|
|
Post by Azan on Mar 20, 2005 0:10:59 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 21, 2005 0:09:31 GMT -5
i think i'm kinda liberal-moderate
|
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 21, 2005 0:17:59 GMT -5
the test said:
On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (34).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Centrist (54).
0 being completely liberal and 100 being completely conservative
|
|
|
|
Post by decapitatedKOW on Mar 22, 2005 2:01:50 GMT -5
ok well I am like almost a bill clinton lol I took this poll or form and it said that imagine that(lol) its funny me and this one kid none of you know argue about this all the time. well mostly that bush is a dumb ass or not. and well I don't really have anything to back anything dumb i'm just like look at time you can just tell he is dumb. and you also can say that he doesn't make that many speeches, he has mad the least out of all the presidents and like we have tvs which is weird righT? wow cap t what is up with that fun
ok and well so like always I will just say conservatives only look out for there own and liverals try to make every1 happy not just themselves.
i didn't get the seconds ones ranking thing, but I did not take the first one to long. I was like woo forget this mad way to much it has to be quick and simple. but you know I forget what is going on so I quit
|
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 22, 2005 18:48:17 GMT -5
see, I have not responded to the poll question, because although I may be a moderate liberal, I don't believe one is better than the other
|
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Mar 22, 2005 19:25:31 GMT -5
yeah I guess I worded it wrong, oh well
|
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 22, 2005 20:15:52 GMT -5
it should say:
ARE YOU A LIBERAL OR A CONSERVATIVE?
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Mar 22, 2005 20:47:28 GMT -5
Yes the question is worded wrong, but I am a conservative. The question should say, do you think liberals or consrvatives have the right idea.
As to Mr. KOW's post, yes Bush is not the brightest person, but he needs our support, so you shouldn't make fun of him, no matter how stupid he is. It is popular belief that lberals want whats best for everyone and conservatives are self-centered and, well, that pretty much sums it up. But I will say this: liberals want everyone to stop everything and help each other, which would be great. But it ain't gonna happen, so be reasonable. I'm all for world peace, but the only way to get it is by means of war. The world has bad people in it, it's a fact of life. We must purge the bad people, and only then may we live in peace. (sorry if it's a bit too biblical, just don't take it literally word for word)
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Mar 22, 2005 21:06:31 GMT -5
Okay now I will list a few of the major standpoints that I believe in as a conservative:
# 1-Abortion: Yeah it's supposedly all about women's rights, but who'll stand up for the babies if I don't?
# 2-Taxes: DO NOT TAX THE RICH EXCESSIVELY!! In america we have capitalism, and those who are rich are rich because they work hard. Tax more than middle class, but don't go overboard
# 3-Wellfare: Give a man a fish, and you'll feed him for a day...
# 4-War: I just don't think the terrorists are going to sit down and be peaceful... SO KILL THEM!
# 5- Guns: They don't kill people, people do. 2nd Amendment people, c'mon!
# 6- Death Penalty: I don't ever plan on going to death row, so i'm all right with the death penalty.
# 7- Homeless: You take the cards life deals you, and if you don't like them, thats too bad. Better luck next time.
These are 7 points that I could think of right now. If you disagree (which many of you probably do) with any of these, feel ENCOURAGED to say so (this means you jiub). After all this IS a debate board. Also if I missed any please post and i'd be happy to fill you in on more of my opinions if you would like to know.
|
|
|
|
Post by GamerMan on Mar 22, 2005 22:22:01 GMT -5
I'm a european liberal. More liberal than US liberals on ideas of taxation and social issues, but like what a conservative liberal will say about economic issues with the exception of taxation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 23, 2005 1:02:10 GMT -5
see, this is weird, because I agree with a lot of the things lobstrosity said, but im still liberal and he's conservative... hmm...
|
|
|
|
Post by GamerMan on Mar 23, 2005 11:59:43 GMT -5
thats because that test was not an accurate display of conservative or liberal side of teh spectrum. it didn't take into account what issues were normative and which posititve, the weighing of issues, nor anything else of the like.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Mar 23, 2005 20:42:35 GMT -5
Okay Gamerman, I agree with some of your points, and disagree with others.
