I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political [W:63]

[Nap]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Hi, welcome to the board. Just a note: free market economics is not supply side economics. Demand side economics(which most liberals support) is just as much free market economics. 99 + % of liberals support a free market, with some limits, just as 99 + % of conservatives support a free market, with some limits. The disagreement between the two stems from what those limits should be, and the level of taxation on business and top wage earners(demand side economics tells us that more money to businesses and the richest people is not as effective a way to grow the economy as more money at the bottom side, simply because a larger percentage of that money is spent as opposed to saved). Citing the free market as a benefit of conservatism is akin to citing elections as a benefit of liberalism.

The problem with demand side economics is a complete misunderstanding of what rich people do with money. The money is not "saved" it is directed back into the economy in the form of investments that help fund startups or lead to innovations that help society as a whole. Funding the next Jeff Bezos or cancer research is much better for society than poor people being able to buy Nike's rather than Wal-Mart brand shoes.

 

[Redress]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

The problem with demand side economics is a complete misunderstanding of what rich people do with money. The money is not "saved" it is directed back into the economy in the form of investments that help fund startups or lead to innovations that help society as a whole. Funding the next Jeff Bezos or cancer research is much better for society than poor people being able to buy Nike's rather than Wal-Mart brand shoes.

That is false. It is mostly either saved, or invested in stocks. Neither create growth to any significant degree.

 

[poweRob]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Great. Another pablum poster.

 

[poweRob]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Already have. I would describe myself as a JFK Democrat. "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" still rings true for me. I'm fiscally conservative but socially liberal (in the classical sense). With the rise of Bernie Sanders and how far left the Democrats have went, I didn't leave the party. It left me.

No party left you. You just don't know what the left is and are living through talking points.

“If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.” - JFK​

Tell me what in there is different than Bernie Sanders' positions?

 

[gdgyva]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

"SJW's" are social issue based, not economic issue based. Socialism and capitalism are economic theories. And while classic liberals and modern liberals are not the same thing(nor are classic conservatives and modern conservatives, Reagan would be considered a RINO today), very few modern liberals are socialist. For example, I am very much a modern liberal, and I am very much in favor of a free market(with limits) and capitalism. Too often these days people look to attach labels, then argue against the label instead of what is actually said. I have lost track of how many times I have been told "you are a liberal, so you think or want this", and when some one does that, they are inevitably wrong. SO I recommend not worrying if some one is classicly liberal, or a modern liberal, or a SJW, or a socialist, or whatever other label. Instead worry about what positions they take, and debate those. Much more effective that way.

i agree with that 100%

very few people fit neatly into a box

i am a classic small government conservative, but i vary on a number of social and liberal policies

most of us are square pegs....and we dont fit into those round holes

 

[jdog21]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Why do you hate poor people?

So harsh Bob.
Do you really think one party does a better job at protecting the poor over the other?
Could you give me a couple of the best examples you have to why that policy has the best impact at helping the poor?

 

[jdog21]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

That is false. It is mostly either saved, or invested in stocks. Neither create growth to any significant degree.

Capital investments which comes from richer people (savings) is how most businesses afford making large repairs or infrastructure improvements. Its money borrowed against class A stock holders at a gaurenteed percentage return of investment. Also most rich people have no classical sense of the word savings because their money is invested in stocks which is good for the company and whats good for the company is good for the employees that are employed by that company. As stock prices rise due to more rich people saving there money this is what is considered growth and its also caluclated into GDP which is how we messure and compare growth between countries. So I think you have to do more explaining to how Rich people investing their money in stocks is not good for our econonmy

 

[Redress]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Capital investments which comes from richer people (savings) is how most businesses afford making large repairs or infrastructure improvements. Its money borrowed against class A stock holders at a gaurenteed percentage return of investment. Also most rich people have no classical sense of the word savings because their money is invested in stocks which is good for the company and whats good for the company is good for the employees that are employed by that company. As stock prices rise due to more rich people saving there money this is what is considered growth and its also caluclated into GDP which is how we messure and compare growth between countries. So I think you have to do more explaining to how Rich people investing their money in stocks is not good for our econonmy

Leaving aside your misunderstanding of how stocks work, capital investment does not come from extra money. The vast majority of it comes from need. If a company needs more equipment, improved equipment, a new building, whatever, they do what it takes to attain the equipment, building, or repairs. If they do not need those things, they do not spend on them. Supply side fails in that supply side assumes re-investment of higher income and business savings. While those do happen, it is limited, and short term. Meanwhile, demand drives profits, employment levels, and to an extent, the need for capital improvements.

 

[jdog21]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Leaving aside your misunderstanding of how stocks work, capital investment does not come from extra money. The vast majority of it comes from need. If a company needs more equipment, improved equipment, a new building, whatever, they do what it takes to attain the equipment, building, or repairs. If they do not need those things, they do not spend on them. Supply side fails in that supply side assumes re-investment of higher income and business savings. While those do happen, it is limited, and short term. Meanwhile, demand drives profits, employment levels, and to an extent, the need for capital improvements.

