Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #101  
Old 10-30-2019, 02:22 AM
ASL v2.0's Avatar
ASL v2.0 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Various
Posts: 475
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
For the most part the rich liberal uses his money to try to make life better for those without as much. Bill Gates is an example. The rich conservative uses his money to try to get more money.
IDK about any of that. Charitable giving by the ultra-rich is one of those things that conservatives like to point to as "proof" that taxes are bad, people with money are good, and that all the "social safety net" functions can be filled "better" by a hodge-podge of charities, and if only people weren’t taxed so much already they could donate that money to said charities.

So I don’t know if Gates is truly liberal, and even if he is I’m sure there are plenty of card-carrying Republicans who happily give to charity and would insist that they should be allowed to give to charity instead of pay taxes.

Last edited by ASL v2.0; 10-30-2019 at 02:24 AM.
  #102  
Old 10-30-2019, 02:28 AM
Ale is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Bangkok
Posts: 5,317
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASL v2.0 View Post
Sure, but the implication, again (which I think is starting to gain some traction), is that there is an implicit allegation of hypocrisy.

Which may or may not be justified for a given case.

But, merely labeling someone a hypocrite, even if true, does not make the views they are "hypocritically" espousing "wrong."

Which is why I think it’s important for my liberal friends to understand that it’s not just about being educated or wealthy, it’s about the views espoused (the "liberal" part of "liberal elite"), with the achievement of wealth and education (the things commonly associated with "privilege") within the system being used to bolster an accusation of hypocrisy. As in "you’ve obviously done well in this system that you say we ought to change, and change in a way that will make it harder for others to amass equivalent (to yours) sums of wealth, so clearly you’re a hypocrite."

It’s an ad hominem, but not in the way you think.
"merely labeling someone a hypocrite, even if true, does not make the views they are "hypocritically" espousing "wrong."

It does, however, make claims of moral superiority wrong; besides there's a very fine line between hypocrisy and dishonesty, when people can see others, at the very least, lying to themselves they can conclude that they may just as well be lying to others about things.
For example, let's say one of those elites espoussing the view that Climate Change is going to cause so much damage that we absolutely must stop doing X, and then they blatantly do X, some people may think it's just complete hypocrisy and nothing more, some may conclude that person doesn't actually believe what they are espousing and just does it for some personal gain (i.e. gaining social capital), others that the elite in question may actually believe what they say but in view of how they act contrary to that belief that individual can't be trusted to have an accurate view of the world because that disconnect between beliefs and actions exposed a confused or irrational mindset, etc, etc...

The bedrock of human relationships is trust, hypocrisy undermines it, if one can't be true to oneself why should others expect to be treated better?
  #103  
Old 10-30-2019, 05:27 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers View Post
It's a label useful for making people hostile to people better educated than they are. It's a pity, because one should be trying to emulate smart people rather than sneering at them, but sneering is lazier so it's an easy sell.
This poster pretty much defines the question in the OP.
  #104  
Old 10-30-2019, 05:52 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
What fraction of the population do you estimate these folks make up? Do you believe them to make up a large/majority proportion of liberals, specifically?
They make up just about every single politician and political loudmouth who advocate for the mentioned policy.
  #105  
Old 10-30-2019, 06:03 AM
GoodOmens is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,154
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrFidelius View Post
I thought "liberal elite" meant Jews.
That's "cosmopolitan" or "globalist."

A stereotypical "liberal elite" is someone who brags that he doesn't own a TV. The salient aspect is not the TV, it's the bragging.
  #106  
Old 10-30-2019, 07:34 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,015
This thread is hard to follow because the words 'elite' and '"elite"' each have several meanings, and some posters use the terms interchangeably. And what is a 'conservative elite'? Does it come with or without quotation marks?

One theme I glean from reading the thread is that some well-educated people are denounced for thinking they are well educated. Is it only uneducated people who have the right to feel well-educated?

In that context, over the last 20 years there has been a profound shift in voting demographics which may help explain a correlation between liberal and elite:

Quote:
“In 1994, those with at least some postgraduate experience were evenly split between the Democratic and Republican parties. Today, the Democratic Party enjoys a roughly two-to-one advantage in leaned partisan identification. While some of this shift took place a decade ago, postgraduate voters’ affiliation with and leaning to the Democratic Party have grown substantially just over the past few years, from 55% in 2015 to 63% in 2017.”
  #107  
Old 10-30-2019, 07:44 AM
Nava is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Hey! I'm located! WOOOOW!
Posts: 42,956
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Some examples:

Liberal elitism is more often correlated with agnosticism and atheism.

