Fiscally Conservative & Social Liberal?

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Fiscally Conservative & Social Liberal?
60
Mon, 07-26-2004 - 9:55pm
I read another post and someone mentioned being fiscally conservative and socially liberal. Personally I find this hard to believe.

Perhaps you could be

A. Conservative on Both

B. Moderate fiscally and moderate socially

C. Liberal on Both.

It just seem difficult if not impossible to be Fiscally conservative and socially liberal and here is why.

Most liberal programs increase gov't control over private institutions, increase spending on issues, or increase red tape, etc. This all adversly affects efficiency or causes increases in gov't spending. Both of which a fiscal conservative would be against. Yet I hear this uddered all the time. I wonder if it is a way of presenting yourself as not one of the extremes on either side. You certainly can get labeled when you say I'm a conservative or I'm a liberal. So you play both sides of the fence.

I'm not convinced it is not possible it just seems unlikely. It would seem in every case you would end up being a moderate or liberal if you support liberal social programs because of their restriction on the free market or their inherent cost from tax payer coffers.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 8:11am
How much will killing the time and effort on trying to oppose gay marrage cost the government?

Only one example.

And can you please give an estimate of how much it will cost to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Alligence?

Thank you.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 3:07pm
"How much will killing the time and effort on trying to oppose gay marrage cost the government?"

Fair enough although it would have fiscal ramifications I could easily argue "your" side of the arguement as well.

"And can you please give an estimate of how much it will cost to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Alligence? "

It would cost a ton but not fiscally.

I would say these are two pretty good examples. Just glad I'm strictly conservative so I can argue against these points without needing a financial reason.

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 3:57pm
These things are not mutually incompatible.. Being pro-choice (but yet anti-abortion) also has no fiscal aspect. But even being supportive of social programs doesn't mean one wants the government to spend more. For example health care is an area where I think in the end there are savings to be made by treating people early in life, and prevention, that enables them to be productive citizens and not end up later being on medicaid with catastrophic illnesses. A ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure.

Also, it's about priorities... You can spend more on some social programs and less on others or less on other expenses. I personally would be willing to spend more on anything related to children (including pre-natally) and instead tax-back some benefits provided to adults (including seniors) that can afford it. I think it's about making an investment in our future - children. For example, if you provide all children free health care, dental care, psychological care, and improve our education system, what do you think would happen? We would get an educated, healthy and productive workforce that would improve our overall standard of living, and we would get less crime. I read somewhere that one of the reasons Canada has a lower crime rate is because something like three times as many of our children with psychiatric or psychological disorders get treated in childhood. A very large segment of the jail population suffers from mild to severe mental illness. Some of it may also be from lack of care, alcohol or drug abuse by their mother during pregnancy.

Here in Canada, there are many programs implemented by both conservative governments and by liberal governments I didn't support. But I can tell you that Health care is certainly one I DO support!


Edited 7/27/2004 6:17 pm ET ET by nicecanadianlady

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-08-2003
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 3:59pm
Why is the label so important? I supported and voted for Bush in 2000. Almost 4 years later, there's not much of anything more important in my life than voting him out. What does that make me? A kerry republican, sheesh I hope not.

Politically conservative values I hold dear:

Fiscal discipline and a balanced budget.

Strong national defense and a military force ready to roll when in need.

Small, more efficient government.

Less intrusion into peoples personal lives.

But I am for Gay Marriage, Pro-choice, against the war on drugs, for the assault weapons ban, against the Death Penalty.

Thats about it off the top of my head. I would describe myself as being politically conservative, but socially liberal. More Libertarian than anything else, but I have voted republican in every election since 1984, except 1996: I couldnt even hold my nose and vote for Dole/Kemp.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2004
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 4:47pm
I fall very closely along those lines as well. I think it is very difficult for staunch conservatives, especially those that carry the biblical line as a driving force of their political views, to grasp that it can be so. I have voted Democratic mainly on the national level and conservative mainly on the state and local levels, so I'm not sure what that makes me (other than a registered Independent!). There are two that won't be getting my vote on their next up for sure, and those are George W. Bush and Rick Santorum. They have just gone too far right for me to feel that they share or represent my values, and Santorum has really been an embarassment to PA of late, if you ask me. He sounds like a ranting lunatic sometimes, such as his assertion that gay marriage will cause more children to be born out of wedlock. I'd like to see the biological explanation on that one Rick!

