• 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!

What is a progressive anyway?

I think conservatives should run on raising taxes on the old, disabled, students and lower class workers. Maybe a $1,000 per year minimum "income" tax on everyone! Add it to the GOP platform! Please!!! Then we could get to the rub of the conservative fiscal philosophy - lower taxes on the wealthy and corporate interests, and higher taxes on the poor and middle class, families with children, the elderly, disabled, etc.

Seems people like you run on certain groups not paying any share while making it where others you despise pay above theirs. The thing is there are enough on the lower end that pay nothing that vote to have it that way. I guess if I were a leech on society I'd think the same way. Since I'm not, someone has to keep the lowlifes up I guess. Better to be a man than a slug on society.
 
The mindset is called Economic Progressivism. Ever heard a Progressive use the term social justice?



Economic progressivism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you need more proof, then you really didn't want any to start with as you were never really willing to accept it.

Let me show you where you’re wrong. Here’s what you said:

First Progressive: The person who suggests that certain members of the tribe contribute more to the cause because they can while the rest who can't benefit equally from it.

Now, here’s what’s wrong with your source:

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (December 2009)

So, it’s not a credible or objective source. Moreover, you said “it was a progressive mindset”. That is a talking point opinion of the right-wing which is absolutely wrong.

Here are the words of the progressives themselves:

The Origins and Evolution of Progressive Economics | Center for American Progress

Although multiple schools of economic thought exist within the progressive tradition, there are several core assumptions that broadly define a progressive approach to economics in terms of theory, values, and practice. On the theoretical side, progressive economics is primarily concerned with striking a proper balance between private and public action to ensure greater stability and equitable growth in the economy and better achieve national goals.

The contours of progressive economics emerged in the late 19th century as a pragmatic attempt to deal with the realities of frequent depressions, workplace dangers, low wages, assaults on labor rights, mass unemployment, environmental negligence, public health issues, and political corruption at all levels of government. As with the transformation of philosophy and constitutional theory during this period (see part one, “The Progressive Intellectual Tradition in America,” for a discussion of positive and negative freedom), the original progressives charted a new and more realistic path in economics that preserved a market-based society and private enterprise while strengthening democratic control over the economy and employing the positive power of the state to advance human welfare and national prosperity.
Nowhere in there is anything that comes close to what you describe.
 
Let me show you where you’re wrong. Here’s what you said:



Now, here’s what’s wrong with your source:



So, it’s not a credible or objective source. Moreover, you said “it was a progressive mindset”. That is a talking point opinion of the right-wing which is absolutely wrong.

Here are the words of the progressives themselves:

The Origins and Evolution of Progressive Economics | Center for American Progress


Nowhere in there is anything that comes close to what you describe.


I'm still waiting on you to show me where I'm wrong. All the tripe you posted doesn't do so except to simple minds like the ones Progressive have.
 
We need to be very careful in speaking like that "progress" is a term that is easy to manipulate, as I said, I have no issue with corporate businesses. Or guns, which leads many people to assume I am a conservative...

And if you speak in that way about your opposition, you only drive them to completely oppose. If Clinton hadn't spent political capital pushing gun control he would've had don't ask don't tell repealed in the 90s or a better preservation of social services against the republican budget. Polarization is a negative force, not a positive one

I can't disagree with you. I don't think however that porgress in this sense is manipulatable; it is made by increments, issue by issue and witheld when not practical or feasible.
 
I'm still waiting on you to show me where I'm wrong. All the tripe you posted doesn't do so except to simple minds like the ones Progressive have.

I guess you don't read very well. Your in ablity to refute is noted too.

It's all in my response.
 
We need to be very careful in speaking like that "progress" is a term that is easy to manipulate, as I said, I have no issue with corporate businesses. Or guns, which leads many people to assume I am a conservative...

And if you speak in that way about your opposition, you only drive them to completely oppose. If Clinton hadn't spent political capital pushing gun control he would've had don't ask don't tell repealed in the 90s or a better preservation of social services against the republican budget. Polarization is a negative force, not a positive one

Not to worry, there are plenty of examples of Progressivism around so the soft gentle approach you've suggested won't be mistaken for what it is. Fortunately, there are enough people around to expose this quiet charade.
 
I can't disagree with you. I don't think however that porgress in this sense is manipulatable; it is made by increments, issue by issue and witheld when not practical or feasible.

Increments towards what? That's what causes fear in people, I try to be open as possible, for example, I think a public Heath system like Great Britain would benefit us greatly, and I am not afraid to say it. By being clear about objectives we skip the debate on true intentions and go straight to merits of the idea
 
Increments towards what? That's what causes fear in people, I try to be open as possible, for example, I think a public Heath system like Great Britain would benefit us greatly, and I am not afraid to say it. By being clear about objectives we skip the debate on true intentions and go straight to merits of the idea

No; increments are applying progressive policy when and where it's applicable: it's cheaper and better effective than the Blitzkrieg that the right-wing has been for thirty odd years now.
 
In the spirit of a recent thread, I thought I'd get people's ideas as to what constitutes a "progressive" this is a contentious topic, people like Glenn Beck use it as a slur and try to draw a vast conspiracy, in many cases some people associate progressive less with Theodore Roosevelt and the progressive movement of the early 20th century and more with modern social liberalism, which does share some strains with the earlier movement but now all. In some cases progressive movements have resulted in terrible crimes, such as the young Turks (not the talk show) in early 20th century turkey, many also associate progressives with authoritians, which I reject. My philosophy of progressivism, is education, worker protection, preservation of our environment, while preserving rights of the individual.

Personally, I draw my identity as a progressive from three people, Theodore Roosevelt who began widespread conservation of the environment, a strong national identity and defense, and strong worker protections and consumer protection while not over regulating business the "square deal" Albert Rosselini the former governor of Washington state, who emphasized massive infrastructure projects, many projects such as the evergreen point floating bridge and established medical schools at Washingtons public universities, to this day Washington is a leader in education and the projects allowed massive growth and wealth to come to the state (he also as a lesser note, signed the first shall issue concealed carry law in the country and was a gun rights supporter before guns became a national issue) and finally Tom McCall of Oregon, who championed public ownership of the states beaches, controls on unchecked development and the first bottle bill, which made preservation of the environment a northwest value.

These are IMO the best examples of progressives and why I label myself as such, thoughts?

All to often those that claim to be "progressive" seem only to want ever more gov't power/control which means ever less personal choice/freedom.
 
"What is a progressive anyway?"

Someone who is confused about how to achieve progress?
 
Back
Top Bottom