While I do not have a good argument as to what side is better economically. I believe my explanation was still correct. You cant spend money on more equipment or whatever if its not in your budget to do so. You are limited by your cash on hand and revenues. Once you decided to spend money on something that costs more then you have you dont go to a bank and get a loan like most normal people do you ask your stock holders for capital investments. Which is a loan taken out against their stocks inreturn for a guarenteed return on investment. Please if my understanding is wrong here please point it out to me. Im allways looking to better my understanding of corporation business

 

[Moderate Right]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Obamacare. Regardless of the fact my employer offers insurance even though we only have 15ish full time employees, obamacare jacked our rates up to the point where my employer went from paying 90% of the cost to less than 75%. When this went down I was a new homeowner and every little bit helps. It was then I started doing my own research and figuring out what and how my ideology would best suit me.

Liberals will tell you that there is no such thing as a bad Obamacare story or that your story is anecdotal or that your rates were going up anyway so you can't blame that on Obamacare.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

So harsh Bob.
Do you really think one party does a better job at protecting the poor over the other?
Could you give me a couple of the best examples you have to why that policy has the best impact at helping the poor?

Has the winkie face lost all meaning? I don’t actually believe most conservatives hate poor people. I used to be poor AND conservative.

 

[Moderate Right]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

No party left you. You just don't know what the left is and are living through talking points.

“If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.” - JFK​

Tell me what in there is different than Bernie Sanders' positions?

And you think this post is going to convince him to change? The trouble with lefties is that they are deaf and blind.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Do you believe the Russian Federation is the #1 geopolitical threat to the United States?

 

[Mach]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

The problem with demand side economics is a complete misunderstanding of what rich people do with money. The money is not "saved" it is directed back into the economy in the form of investments that help fund startups or lead to innovations that help society as a whole. Funding the next Jeff Bezos or cancer research is much better for society than poor people being able to buy Nike's rather than Wal-Mart brand shoes.

But keep going, if you want to learn, continue until you cannot continue. Look up what rich people do with money...use legit sources that are credible studies/data, etc., nothing political (economics is apolitical at it's root, it's just a science).

The wealthy spend money on investing in stocks, real estate, bonds/money market/funds, primarily.
The poor spend their money on goods/services that primarily the wealthy own the businesses for, and receive it back as profits to drive growth.
Middle class/upper class (not ultra-wealthy), spend on a mix of goods/services, and invest in retirement savings.

So they all put it back into the economy. Which ones drive more growth? Do you invest in the areas that are doing well/saturated or areas that have potential for growth? Which are they? I'd wager today in the U.S. the poor/middle class would return a higher economic growth multiple vs a dollar given back (in taxes) to the wealthiest.

Second, how does this affect our lives/health/happiness? If 10 ultra-wealthy get some extra cash, vs 1000 working-poor, are you really thinking that extra money drives life/health/happiness for the ultra-wealthy in any way comparable to the 1000? Does a new drug with more side-effects and dubious benefits that are not actually evaluated by science, help your life?

Our economy, and society, functions best with distributed power. Right now it's lopsided in favor of corporations in the U.S. because of right-wing rhetoric. It should be a balance of:
wealthy/corporations (prioritize profits over everything)
Workers (want both life/money)
Government - (the referee and the one that can prioritize life over money).

Let corporations drive all R&D and you get printers that require Ink for life, a money pot. Or $600 epi-pens. Or drugs that do nothing, cost a fortune for life, and don't cure the underlying disease. It's just as bad as if government is in charge, or workers are in charge. That's why you want it spread out to all three...

 

[PleasantValley]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Already have. I would describe myself as a JFK Democrat. "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" still rings true for me. I'm fiscally conservative but socially liberal (in the classical sense). With the rise of Bernie Sanders and how far left the Democrats have went, I didn't leave the party. It left me.

I hear you. I am a conservative Democrat, and my "lean" is so rare DP does not even have a spot for it in the LEAN area.
I believe this is so because today, that term is an oxymoron.
The Democrats have moved so far left, you need binoculars to see their position.

 

[PleasantValley]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

i agree with that 100%

very few people fit neatly into a box

i am a classic small government conservative, but i vary on a number of social and liberal policies

most of us are square pegs....and we dont fit into those round holes

Yet daily, people slap labels on our backs at will. All saying different things.

 

[jdog21]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Has the winkie face lost all meaning? I don’t actually believe most conservatives hate poor people. I used to be poor AND conservative.

I wasnt assigning your comment to mean a dig against conservatives.
But was questioning if you believe one party protects the poor better then the other? If so which one? And a small example of a way they do this better then the other.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

I wasnt assigning your comment to mean a dig against conservatives.
But was questioning if you believe one party protects the poor better then the other? If so which one? And a small example of a way they do this better then the other.

Hmm, does one party protect the poor more than the other? That is tough because they take very different approaches, in theory at least. In practice, they both suck at it.

Democrats want to help the poor by giving them a safety net that at least ensures they have at least a base level standard of living. They want to help the poor get ahead by offering things like free education. I can get onboard with that.