This used to be called being a moderate, but people act like we aren't around any more!

Glassy

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-16-2003
Tue, 07-27-2004 - 7:33pm
<>

Please explain.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-30-2004
Sat, 07-31-2004 - 8:03pm
I’d like to take this discussion a step further. It seems to me that many people consider the terms liberal and conservative to be opposites, like tall and short. One can be tall or short or of median height, but one cannot be both tall and short at the same time. But, based on their definitions liberal and conservative are not opposites and one can be both liberal and conservative, or neither liberal nor conservative as well as only liberal, or only conservative.

A concise definition of a political conservative is “disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions etc. and to resist change” (The Random House College Dictionary Revised Edition, 1975).

In this way conservative philosophy is relative to the existing society or culture. That is a conservative will support existing conditions and institutions, no matter what they are. In the Soviet Union during the 1970's and 80's the Communists were the conservatives.

It seems to me that throughout history most people, at most times were conservatives. Every once and a while that would change with the result that people would change the previously existing conditions and institutions.

The definition of liberal is more involved. A liberal is “favorable to progress or reform . . .” The term also means “of, or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies”; “favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties”; “favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression”; “free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant”; “open-minded or tolerant esp., free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.”; “characterized by generosity and willingness to give in large amounts”; “given freely or abundantly”; “not strict or rigorous; free; not literal”; etc. (ibid.).

Based on the above, for the most part, liberal philosophy is not relative to the existing society or culture. Further, in the Soviet Union during the 1970's and 80's the liberals were in favor of moving toward less government control over the economic and over life in general.

Now, we get to the main point. Americans, Canadians and Europeans, living during the first decade of the 21st century, reside in a profoundly liberal society and culture, with profoundly liberal existing conditions and institutions. So to be a conservative in the manner described above and I believe most people currently are, one must also be a liberal.

That, does not mean that everyone now-a-days hold the same positions, there are some differences between the positions held by Republicans and Democrats. But, from a historical viewpoint those differences are small. If a person who fully supports the Republican party platform and another person, who fully supports the Democrat party platform, were to be transported in time back to the 1920's they would both be seen as pretty much equally radical and neither would be considered a conservative. Even during the 1930', 1940's and 1950's both would be considered to be left of center.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Sat, 07-31-2004 - 11:25pm

Excellent post, thank you!


iVillage Member
Registered: 07-30-2004
Mon, 08-02-2004 - 8:58pm
And thank you for your excellent welcome.

Tom

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Mon, 08-02-2004 - 9:36pm
While your definitions are sound and correct. The words conservative and liberal have taken on meanings well beyond their dictionary meaning or maybe not, depends on how you view this post.

I am a conservative. I believe in traditional values and morals. I am in favor of a limited, smaller, less intrusive government. I prefer personal responsibility rather than state dependence. Neighborhood charities rather than governmental ones. I am for lessening the tax burden on people and freeing them to be innovative. I want hard work and determination to be what puts you ahead of the pack, not a quota system. I believe racial equality will exist when we stop asking your race and start asking your qualifications. I hate multiculturalism and want to say Merry Christmas. I don't like divorce, vulgar entertainment, abortion, or an openly sexual society. I support marriage, the normal kind, playing with your kids, having dinner as a family, supporting your family and friends and being their for your neigbors.

Does that make me a conservative? Well Yes and No. Yes I'd like to conserve these values but the values I hope to conserve are sadly gone. I wouldn't want to conserve the current society we live in as it is destined to failure. I want our society to return to these core values. So in that sense I'm advocating change.

In short...I'm the most liberal conservative you'll ever find.

Pages