• 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!

Do conservatives see ANY injustice in society?

whutabouts....
What if I'm paying taxes but have no driver's license? Do I get back my portion of the taxes for roads I'm not using? Your tax payment will not be commensurate with your usage.
Since most "road" spending includes the funding via fuel taxation (shared to local/state), if you aint paying gas tax, you are not funding it much....further, you ARE benefiting via all of the services you use that depend on the "roads".
You might drive 20,000 miles in a year or you might drive none but you are still contributing to the general societal infrastructure and that is what matters.
you made my point.
 
Are you a bot? You didn't answer my question. I'll pose it again.

Do you agree with conservatives like Ronald Reagan and Barry Goldwater who felt that the federal government had no right to infringe on states' rights regarding Civil Rights for Blacks? Should Mississippi have been allowed to keep its segregated schools? Should Whites only private schools be allowed? Should employers be allowed to discriminate based on race?

How about Harvard and lots of other universities discriminating based on race in their admissions? Why is that OK? Why should anyone strive for excellence if they are going to be penalized because of their race?
 
How is he getting anything free? He inherited money and has to spend it to live. It seems the inheritance is the part you have a problem with.

Is he spending any money to keep a roof over his head, beer in his frig, food in his belly, gas for his free car? No, he's not. The inheritance is not at all what I have a problem with, I have a problem with people that have had everything handed to them on a silver platter bitching about poor people that can't afford to feed their families. Referring to those who support school lunch credits, food assistance, medical care and rent subsidies as 'worthless libruls'. That's what I have a problem with.
 
whutabouts....Since most "road" spending includes the funding via fuel taxation (shared to local/state), if you aint paying gas tax, you are not funding it much....further, you ARE benefiting via all of the services you use that depend on the "roads".you made my point.

You're switching gears now. Now you're saying that, because roads are used to ship things like food and other goods and I have to use those goods, that I'm benefiting above and beyond my tax payment. How would you propose to make your tax payment commensurate with your usage? It can't be done, of course. BTW, income and sales taxes pay for as much of road repair and construction as fuel taxes.

Who Pays for Roads? | Frontier Group
 
How about Harvard and lots of other universities discriminating based on race in their admissions? Why is that OK? Why should anyone strive for excellence if they are going to be penalized because of their race?

Because of someone’s been kicked in the nuts and is doubled over on the ground, it’s OK to give them some preferential treatment for a while and give them a helping hand to get back up on their feet.

If some people can be enslaved and systematically discriminated against for centuries, they can be helped for a little while for the same reasons.
 
Is he spending any money to keep a roof over his head, beer in his frig, food in his belly, gas for his free car? No, he's not. The inheritance is not at all what I have a problem with, I have a problem with people that have had everything handed to them on a silver platter bitching about poor people that can't afford to feed their families. Referring to those who support school lunch credits, food assistance, medical care and rent subsidies as 'worthless libruls'. That's what I have a problem with.

Uh, who is paying for his roof, his beer, his food, his gas, his car? You? The government? The inheritance is what you have a problem with.
 
How about Harvard and lots of other universities discriminating based on race in their admissions? Why is that OK? Why should anyone strive for excellence if they are going to be penalized because of their race?

Harvard Does Not Discriminate Against Asian-Americans in Admissions, Judge Rules--da judge says no.

"A federal judge on Tuesday rejected claims that Harvard had intentionally discriminated against Asian-American applicants, in a closely watched case that presented one of the biggest legal challenges to affirmative action in years.

The lawsuit against the university came from a group hoping to overturn a longstanding Supreme Court precedent that allows race to be considered as one factor among many in admissions, but prohibits universities from using racial quotas.

The group argued that Harvard had favored black and Hispanic applicants at the expense of another minority group — a strategic reversal of past affirmative action lawsuits in which the plaintiff complained that white students had been treated unfairly.

The judge, Allison D. Burroughs, rejected the plaintiff’s argument, and said that the university met the strict constitutional standard for considering race in its admissions process.



In her decision, Judge Burroughs defended the benefits of diversity, saying it was not yet time to look beyond race in college admissions. “Diversity,” she wrote, “will foster the tolerance, acceptance and understanding that will ultimately make race conscious admissions obsolete.”

