
and certainly none of this shit is true, about me, or about any liberal i know.
who, specifically, do you think this applies to?
***********************
liberals want to use the power of government to take money (taxes/ the productive capacity) from individual citizens to give that money (or services or income or productive capacity ) to
other individuals who did not earn it
VOLUNTARY CHARITY IS DIFFERENT
PUBLIC USE IS DIFFERENT (roads ?bridges /soldiers)...everyone can use those entities for travel /security defense etc.
when you take (what would be)my daughter's tuition money that i earned with my labor (or effort) and give it to another citizen (a 42 month refugee from new orleans who will not rent a trailer or apt.on his own dime) because you think he /she needs it or deserves it more than i do because you want to seem more compassionate ......that is immoral
it is true that liberals support policies that take taxes from (earning)individuals to give to other individuals
that is treating one citizen as more important or deserving of the money/wealth productive capacity as another citizen (the one who earned it)
again...so you won't forget...
VOLUNTARY CHARITY IS DIFFERENT
PUBLIC USE IS DIFFERENT (roads ?bridges /soldiers)...everyone can use those entities for travel /security defense etc.
welfare and socialized medicine is enslaving one citizen for the sake of another
