Fiscally Conservative & Social Liberal?
Find a Conversation
| Mon, 07-26-2004 - 9:55pm |
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
"Please explain."
Nah....You know and if you don't you wouldn't understand.
But one point: if there had always be on our society people who are staunchly conservative (and therefore don't want change), we would still live in a world where women have no votes, have no rights, slavery is legal, no civil rights, to name a few changes that were deemed 'liberal' in the past.
I think the key is balancing 'conservatism' with 'liberalism' and carefully choosing those changes which will benefit society as a whole, and/or improve the lives of individual citizens. It is a difficult balance, but how we maintain that balance is what reflects on how 'civilized' we really are.
Well we can debate those later if you like...
"But one point: if there had always be on our society people who are staunchly conservative (and therefore don't want change), we would still live in a world where women have no votes, have no rights, slavery is legal, no civil rights, to name a few changes that were deemed 'liberal' in the past"
I agree. I would have been liberal during the revolution, liberal during slavery, and liberal for equal rights. But those have all been establish so now I'm labeled conservative because I defend those traditional values.
Oh well....I'll be liberal in 50 years when I want our new socialist gov't overthrown.
I'll just stick to the right side of the issues and let people call me and label me what they will.
Since when have those able to give and those in need lived in the same neighborhood?
Funny way to say you can't explain.
I guess in your world the needy and those able to provide help don't live together.
Interesting.
You have this class warfare thing going in your mind. That's fine, your entitled to it. You believe whatever you believe...I stopped trying to figure it out because from what I can tell people who have money are greedy and those that don't aren't capable of helping themselves. Fine, whatever, believe what you want. You sound like you harbor resentment and bitterness. Maybe life dealt you a bad hand, I dont know.
I do know debating issue with regards to helping people and financial resources is a mute point with you.
Believe what you want.
See post 17.
NO. You have the idea that this is what's going on in my mind. "class warfare" is right-wing propaganda.
It does not compute.
Pages