Republicans take a different approach. They want to help the poor get ahead by reducing the red tape and regulations that hinder people from starting their own businesses or that hinder established companies from being able to hire more people. They want to help poor people stop being poor. And I can get onboard with that.

I think they each have parts of the solution in their platforms. But in practice I think both parties are overly influenced by big money.

 

[Nap]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

But keep going, if you want to learn, continue until you cannot continue. Look up what rich people do with money...use legit sources that are credible studies/data, etc., nothing political (economics is apolitical at it's root, it's just a science).

The wealthy spend money on investing in stocks, real estate, bonds/money market/funds, primarily.
The poor spend their money on goods/services that primarily the wealthy own the businesses for, and receive it back as profits to drive growth.
Middle class/upper class (not ultra-wealthy), spend on a mix of goods/services, and invest in retirement savings.

So they all put it back into the economy. Which ones drive more growth? Do you invest in the areas that are doing well/saturated or areas that have potential for growth? Which are they? I'd wager today in the U.S. the poor/middle class would return a higher economic growth multiple vs a dollar given back (in taxes) to the wealthiest.

Second, how does this affect our lives/health/happiness? If 10 ultra-wealthy get some extra cash, vs 1000 working-poor, are you really thinking that extra money drives life/health/happiness for the ultra-wealthy in any way comparable to the 1000? Does a new drug with more side-effects and dubious benefits that are not actually evaluated by science, help your life?

Our economy, and society, functions best with distributed power. Right now it's lopsided in favor of corporations in the U.S. because of right-wing rhetoric. It should be a balance of:
wealthy/corporations (prioritize profits over everything)
Workers (want both life/money)
Government - (the referee and the one that can prioritize life over money).

Let corporations drive all R&D and you get printers that require Ink for life, a money pot. Or $600 epi-pens. Or drugs that do nothing, cost a fortune for life, and don't cure the underlying disease. It's just as bad as if government is in charge, or workers are in charge. That's why you want it spread out to all three...

Demand side is what creates these large corporations that the proponents of it hate. Take Wal-Mart, do you think they prefer people investing (buying stocks in other companies) or the poor having more money to spend? Due to people having the money to invest in Jeff Bezo's idea when he was running a book store from his garage he has created an online competitor to Walmart that is going to force them to radically change or slowly die off. It is also true that demand side economics is what fueled the rapid growth of Amazon after it's creation but that rapid growth is also what turned it from just a regular business into one of the largest corporations in America. Supply side creates competition and innovation while demand side simply creates growth in already established companies thus creating these large corporations that so many hate and think are ruining this country.

 

[Nap]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Hmm, does one party protect the poor more than the other? That is tough because they take very different approaches, in theory at least. In practice, they both suck at it.

Democrats want to help the poor by giving them a safety net that at least ensures they have at least a base level standard of living. They want to help the poor get ahead by offering things like free education. I can get onboard with that.

Republicans take a different approach. They want to help the poor get ahead by reducing the red tape and regulations that hinder people from starting their own businesses or that hinder established companies from being able to hire more people. They want to help poor people stop being poor. And I can get onboard with that.

I think they each have parts of the solution in their platforms. But in practice I think both parties are overly influenced by big money.

I think this is what is missing in today's politics. People are so quick to disagree that they don't take time to evaluate the other's position and simply dismiss it by attributing ill motives. Both Republicans and Democrats want the same outcome (prosperity, safety, stronger society, etc) but have drastically different views on how to achieve those goals.

 

[Spartacus FPV]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

Yet daily, people slap labels on our backs at will. All saying different things.

People do that because its easier to be dismissive and not engage in challenging ideas on their merits, or the painful cognitive dissonance that induces.

You commie bastard. /s

 

[poweRob]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

And you think this post is going to convince him to change? The trouble with lefties is that they are deaf and blind.

What in that post would push him away?

 

[Moderate Right]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

What in that post would push him away?

What? I didn't say anything about anything in your post about chasing him away. I asked what was there in your post that you would expect him to change his thoughts to your side.

 

[poweRob]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

What? I didn't say anything about anything in your post about chasing him away. I asked what was there in your post that you would expect him to change his thoughts to your side.

Ahhh...

And you think this post is going to convince him to change? The trouble with lefties is that they are deaf and blind.

So you are just admitting that you weren't actually asking a question but rather you were just trolling me. Gotcha.

 

[66mustang]

Re: I'm bored, conservative pov, ama political

No party left you. You just don't know what the left is and are living through talking points.

“If by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people-their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights and their civil liberties-someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal", then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal.” - JFK​

Tell me what in there is different than Bernie Sanders' positions?

I think it's pretty obvious what has happened to the left. In a town hall debate, Ted Cruz asked Bernie what the difference between a Democrat and a socialist is, Bernie didn't have a reply indicating there really isn't a difference. Now take my point of view, I believe in a live and let live society. I believe in property rights, the freedom to make my own choices as to what goods and services I want to consume. Those are the farthest thing away from socialist values. Which ironically is what JFK was hinting at imo on your quote.