Thread: Is Liberalism Dead?

Originally Posted by USCitizen

Hey look, I believe in US first, allies second and enemies be blown to hell and because my order is not profit first, profit second, profit only, I am a Liberal.
Then I'm damned proud to be a Liberal.

Profits are not first. The great 20th century philosopher, Ayn Rand, said there is only one right. All others are its consequence or corollary. That is, the right to life. Since the days of the first Republican President, America has given up freedom for cronyism. For some reason, freedom/capitalism has been blamed for government inviting corporate bribes to replace working for the general welfare for the specific welfare of corporations. First, it was the rail roads and canal builders. Now it is Big Education and so-called green energy firms.

I guess what I'm trying to say is do not combine or equate Conservatives with cronyism as campaign contribution records reveal both Democrats and Republicans have their corporate sponsors.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I like that simple, to the point defintion of a liberal. But it is obvious the conservatives feel profit is the highest good, and it should be concentrated in the top, because only they deserve that much of the pie. They arbitrarily weight the top, and it is arbitrary, as it is based upon conjured up values.

There is nothing morally wrong with the unequal distribution of wealth as some people pursue it with more vigor. Modern day Liberals want equal outcomes, which is not a system of justice. Failure IS an option in a Free State. Modern day Liberals confound the means and the ends, supposing if the ends are unequal, the means must necessarily have been immoral, such as sexism. racism, homophobia. They look for some victim, which is a perspective resulting from being dominated by trial lawyers.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

Values that are the root of social disorder, inequity and outright economic injustice.

This deserves its own thread.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

Well, some people always do look back to the 'good ole days'.

It is cavalier replies like this one from USCitizen that is so offensive to many non-kool-aid-drinking-dyed-in-the-wool Liberals.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

Profits are not first. The great 20th century philosopher, Ayn Rand, said there is only one right. All others are its consequence or corollary. That is, the right to life. Since the days of the first Republican President, America has given up freedom for cronyism. For some reason, freedom/capitalism has been blamed for government inviting corporate bribes to replace working for the general welfare for the specific welfare of corporations. First, it was the rail roads and canal builders. Now it is Big Education and so-called green energy firms.

I guess what I'm trying to say is do not combine or equate Conservatives with cronyism as campaign contribution records reveal both Democrats and Republicans have their corporate sponsors.



There is nothing morally wrong with the unequal distribution of wealth as some people pursue it with more vigor. Modern day Liberals want equal outcomes, which is not a system of justice. Failure IS an option in a Free State. Modern day Liberals confound the means and the ends, supposing if the ends are unequal, the means must necessarily have been immoral, such as sexism. racism, homophobia. They look for some victim, which is a perspective resulting from being dominated by trial lawyers.



This deserves its own thread.



It is cavalier replies like this one from USCitizen that is so offensive to many non-kool-aid-drinking-dyed-in-the-wool Liberals.

The current economic model should prove that profits are first, with the health of the nation way down the line. I don't see how anyone could ignore it.

The disparity of income is an indication that those that were a large part in creating the owner's wealth were not fairly compensated for the amount of wealth they helped to create. In fact, it is a direct indicator of such especially when you see at the same time the shrinkage of the middle class.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

The current economic model should prove that profits are first...The disparity of income

The same old, worn out, class warfare rhetoric. Profits are not the same as disparity of income. There is an implied premise to even connect the two: "some are not 'fairly' compensated." That is untrue (or another misuse of words). There is a difference between fair and equal.

As far as the shrinking middle class; that is not all that is shrinking with unending government spending, America’s Fewer Millionaires: Liberals Want Income Equality – They Should Be Thrilled | Maggie's Notebook

Liberalism isn't dead.

We couldn't possibly be that lucky.

Originally Posted by JohnLocke

The same old, worn out, class warfare rhetoric. Profits are not the same as disparity of income. There is an implied premise to even connect the two: "some are not 'fairly' compensated." That is untrue (or another misuse of words). There is a difference between fair and equal.

As far as the shrinking middle class; that is not all that is shrinking with unending government spending, America’s Fewer Millionaires: Liberals Want Income Equality – They Should Be Thrilled | Maggie's Notebook

When those not in the upper class complain about the actuality, the right always comes back with this class warfare rhetoric. The real class war has been waged and won sir. By those special interests who only seek to max out their wealth, by exploiting the lower classes in china, by exploiting illegals here, and by the displacement of working americans by HB1 visas. This is the reality, the actuality, and it amazes me that you can dismiss it so easily by falling back on the class warfare accusation. No different from the far left loony birds from holler racism at every opportunity. You guys have more in common that one would think at first glance. Both of these sides are absolutely radical in the way that they think.

I HAVE NEVER maintained that wages, wealth should be equal. You will never find me ever saying such an odd thing. I am concerned with the disparity, the trend of income moving to the top, by the means of cheap labor, that destroys america's middle class, and takes away a very important ladder up from poverty.

If one isn't concerned about this, the trend that is devastating to america, as a nation, and to her average people, the future is bleak for a large group of americans. Everyone should be concerned about that, instead of defending it, by pulling out the class warfare card.