The case drew widespread scrutiny, including from dozens of other top-ranked colleges that expressed their support in court filings, and from the Justice Department, which backed the plaintiff and is pursuing its own investigation. The decision will be appealed and is widely expected to reach the Supreme Court."

Alas the death of merit continues.
 
What if I'm paying taxes but have no driver's license? Do I get back my portion of the taxes for roads I'm not using? Your tax payment will not be commensurate with your usage.

Who brings mail, packages and pizzas to your home?
 
Because of someone’s been kicked in the nuts and is doubled over on the ground, it’s OK to give them some preferential treatment for a while and give them a helping hand to get back up on their feet.

That has nothing to do with admitting less qualified or unqualified students into universities. In fact, it does them no favors at all by placing them into an envirionment in which they are more likely to fail. Feel goodism always has the opposite result of its intentions.
 
Who brings mail, packages and pizzas to your home?

Who cares? The point is that a guy down the street might order pizza 4 times a week but we pay the same taxes. IOW, tax payments can never be made commensurate with the use of public facilities.
 
Surely we don't have a perfect society yet. So are there any injustices in our society that conservatives care about?

Here are some of the injustices liberals see:

1. Growing income inequality. The gap between rich and poor is growing.

2. Environment pollution

3. Discrimination by race, sex, and sexual orientation

4. Criminal justice

5. Healthcare for the poor

6. Educational inequality

Do conservatives see any injustice in society?

1's a phoney issue . Income aren't unequal because of injustice.

The rest , Yeah I see em. Most of them are better than they were 20 years ago.
 
Harvard Does Not Discriminate Against Asian-Americans in Admissions, Judge Rules--da judge says no.

"A federal judge on Tuesday rejected claims that Harvard had intentionally discriminated against Asian-American applicants, in a closely watched case that presented one of the biggest legal challenges to affirmative action in years.

The lawsuit against the university came from a group hoping to overturn a longstanding Supreme Court precedent that allows race to be considered as one factor among many in admissions, but prohibits universities from using racial quotas.

The group argued that Harvard had favored black and Hispanic applicants at the expense of another minority group — a strategic reversal of past affirmative action lawsuits in which the plaintiff complained that white students had been treated unfairly.

The judge, Allison D. Burroughs, rejected the plaintiff’s argument, and said that the university met the strict constitutional standard for considering race in its admissions process.



In her decision, Judge Burroughs defended the benefits of diversity, saying it was not yet time to look beyond race in college admissions. “Diversity,” she wrote, “will foster the tolerance, acceptance and understanding that will ultimately make race conscious admissions obsolete.”

The case drew widespread scrutiny, including from dozens of other top-ranked colleges that expressed their support in court filings, and from the Justice Department, which backed the plaintiff and is pursuing its own investigation. The decision will be appealed and is widely expected to reach the Supreme Court."

Alas the death of merit continues.

Precisely. The very thing the left railed about for decades is the thing they now practice. It's the logical outcome of identity politics.
 
You're switching gears now. Now you're saying that, because roads are used to ship things like food and other goods and I have to use those goods, that I'm benefiting above and beyond my tax payment.
No, I'm NOT "switching gears", my point has consistently been that the benefits we gain from socialized costs exceed what we pay in taxes.

How would you propose to make your tax payment commensurate with your usage?
I don't like "user fees", I think they are done far too much at the local/state, and are regressive where, at the state level, taxation is already regressive.

It can't be done, of course.
I don't want it done, necessarily.
BTW, income and sales taxes pay for as much of road repair and construction as fuel taxes.

Who Pays for Roads? | Frontier Group
It depends on the state, I am aware of this point.
 
Uh, who is paying for his roof, his beer, his food, his gas, his car? You? The government? The inheritance is what you have a problem with.

I think I was pretty clear as to what I have a problem with, You might want to try reading my responses now and then.
 
disenfranchisement by gerrymandering

To be fair, this is a problem from both sides.

Sent from my cp3705A using Tapatalk
 
I think I was pretty clear as to what I have a problem with, You might want to try reading my responses now and then.