Everyone has their own opinion on abortion, and mine happens to be that it's not right. But i'm also not saying we should get rid of it. Its just that some people say we should have govt. funded abortion clinics and I don't like the idea of my tax money supporting things I am against.
Then again, some people were against the war, and the government sure paid for that. I agree with you here. The war was a good idea, but it was a little half-baked. We should have thought and planned first.
On the taxation thing, I am not saying we should hand out tax breaks for the rich, but we should tax them at the same rate as the middle/lower classes. WE should tax them more, but not until the point that they are as poor as the rest of the country.
And with the whole homeless and wellfare thing, I happen to disagree with you here. Housing for the homeless will help the communities, and improve the quality of life on the streets, but the govt. should not have to pay for all that. I think the communities themselves should do that. And it's been proven that if you let people learn to work for themselves, they become more independant and no longer need to rely on government handouts. In a capitalist society, in order for some to succeed, others must fail. I think thats the way it should be, and if we can think of a better system, then me may use it. (Any suggestions?)
Okay, and as for the guns, we should not let just anybody waltz into a store and pick up an assault rifle, but there's no need to go banning them left and right. Background checks and things like that are enough. Many power tools could be effective weapons, but there's no need to ban them now is there? It's like that law some people want to pass about limiting cold medicine because people can use it to make drugs. What's next, limiting cars because people could be DWI? Limiting water bacause toddlers can drown?
And lastly, not that many people get sentenced to capital punishment anymore, even in the south. And so it's even less likely that an innocent person will be convicted. And with the recent developments in forensic evidence technology, it's even less likely.
And with jail space at such a premium, we need the death penalty. The tax payers should not be the ones paying for criminals to sit in jail. Here's an idea! have the convicts live in a town with all the homeless and make it a reality tv show! Just kidding ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by GamerMan on Mar 24, 2005 2:00:45 GMT -5
goverment does act as our community banded program, thats basicly its soul purpose. And it does this because it can use force like no one else can. thus garentee products for the commons are payed by the commons. For a simpler example, ill bring you to a a mosquito example.
"Suppose that an area has a terrible mosquito problem. An enterprising young man decides that it would be fairly cheap to spray the area ponds and swamps to control mosquitoes. (In most species of mosquitoes, the larval stage is spent living in water, but breathing air.) He also reasons that most of the people would value a reduction in mosquitoes a great deal. However, even if his assessment of the situation is correct, an attempt to form a business will run into a serious problem, the problem of the free rider.
To see the problem of the free rider, consider the options open to a "customer" of the mosquito-reduction service who is asked to pay $25.00. If he pays $25.00, he will get a reduction in mosquitoes (if enough other people also pay to make the service financially viable). If he refuses to pay, he will still get the same reduction in mosquitoes (again assuming that there are enough other people who pay so the service is financially viable). Once the service is produced, it cannot be withheld from people who do not pay for it. Mosquitoes attempt to bite the first target they find, and are not likely to bite only those who do not pay businessmen who are trying to kill them. Given the options, each person is likely to reason that his $25.00 is unimportant relative to the total amount needed to make the enterprise successful, and thus the results will not depend on his contribution. However, if everyone thinks this way, the enterprise cannot come into being. Hence there is a paradox: though people may want the service a great deal, and though it may be cheap to produce, it may be unprofitable to produce. "
"The government could provide a mosquito-control program, paying for it by taxing citizens. Even when voluntary organization is possible, it may be much easier (and require fewer resources to collect the money necessary for the program) to use the power of the government to provide public goods." -Robert Schenk 2002
and that basicly also explains the homeless thing
i dont think guns need to be banned, nor do most other liberals. Im a gun owner, so is kerry, and same with even ted kennedy, in fact the idea of guns is accually almost the same for both parties, its just the idea behind how to market it. Now concealable firearms is a bit different matter, I dont think that people should be able to have a concealable gun with them around in public areas. and this is the area conservatives and liberals disagree on.
and in most states capital punishment is going down, except texas, where they are making it easier and easier!
|
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 24, 2005 18:09:30 GMT -5
uhhh, gamerman? in case u haven't figured it out yet, ur doing quotes incorrectly
|
|
)
)
;D 
