LiberalDevil has inspired me

[Don't Be Daft!]

As I said I'm a democratic socialist. I am not in bed with the like of those nutters(Pol Pot, Stalin, Mao). Although both Lenin and Stalin had some wee good points. They took the ideology too far.

[joe bloe]

I'm not sure I buy into the idea of the slippery slope theory when it comes to democratic socialism necessarily morphing into Soviet style communism.

I understand the vast majority of liberals and democratic socialists have noble intentions and are motivated by good will. The problem is that when socialism fails, as it is failing in Europe, the economic collapse creates an environment of desperation and chaos that makes tyranny inevitable.

[nevergaveitathought]

conservatism is about a liberty within which individuals govern themselves in the framework of a social contract. it seeks a liberty which is the ability to act freely and also a freedom from coercion. it values individual industry and private property as it views man acting in his own interest provides the greatest benefit to community. it defines rights as those common to a natural man, the right of the individual to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. it sees rights as those which do not diminish the liberty of another within a common social contract. its strongest adherents try to live as conservatives.

liberalism, nee socialism, as is known in the united states is about an egalitarianism seeking to provide a certain lifestyle to people. it has a different view of rights, seeing rights as those insuring the goals of socialism even to the denial of liberty. as it progresses toward complete socialism it views all means of production as owned for the common good and the absence of private property. it views rights as entitlements, or a legal right or a "civil" right; rights that can change and which can be asserted even through coercion upon another. its leaders seldom live privately as socialists.

the tension between these competing views and the outcome in america will depend on what its people ultimately will accept as the greater societal value, liberty and freedom or equality of outcome.

[Sexyeccentric1]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

What conservatives do have a problem with is massive welfare spending on people that don't actually need help but choose to parasite off of their hard working neighbors.

Here in lies these misconceptions about welfare and or aid to the poor, elderly and disabled.

"According to the current conservative palaver, we've been wasting billions on handouts to undeserving people with no appreciable effect. This is pretty much pure fantasy".

An old article on welfare money and poverty

I bet none of you have ever been poor or had to live on welfare or take disability if you have then you are guilty then of the very thing your accusing others of "socialism".

By the way that social security check some of you older folks are receiving right now is a form of your so called "socialism". What you put into the system does not come close to what your taking out.

[Iaintliein]

Originally Posted by Sexyeccentric1

Here in lies these misconceptions about welfare and or aid to the poor, elderly and disabled.

"According to the current conservative palaver, we've been wasting billions on handouts to undeserving people with no appreciable effect. This is pretty much pure fantasy".

An old article on welfare money and poverty

I bet none of you have ever been poor or had to live on welfare or take disability if you have then you are guilty then of the very thing your accusing others of "socialism".

By the way that social security check some of you older folks are receiving right now is a form of your so called "socialism". What you put into the system does not come close to what your taking out.

Thanks for the reminder: I left out "Class Guilt" as one of the things socialism depends on for survival.

The "War on Poverty" is a dismal failure, perpetuating generational dependence on government.

I wholeheartedly agree by the way, social security should be phased out as quickly as possible. FDR did more long lasting harm to the US than Hitler and Tojo combined.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Sexyeccentric1

Here in lies these misconceptions about welfare and or aid to the poor, elderly and disabled.

"According to the current conservative palaver, we've been wasting billions on handouts to undeserving people with no appreciable effect. This is pretty much pure fantasy".

An old article on welfare money and poverty

I bet none of you have ever been poor or had to live on welfare or take disability if you have then you are guilty then of the very thing your accusing others of "socialism".

By the way that social security check some of you older folks are receiving right now is a form of your so called "socialism". What you put into the system does not come close to what your taking out.

Social Security is the biggest rippoff in the history the world. If Americans were allowed to invest the money taken from them for Social Security in a private pension fund they would be able retire in comfort.