Capitalism works by having the wealthy at the top. I do not deny that at all. But what is important here is the degree of that wealth, and how it was grown. The way it has been grown in the last few decades is destroying our middle class. You would have to think a middle class is not important to support the continuing disparity brought on by a few maxing out wealth by cheap labor. Sir, the trickle down never worked, and it will not work, because human nature is opposed to it working. Human nature is at odds with trickle down. If you want to maintain a middle, gov't have to intervene to fetter what human nature yields. We have experience in that area, because at one time we actually attempted to do that, coming out of ww2 and the great depression.

Yet those attempts were gutted when the republicans came back into power. The vast change in america, the change in her economic model to benefit the few in their lusts for greater profits, is like a parasite that will eventually kill, or greatly sicken the host. This has nothing to do with class warfare from the bottom. It was class warfare from the top down. And as I said, they have already won that war. All that is left is the ooze of the collaterial damage to the middle. And of course the ever increasing debt that comes from what you call entitlements, that has a direct relation to the change in the economic model and the recession that the new banking model caused.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I like that simple, to the point defintion of a liberal. But it is obvious the conservatives feel profit is the highest good, and it should be concentrated in the top, because only they deserve that much of the pie. They arbitrarily weight the top, and it is arbitrary, as it is based upon conjured up values. Values that are the root of social disorder, inequity and outright economic injustice.

This describes the entertainment industry more than anything. Are these the evil conservatives that you are referring to?

Originally Posted by Damn Yankee

This describes the entertainment industry more than anything. Are these the evil conservatives that you are referring to?

I think the entertainment industry has more liberals than conservatives. Yet it isn't the entertainment industry that is exploiting poor folks in foreign nations, nor using illegals, or HB1 visas to max out their profits. And that industry still have unions. If they were conservative they would have killed the unions.

I do think that allowing greed of a few to destroy out middle class is evil, and that Clinton is as much to blame as the conservatives who devised free trade at the prompt of special interests. I think cons who say the unemployed are that way because they are lazy no account bums are evil. I think anyone who thinks greed is good is evil. So yeah, overall the cons are certainly filled with evil hearts. These are not your Eisenhower republicans here. That is obvious. The cons believe average americans want to live off of other taxpayers, when the fact is, average americans just want their middle class jobs back that the repubs and clinton allowed to leave, so a few might max out their personal wealth as we let them have free access to our markets. And in my book, when you hurt other people, millions of them, which gives us depression era jobless rates, that is as evil as you can get, short of molesting children.

The entertainment industry did not do this.

I will state the Portfolio Conservative truth once again, anyonw who is not for profit first, profit second, profit always is considered a flaming Liberal by Portfolio Conservatives.
Damned be our national security or welfare.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I think the entertainment industry has more liberals than conservatives. Yet it isn't the entertainment industry that is exploiting poor folks in foreign nations, nor using illegals, or HB1 visas to max out their profits. And that industry still have unions. If they were conservative they would have killed the unions.

I do think that allowing greed of a few to destroy out middle class is evil, and that Clinton is as much to blame as the conservatives who devised free trade at the prompt of special interests. I think cons who say the unemployed are that way because they are lazy no account bums are evil. I think anyone who thinks greed is good is evil. So yeah, overall the cons are certainly filled with evil hearts. These are not your Eisenhower republicans here. That is obvious. The cons believe average americans want to live off of other taxpayers, when the fact is, average americans just want their middle class jobs back that the repubs and clinton allowed to leave, so a few might max out their personal wealth as we let them have free access to our markets. And in my book, when you hurt other people, millions of them, which gives us depression era jobless rates, that is as evil as you can get, short of molesting children.

The entertainment industry did not do this.

But the entertainment industry has a huge imbalance in what it pays employees. Some folks make several million for a single film, while some make a few dollars per hour. Mike Moore and Sara Parker should give most of what they earn back to these poor union workers. Right?

Originally Posted by Damn Yankee

But the entertainment industry has a huge imbalance in what it pays employees. Some folks make several million for a single film, while some make a few dollars per hour. Mike Moore and Sara Parker should give most of what they earn back to these poor union workers. Right?

The students and people I have met and those I know who work in the media industry know what their salaries will be and also know nobody in the industry is screaming that they're all lazy and stupid and need visas to replace them.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

When those not in the upper class complain about the actuality, the right always comes back with this class warfare rhetoric. The real class war has been waged and won sir.

By socialists, I'm sure you think.

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

I HAVE NEVER maintained that wages, wealth should be equal. You will never find me ever saying such an odd thing. I am concerned with the disparity

I see. There is obviously some disparity amount that is not OK with you. Unequal is OK as long as wages are more equal than not.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Blue Doggy

the trend that is devastating to america, as a nation, and to her average people

A lie of Liberalism. If the rich make less it does not mean the poor make more.

JL,
If the rich, or poor, lie to make even one buck, that's a problem.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

JL,
If the rich, or poor, lie to make even one buck, that's a problem.

Funny how the lunacy of the Left's MORAL EQUIVALENCE is abandoned here. The amount of unfunded liabilities is somewhat more than $1, U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time. Try
$115,000,000,000,000

Said differently, not all problems are created equally.