Interesting take on conservatives and liberals.
Conservatives believe all the things the liberal guy said.
For example: "helping the little guy":
- teach individualism/personal responsibility not government reliance (the "little guy" learns self-reliance)
- kick people off welfare programs, so it motivates them to get a job (avoid the "welfare trap")
- lowering taxes and regulation on employers ("trickle down" economics ultimately benefits the "little guy")
- eliminate minimum wage and some labor laws (to make the "little guy" more competitive)
- lower taxes/smaller government (so the "little guy" keeps more of his money)
- open up free trade markets (so the "little guy" has an improved standard of living)
There are quite a few differences, some rather fundamental, that a comedy sketch cannot quite express. This could be an interesting thread so I'll start with one: freedom of action is often interpreted a different way by the Left and the Right.
Best explained through an example. We enjoy freedom of movement within Western countries, a liberty not enjoyed by citizens of many communist regimes, where special permission was required to travel around the territory and very special permission required to leave.
Movement over great distances costs money. It might cost Joe $10 for a train ticket to the next town. Even if Joe doesn't have any money the "conservative" maintains what is obvious to him, Joe still has the freedom to move, just not the means at present. To many "liberals" Joe is clearly not free to travel, since he doesn't have the money.
The same thinking permeates many areas of the Left/Right divide, especially when it comes to wealth acquisition and status.
_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 34,237
Location: Long Island, New York
Best explained through an example. We enjoy freedom of movement within Western countries, a liberty not enjoyed by citizens of many communist regimes, where special permission was required to travel around the territory and very special permission required to leave.
Movement over great distances costs money. It might cost Joe $10 for a train ticket to the next town. Even if Joe doesn't have any money the "conservative" maintains what is obvious to him, Joe still has the freedom to move, just not the means at present. To many "liberals" Joe is clearly not free to travel, since he doesn't have the money.
The same thinking permeates many areas of the Left/Right divide, especially when it comes to wealth acquisition and status.
A conservative might say they do not have freedom of movement on college campuses because of safe spaces. SJW's will say conservatives have freedom of movement but have to suffer consequences for their privileges, racism, sexism, homophobia, gender identities phobias and microaggressions.
_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity
“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman
Yes. That's not a bad counter example, though a somewhat more complicated issue. When anyone seriously tries to defend what student unions are up to, I say one thing. Imagine if college was a safe space for me...
_________________
Behold! we are not bound for ever to the circles of the world, and beyond them is more than memory, Farewell!
Sweetleaf
Veteran
Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,439
Location: Somewhere in Colorado
For example: "helping the little guy":
- teach individualism/personal responsibility not government reliance (the "little guy" learns self-reliance)
- kick people off welfare programs, so it motivates them to get a job (avoid the "welfare trap")
- lowering taxes and regulation on employers ("trickle down" economics ultimately benefits the "little guy")
- eliminate minimum wage and some labor laws (to make the "little guy" more competitive)
- lower taxes/smaller government (so the "little guy" keeps more of his money)
- open up free trade markets (so the "little guy" has an improved standard of living)
A lot of people on welfare programs have a job, unless they are on SSI disability and not participating in Ticket to Work currently.
Trickle down economics is a scam.
_________________
We won't go back.
Kraichgauer
Veteran
Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 47,739
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.
For example: "helping the little guy":
- teach individualism/personal responsibility not government reliance (the "little guy" learns self-reliance)
- kick people off welfare programs, so it motivates them to get a job (avoid the "welfare trap")
- lowering taxes and regulation on employers ("trickle down" economics ultimately benefits the "little guy")
- eliminate minimum wage and some labor laws (to make the "little guy" more competitive)
- lower taxes/smaller government (so the "little guy" keeps more of his money)
- open up free trade markets (so the "little guy" has an improved standard of living)
A lot of people on welfare programs have a job, unless they are on SSI disability and not participating in Ticket to Work currently.
Trickle down economics is a scam.
Of course it's a scam. Prosperity and jobs only increase when there's a demand, not when would-be-job-makers are given breaks to get more money. Supply side economics, like communism, only looks good on paper, but is just a pie-in-the-sky fantasy when applied to reality.
_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
How interesting do you think your life is? |
10 Jan 2024, 12:29 pm |