Government workers were allowed to opt out of Social Security in Galveston county and Brazoria county. They retired on several times as much money as they would have gotten from Social Security.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

conservatism is about a liberty within which individuals govern themselves in the framework of a social contract. it seeks a liberty which is the ability to act freely and also a freedom from coercion. it values individual industry and private property as it views man acting in his own interest provides the greatest benefit to community. it defines rights as those common to a natural man, the right of the individual to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. it sees rights as those which do not diminish the liberty of another within a common social contract. its strongest adherents try to live as conservatives.

liberalism, nee socialism, as is known in the united states is about an egalitarianism seeking to provide a certain lifestyle to people. it has a different view of rights, seeing rights as those insuring the goals of socialism even to the denial of liberty. as it progresses toward complete socialism it views all means of production as owned for the common good and the absence of private property. it views rights as entitlements, or a legal right or a "civil" right; rights that can change and which can be asserted even through coercion upon another. its leaders seldom live privately as socialists.

the tension between these competing views and the outcome in america will depend on what its people ultimately will accept as the greater societal value, liberty and freedom or equality of outcome.

I think the major differences between the left and right are illustrated by comparing the French revolution and the American revolution.

The American revolution was a glorious success that produced freedom and affluence; the French revolution was a hellish failure that ended in mass executions and tyranny.

The fundamental difference between the two is the American respect for individual liberty and the French emphasis on equality. I think the French were basically motivated by Rousseau's notion of the noble savage, that man is perfect at his core and consequently is naturally altruistic. It's interesting to read Rousseau's eighteenth century theories about politics and what constituted the ideal society; it reads just like modern day liberals.

I think Adam Smith's idea that the individual's pursuit of self interest benefits the whole, pretty much says it all.

[Sexyeccentric1]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Social Security is the biggest rippoff in the history the world. If Americans were allowed to invest the money taken from them for Social Security in a private pension fund they would be able retire in comfort.

Government workers were allowed to opt out of Social Security in Galveston county and Brazoria county. They retired on several times as much money as they would have gotten from Social Security.

I would be all for a private pension fund for our citizens to opt into provided we didn't have to worry about the crooks at the big banks and on wallstreet. They have already shown through their actions that they can't be trusted with other peoples money. See crash of Wallstreet of 2008.. and so on. Yes, medicare and social security need to be worked on and overhauled before it is too late.

[I B Hankering]

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...the-next-steps

[WTF]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

I think Adam Smith's idea that the individual's pursuit of self interest benefits the whole, pretty much says it all.

As evident by the Banking Bailout!

[CJ7]

Originally Posted by Sexyeccentric1

I would be all for a private pension fund for our citizens to opt into provided we didn't have to worry about the crooks at the big banks and on wallstreet. They have already shown through their actions that they can't be trusted with other peoples money. See crash of Wallstreet of 2008.. and so on. Yes, medicare and social security need to be worked on and overhauled before it is too late.

the vast majority of seniors arent capable of managing their own accounts, much less deciding WHAT to purchase that has term growth ... enter a fund manager or financial planner ... then enter FEE after FEE after FEE and an account that can buy an ice cream bar at the 7-11

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by CJ7

the vast majority of seniors arent capable of managing their own accounts, much less deciding WHAT to purchase that has term growth ... enter a fund manager or financial planner ... then enter FEE after FEE after FEE and an account that can buy an ice cream bar at the 7-11

You've finally convinced me. We should just trust the wonderful folks at the federal government to do everything.

Provide our health care, educate our children, provide a monthly stipend for our old age, public housing, public transportation, etc, etc. It sure worked out great in the Soviet Union!

After all, what do we know about running our own lives?

[CJ7]

lock box SS and keep the damn politicians from using the fund for their personal agenda ... end of problem

sans all the off center generalized etc etc etc bs, remind me how hard it was for seniors to decide what insurance to buy when the ill advised Part D was shoved up their asses?

the remind me how easy it is to keep up with an ever changing market and a shyster $$ advisor ...

[Don't Be Daft!]

Sounds fine by me mate as long as it doesn't become an issue where its forced down one's throat. In the UK most of what you said above is exactly the way it is. However, the private route is there for those who want it. I went to all private schools so I can't say I'm one to talk. But, many of my mates went to public schools and they turned out quite well.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by CJ7

lock box SS and keep the damn politicians from using the fund for their personal agenda ... end of problem

sans all the off center generalized etc etc etc bs, remind me how hard it was for seniors to decide what insurance to buy when the ill advised Part D was shoved up their asses?

the remind me how easy it is to keep up with an ever changing market and a shyster $$ advisor ...

Saying that social security would be great except that the politicians looted it reminds me of the old joke: Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how'd you like the play?