|
| Thread: Liberals vs. Conservatives |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · «PREV |
|
Wolfman
Responsible
Supreme Hero
Insomniac
|
posted June 22, 2003 02:21 AM |
|
|
Quote:
One thing I am happy about in the Liberal v. Conservative issue is that more conservative media is coming in with The Savage Nation and Scarborough Country.
Yes! Michael Savage knows what he is talking about, I thought I was listening to myself the first time I heard him(minus the New York accent )
I have been away for a while, nice reading the new posts from the new people.
____________
|
|
SirDunco
Responsible
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted June 23, 2003 08:50 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote
"P.S. Dargon the us welfare system is suited for the middle classes. Yet it is interesting that a considerable percentage of US citizens, live below the line of poverty(and these are people who have usualy 2 or 3 jobs...)
"
I think it might be helpful if you stated facts versus fantasy. The USA has extremely low poverty..and the majority in poverty are NOT working at all...let alone 2-3 jobs...that is a joke.
Moreover...the majority of the people in the USA who qualify under "poverty" have TV's, Microwaves, food, housing, etc....hardly poor by the common understanding.
Most of our poor...are very rich when compared with the rest of the world. I find it funny how people try to distort the reality of what the USA is like. The USA has the HIGHEST standard of living for their citizens in the world...so stick that in your pipe and smoke it
dargon...look i don't know why i'm even bothering with you. It is ovious that your are a concealed american nationalist so there is very little hope of changing you...but take this into concideration: #1.: You can't compare poverty around the world! The fact is that those people are still poor and struggle to live from day to day. Wheather they have TV's or stuff doesn't matter! The fact thet they live below the line of poverty MEANS THAT THEY ARE POOR!
#2.: AS i've said the american welfare system is biuld for the middle class and up, which is a joke. The welfare should serve the poor and the worlking class not those who feed off of them! So that means that you have to be have to have a reasonable amount of money to get by in that consoming society.
#3.: It isn't true that most of the american poor aren't working. Apears that you have no knowladge of those people who work day shifts at some mcdonalds and nights at bars or somewhere...
Now to RedSoxs...abortions are a matter of personal opinion. I personaly don't agree with those people who say that life starts when the bay starts forming. It isn't indipendent life yet it is in a way a form of parasitism...the young organizm takes food and nourturing vitamins directly from another body so that's why i say life starts at birth...but that's my personal opinion
____________
|
|
Aquaman333
Famous Hero
of the seven seas
|
|
posted June 23, 2003 11:03 PM |
|
|
|
No offense Dunco, but I think Dargon is right.
|
|
Aquaman333
Famous Hero
of the seven seas
|
|
posted June 23, 2003 11:05 PM |
|
|
|
Oh, wait sorry, my mistake. Dargon is on your side. I'm for whoever you quoted.
|
|
Draco
Promising
Famous Hero
|
|
posted June 23, 2003 11:32 PM |
|
|
Poor is relative lets leave it at that. there are people in africa living off about 100$ a year. the welfare system needs reforme however. there has to be a way to controle peoples abuse of the system. for instance Panhandlers, the money they mooch off people doesnt go towards there income tax, people here (in canada) can go on welfare get a free apartment free food (enough money to cover anyways) and go out panhandling, they get like $30 a day from the poor saps lets say 30$ a day time 20 working days thats 600 a month, add that to the close to 700 the government gives then and poof a guy without a real job is making $15,600.00 clear tax free a year. not to bad for sitting on the street corner.
They are not poor, they choose to be lazy. they make more then i do working full time. imagine if they had kids all the extra money gotten for that.
note to visitors from afar, dont give panhandlers any money!
p.s. Get this, on Portage (one of our main city routes) there were panhandlers holding a sign that read "NEED BEER". seriously people GET A JOB!
ok i kinda jumped off the boat there, oops
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted June 27, 2003 09:54 AM |
|
|
SirDunco you obviously know little about how "poverty" is defined.
It is a relative term. Some nations "poverty" level is when people can't feed themselves. USA "poverty" level is when someone is below a certain income..and that rate continues to rise as USA becomes more prosperous...so you are arguing like a dog chasing its tail.
In the USA there will always be people below the poverty line...the crux of the matter is not wether someone is below the poverty line or not...the important question is twofold...One do they have the basic necessities to live and two are they motivated or lazy.
I have worked with the poor in our country as a social worker...so it would be wise if you began to understand terms before you spout and make yourself look so foolish.
____________
Humans are gods with anuses -Earnest Becker
|
|
Nidhgrin
Honorable
Famous Hero
baking cookies from stardust
|
posted June 27, 2003 02:46 PM |
|
|
Very good thread RedSox! This is growing into an interesting discussion here. Before I post my opinion here though, I'd like to know why you listed only liberals or conservatives...
I can find myself in some liberal points of views but would never call myself a liberal. What about progressive and green parties? Perhaps those are not common terms for a lot of americans but they are quite widely spread throughout Europe...
|
|
RedSoxFan3
Admirable
Legendary Hero
Fan of Red Sox
|
|
posted June 28, 2003 06:16 AM |
|
|
That's because in America the politicians want to be seen as moderate as possible that way they get the most votes. It's bad to be conservative or liberal as you will upset many voters.
____________
Go Red Sox!
|
|
dArGOn
Famous Hero
|
|
posted July 01, 2003 06:43 AM |
|
|
Nidhgrin...here in the USA...progressives and greens are typically considered liberals. Contrary to common perception the USA has over 10 political parties…it is just that the other parties don’t get enough support to register on the political scene.
The democrats consider themselves Progressives..which is kind of a misnomer as they are no longer progressive but defenders of the status quo big government. Green party..or the environmentalist have been a part of the democratic party here for a long time.
As far as I can ascertain there are three main philosophies in politics....libertarians (who are fiscally conservative and morally more for liberty with no value judgments...their key virtue is freedom)...conservatives (such as in the USA republicans which tend to be fiscally conservative and morally traditional, and for limited government intervention ...their key virtue is responsibility) and liberals (such as democrats/socialist/communists which tend to be fiscally liberal, morally untraditional, and socially more expansive...their key virtue is care). All other parties/philosophies seem to be a mixture of the those three.
Personally I of course lean heavily towards responsibility...but I think all 3 philosophies bring an important virtue to the table for all people to consider and possibly integrate.
____________
Humans are gods with anuses -Earnest Becker
|
|
|
|