I did. I highlighted the part that seems to be what's upsetting you.
 
I did. I highlighted the part that seems to be what's upsetting you.

I was clear, there's no need to clarify it more than I already have.
 
Here are some of the injustices liberals see:



6. Educational inequality


No. 6 is debatable.

Here in Los Angeles, the vast majority of students are of non-European ancestry.

They have the BEST facilities that money can buy. California spends BILLIONS on education. BILLIONS!

There are dozens of new schools in the city.

There are computers and books and everything else.

The local Board of Education is 100% devoted to the students' interest.

There is NO "educational inequality" in Los Angeles schools.

What there IS, is a lot of students who do not attend regularly, who cause trouble when they do deign to attend, and who come from families that do not encourage education.
 
We should take care of people totally incapable of caring for themselves, through a combination of government and private charity. What we should not do is drag down and erode the incentives of people to be successful by penalizing them when they succeed. The more successful people we have, the more needy people can be helped. One thing allows for the other.

Good to hear you say both, but be aware it will always be the government who will do the heavy lifting;

Charity doesn't come anywhere near being able to have a major impact.
The Conservative Myth of a Social Safety Net Built on Charity


I agree that the more successful people we have the more successful America becomes. The only way these successful people will have a major impact on people who need help, is through our government. (see above)

The truth is, it doesn't matter how many successful people we have. The conservatives who succeed will never stop attempting to reduce the taxes that make a real difference in needy people's lives...
 
No. 6 is debatable.

Here in Los Angeles, the vast majority of students are of non-European ancestry.

They have the BEST facilities that money can buy. California spends BILLIONS on education. BILLIONS!

There are dozens of new schools in the city.

There are computers and books and everything else.

The local Board of Education is 100% devoted to the students' interest.

There is NO "educational inequality" in Los Angeles schools.

What there IS, is a lot of students who do not attend regularly, who cause trouble when they do deign to attend, and who come from families that do not encourage education.

California may spend a lot on education, but they also have more students than anyone else, which means that those resources must be divided among a greater number of people. So, a smaller state, like Vermont, for example, may spend a lot less overall than California, but they still have excellent schools because they have many fewer students and can consequently focus more time and energy on problem students.
 
California may spend a lot on education, but they also have more students than anyone else, which means that those resources must be divided among a greater number of people. So, a smaller state, like Vermont, for example, may spend a lot less overall than California, but they still have excellent schools because they have many fewer students and can consequently focus more time and energy on problem students.

When liberals decry so-called "educational inequality," that is a euphemism for something like: "Racism is responsible for the low test scores among some groups."

That is NOT true.

The low test scores are due to the students' themselves. It has nothing to do with the abused R-word.
 
Freedom of speech, right to keep an bear arms, disenfranchisement by gerrymandering and voter fraud, right to privacy, ect.

so just who is stopping you from free speech? last I looked no one is taking your guns, gerrymandering? yes Republicans are great at that especially here in NC where they were ordered to redraw new voting maps, voter fraud ? North Carolina by Republicans


Dowless’s system was simple but effective. He or his staff would request absentee ballots on behalf of Bladen County voters, which is legal. They would then go to voters’ houses when the ballots were sent. They would collect the ballots from the voters and take them away, after which, according to former workers, they would mark the ballots to vote for Dowless’s preferred candidates and mail them. Taking possession of a voter’s absentee ballot is against the law in North Carolina. Election officials said Dowless requested more than 1,200 ballots—more than Harris’s 905-vote margin of victory. Other witnesses testified that, contrary to state law, poll workers had run vote totals before Election Day and informed Dowless of them. The problem is that due to historical absentee-ballot fraud, the state has unusually complete public records about absentee ballots, and statistics showed highly anomalous results in Bladen County.
Board Orders New Election in Fraud-Tainted NC-9 Race - The Atlantic
 
It's the mind of a conservative. "I don't care if you're right about this, I only care that I am"

I can’t get 1 dem on DP to agree with me to accept whatever Barr and Durham investigation ends up reporting.

Will you agree with me?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom