Has getting older made you more conservative?

CRUE CAB said:

Outside of my parents, no one has done crap for me. Save maybe my ex wife, current wife. Thats all reciprocal though. I do for them as well.
Take the roads, I have a 4x4. Take the cops. I can build a invasion proof home, I carry a gun, I can hunt and people lived for millions of years without electricity.
Many things are niceties, not necessities.

Click to expand...

Try making a 100 mile road trip on a four wheel drive road sometime. See how long it takes.

I don't buy into that old outdated adage. The reality is....the more educated you become, the more likely you will be liberal. Less educated people tend to be conservative. People probably become more "conservative" financially as they get older and less willing to take chances for the possibility of greater monetary gain in favor of great economic stability....but I don't think people's views on social issues become more conservative.

No, I was much more conservative when I was younger. As I've gotten older, I've turned much more to the left.

disneydude said:

I don't buy into that old outdated adage. The reality is....the more educated you become, the more likely you will be liberal. Less educated people tend to be conservative. People probably become more "conservative" financially as they get older and less willing to take chances for the possibility of greater monetary gain in favor of great economic stability....but I don't think people's views on social issues become more conservative.

Click to expand...

The older you get, the more likely you are wanting to keep on to stability, order, and are suspicious of dramatic changes. You become more tied to a community and traditionalism.

I don't buy into the idea that this form of conservatism naturally moves into small government conservatism, but it can. My favor toward much of social traditionalism moved to liking big government conservatism, benevolent public religiosity, and basic nationalism.

Henrin said:

Private roads, schools, fire departments, and security forces either exist or did exist at some point in history. Furthermore, you can power your house and having drinking water without government involvement. As for arbitration, there is no reason to assume that requires government.

Click to expand...

And most have seen major problems. There is a big reason that the police are not private in most places in the world, it would cause huge injustices for those who couldn't afford them, not to mention conflicts of interest. Would many private police officers arrest or even look for evidence against someone who is paying them? What if the victim is also someone paying them? Does it come down to who's paying them more? What if the victim is someone not paying them? What incentive do they have to help the victim rather than their client?

Dittohead not! said:

Try making a 100 mile road trip on a four wheel drive road sometime. See how long it takes.

Click to expand...

Actually done it, most fun ever.

roguenuke said:

And most have seen major problems. There is a big reason that the police are not private in most places in the world, it would cause huge injustices for those who couldn't afford them, not to mention conflicts of interest. Would many private police officers arrest or even look for evidence against someone who is paying them? What if the victim is also someone paying them? Does it come down to who's paying them more? What if the victim is someone not paying them? What incentive do they have to help the victim rather than their client?

Click to expand...

I didn't say anything about the police. The police is an enforcement force, not a security force.

Henrin said:

I didn't say anything about the police. The police is an enforcement force, not a security force.

Click to expand...

There are many other government entities that cannot be privately run better. Fire fighters, especially in cities, cannot be privately run without putting people in danger. Roads cannot be mainly private without causing major issues with commerce and freedom. Schools became public because not everyone can afford private schools, which leaves those families at a consistently larger and ever growing disadvantage over those that could. Security forces only protect those that pay them. Not sure if you are trying to say they could take the place of a standing military or not, but that would be a stupid idea, very stupid.

roguenuke said:

Not all people do. Plus, not everyone has the same types of families. My family is definitely not the typical family nor have we been.

Click to expand...

Of course there are exceptions to every rule.

roguenuke said:

There are many other government entities that cannot be privately run better. Fire fighters, especially in cities, cannot be privately run without putting people in danger.

Click to expand...

Why is that again?

Roads cannot be mainly private without causing major issues with commerce and freedom.

Click to expand...

Freedom? How does private roads cause major issue with freedom? I can kind of see the issue with roads when it comes to commerce, but freedom? What freedom?

Schools became public because not everyone can afford private schools, which leaves those families at a consistently larger and ever growing disadvantage over those that could.

Click to expand...

The price of private education in the US didn't really increase to any considerable degree until after public education. In fact, the majority of children were going to private school before public schooling. Anyway, while a completely private system would indeed result in unequal educational accomplishment, so does the public educational system. As I'm sure you are aware the quality of schools varies from place to place. For example, suburbs, on average, spend more on their schools than low income inner cities. Another reason, which happens regardless of the system you choose, is that the children of well educated parents are, on the whole, easier to educate and to be educated with than the children of the inner city poor. One reason for this might be is a child's life at home will generally affect how well they do in school, so therefore, a poor community should have lower performance in schools than better well off areas.

A completely private educational system on other hand, would offer parents and children more choice and if the market is competitive(which I don't see why it wouldn't be) good prices. The public educational system however requires parents to acquire political power for their concerns to not go largely ignored. As I'm sure you are aware poor people largely lack any real ability to acquire any political power to speak of. In any event, you should avoid using the word education to describe schooling

Security forces only protect those that pay them. Not sure if you are trying to say they could take the place of a standing military or not, but that would be a stupid idea, very stupid.

Click to expand...

I'm against a standing army as it enables the state to embark in more war campaigns and murder more of their people and the people of the world. If it was up to me nations would not exist and as a result conflicts between men would be shorter and less bloodily, but of course, what I want will never come to pass, but I would still very much like to end the standing army in the US.

You are of course right that security forces only protect their clients, but that is of course what they are hired for.

Can we get back to how people's political beliefs change with age?

(You'd think there are enough libertarianism threads around here...)

DifferentDrummr said:

Can we get back to how people's political beliefs change with age?

(You'd think there are enough libertarianism threads around here...)

Click to expand...

Just admit it, you love how the subject of a thread always turns to libertarianism when I post. I know I do.

Henrin said:

Just admit it, you love how the subject of a thread always turns to libertarianism when I post. I know I do.

Click to expand...

I know you do. For the rest of us, it gets boring before too long.

DifferentDrummr said:

Can we get back to how people's political beliefs change with age?

(You'd think there are enough libertarianism threads around here...)

Click to expand...

I put other although, I have become much more socially liberal with age.

What I've really become with age is pragmatic, but I don't think there's a political party to match that stance.