• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Wealth distribution in the United States

By the way, regarding #4, your attribution of the deficit to liberals has been shown to be false in this thread.

Actually Republicans have tried to make debt illegal 30 times and Democrats have killed every effort because their only priority is to buy votes with always more welfare entitlements. Do you understand?
 
Attributing foreign policy to liberals is going to take way more proof than a point in a list:

what foreign policy???????You clean forgot to say?
 
If I had an honest bone in my body, I would realize that there is neither "liberal war" on schools or on religion.:

1) Conservatives want vouchers and privatization and competition and parents shopping for good schools
2) instead we have liberal unions schools
3) our kids are about the dumbest in the civilized world

can you come to a conclusion from the facts??
 
If I had an honest bone in my body, I would realize that there is neither "liberal war" on schools or on religion.:

1+1=2 notice that liberalism is always based in pure ignorance?



The Left's War on Christianity - John Hawkins - Townhall
townhall.com/columnists/.../2012/03/.../the_lefts_war_on_christianity‎
Mar 9, 2012 ... To be a liberal Christian means you either have to completely gut your ... If Tebow wins the Super Bowl, against all odds, it will buoy his faithful, ...


You Can Be A Christian Or A Liberal, But Not Both ⋆ Doug Giles ...
clashdaily.com/.../you-can-be-a-christian-or-a-liberal-but-not-both/‎
Aug 2, 2012 ... There is no way a Christian can buy into progressive/big ... Thanks to the aggressive and ludicrous liberal lug nuts' anti-Christian agenda, your ...
 


Then you've not understood what M... r... a... means. :roll:

Moreover, you (singular) are just one more who thinks a debate-forum has only winners and losers. And, of course, you're in the former class.

That it is a medium of opinion-exchange escapes you (plural), which is a shame. But, wholly American in nature.

Moving right along ...
______________________

What went over your head is that when you abandoned the issue for personal attacks, you conceded.
 
What went over your head is that when you abandoned the issue for personal attacks, you conceded.

Piffle. When I need your sarcasm, I'll turn you "on".

Meanwhile, here's a definition of the word sarcasm. It is unfit for debate between mature adults. Otoh, it is most often used in the US for that very reason. Most adults do not know how to debate, so they employ it in an effort to have anyway "the last word". Which makes them think they "won the argument".

A trained psychologist would have a field day in some of the exchanges here.
_________________
 
A trained psychologist would have a field day in some of the exchanges here.
_________________

I'd have to agree with you there. Liberals are full of jealousy/envy and obsessed with the fact that the successful should help the lazy and keep them in a constant state of dependency generation after generation with no way out other than continued dependency at infinitum. They want the poor to forever be mindless leechers with no self esteem or drive other than holding their hands out for more.
 
I'd have to agree with you there. Liberals are full of jealousy/envy and obsessed with the fact that the successful should help the lazy and keep them in a constant state of dependency generation after generation with no way out other than continued dependency at infinitum. They want the poor to forever be mindless leechers with no self esteem or drive other than holding their hands out for more.

Quite right. But, of course, they think that to enhance their own self-esteem.

We are all reflections of our own personality. I do not know by what mechanism we are more or less concerned about our fellow man (or woman). But, when one is not the least bit considerate, then they belong on some other planet.

Where they'd all die-off within 50/60 years bickering with one another - and nobody else to blame ...
_______________________
 
I'd have to agree with you there. Liberals are full of jealousy/envy and obsessed with the fact that the successful should help the lazy and keep them in a constant state of dependency generation after generation with no way out other than continued dependency at infinitum. They want the poor to forever be mindless leechers with no self esteem or drive other than holding their hands out for more.

very true. liberal's are anti-reason and anti-science. They are actually trying to reverse evolution without having any idea what they are doing. It is based in pure and utter ignorance.
 
FUNDAMENTAL POLITICAL DIFFERENCES

Liberalism, Socialism, and Democracy, By Robert Kuttner.

Excerpt:
What, if anything, can be usefully salvaged from the socialist tradition, now that communism lies in final disgrace? Paul Starr argued in these pages last fall that four developments -- the implosion of communism, the collapse of efforts to reform communism from within, the failure of socialism in the Third World, and the shift of European socialists toward liberal policies -- should persuade American liberals that socialism ought not to be part of our vision of an ideal society.

What follows is less a rejoinder than a brief for social democracy, as a tradition that loathed communism and may yet enrich liberalism. Social democracy, for at least a century, has been the domesticated form of socialism -- a vaccine made of benign cultures that can inoculate against the ravages of both communism and laissez faire.

Social democracy, certainly, is no mechanical third way. As a worldview, it accepts private ownership and parliamentary democracy, yet retains a broadly egalitarian ethic and keeps a weather eye on the nastier tendencies of capitalism. Social democracy does not propose to supplant capitalism, but to tame it. So, in a sense, does liberalism -- but the differences are telling.

Like liberalism, social democracy belongs to the tradition of a limited state based on political rights and civil and social liberties; it has no sympathy for either command planning or command politics. In our century, social democrats have also been among the most resistant to dictatorship and the most inventive in demanding that if the state is to be an engine of progress, governments must be both accountable and competent. Social democracy resists extreme inequality but does not advocate absolute equality. Yet social democracy does go somewhat beyond liberalism as generally understood. And it does reflect some constructive influence of democratic socialism, particularly in its insistence that capitalism be understood as a system. It is this virtue that most distinguishes social democracy from liberalism, yet also makes it an important ally of liberalism.

The above is a broad outline, but what the treatise does not consider is the psychology of liberalism; or, for that matter, also of social democracy. Which, as for the latter, is a deep concern for fellow man, the humans beings with which we share this planet, and particularly our lives in national market-economies.

Liberals are truly self-driven and selfish people who think wrongly that all the matters is the reward for their "hard work". They think only of the personal return-on-effort and not the mechanism. I.e., the "bigger picture", that allows monetary rewards by the usage of hard work to produce/bring products to a market-economy. Within which all should rightly expect a "fair-share".

Not an equal share, which is where Communism got it all wrong, but a "fair share".

HOW?

But, "how". That is the point of discussion. How typically happens by the intermediary of governments that tax revenues to redistribute it.

It's as simple as that. The Big Difference is on the "what" for which the money is spent. The US has as a military expenditure of 20% of its budget is one of the highest per capita. And some think that the money can be better spent elsewhere on Human Development, rather than wasting it on DoD-megabuck millionaires ...

350px-Countries_by_Military_expenditures_%28%25_of_GDP%29_in_2014.svg.png
 
, is a deep concern for fellow man, the humans beings with which we share this planet, and particularly our lives in national market-economies.

liberals are bird brained bigots who feel morally superior because they support crippling welfare entitlements!
 
Back
Top Bottom