Liberal elitism is more often correlated with climate change science.

Liberal elitism is more often correlated with social justice and equality.
None of those correlates with elitism; they correlate with liberal only when the definition of liberal is pushed into correlating with them.
__________________
Some people knew how to kill a conversation. Cura, on the other hand, could make it wish it had never been born.

Last edited by Nava; 10-30-2019 at 07:47 AM.
  #108  
Old 10-30-2019, 08:34 AM
Kearsen1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
I'm glad to see that you believe in proposing solid no problem to implement solutions to our problems. Not.

Take up a collection to build a nuclear submarine, and see how much you get. The benefit to the country as a whole of that sub is great, but the benefit as perceived by each taxpayer (who will never even get to see the sub) is a lot less than the benefit of the money. And they will totally discount the cost of the Russians/Chinese/Grand Fenwickans rolling in.
You think Joe Putz who maybe takes two minutes to read about something the government wants to buy is better qualified than people with experience and training? If you think so, I suppose you diagnose yourself on the internet and don't bother to go to those medical elite guys. "I read about how some doctor misdiagnosed something or botched an operation, so they are all losers and I can do better." Is that your general position. How to spend our money is less important then our health, isn't it?
If you don't want to bring up Trump, how about the other climate change deniers, all on the right.
Your solution is about the same as saying we will cure obesity by having everyone eat only 10% of the food they do now. What could go wrong?
The point you are missing about the fix is multifaceted.

With climate change, the US can take all the steps we wasn't to in regards to making the world a better place, but without the world stepping up to match, we are still doomed. Personal responsibility in this case will only get you so far but in this case, you cant even get the biggest players to take responsibility, why do you think that is?

Obesity is the same simple matter that could be fixed by taking personal responsibility for what you allow yourself to be put into your body, as well as how much work you are willing to do to curtail the detrimental things that you do eat.
As far as doctors go, they make mistakes just like Joe utz does. The reason the government is held, rightly, to a much higher standard is because when they fuck up, it is on a much higher scale and everyone shares in that burden.

As with any policy, the devil is in the details. I am a pretty moderate fellow, with moderate views. I think the policies that are dramatic, require dramatic everything. Funding, support, belief.

Policies shouldn't be rushed through as a feather in a politicians hat. They should ALL be bi-partisan.

We are getting far afield of the liberal elite discussion but the part where the liberal elites come in and tell Joe Schmo that "just vote for us, we will take care of you since you have your ill informed view" isn't aligned with our view for what we have for YOU smacks of arrogance. The problem is they don't know, THEY are the ill informed ones (and they ssimply don't listen because they KNOW better) or we simply would not have been having to deal with Trump for the past three years …

You bring up the military as a case in point to the collective benefit a sub provides. I don't disagree with you, however just like economic policy, it should be sold to the public and agreed upon by both sides.

I have often espoused that big things need big support, much like constitutional amendments. Especially when you are talking about fundamental changes to our lifestyles.
  #109  
Old 10-30-2019, 10:52 AM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
They make up just about every single politician and political loudmouth who advocate for the mentioned policy.
In what way is that different in the case of right wing conservative politicians and political loudmouths who advocate for their policies?

Is it a common term of reference to call them, "conservative elites"?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #110  
Old 10-30-2019, 11:25 AM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
I acknowledge that's how you view the term and I'm sure people use it that way. I don't share that view and I explained how I construe the term. Based on that, the First Steps Act doesn't seem like it is fairly characterized as liberal elitism.
I'm glad that reasonable people like you and me can agree. But we're talking about all those others who refuse to see reason.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #111  
Old 10-30-2019, 12:15 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
The point you are missing about the fix is multifaceted.

With climate change, the US can take all the steps we wasn't to in regards to making the world a better place, but without the world stepping up to match, we are still doomed. Personal responsibility in this case will only get you so far but in this case, you cant even get the biggest players to take responsibility, why do you think that is?
So, even if you stop throwing trash on the street some other guys will still do it, so you shouldn't stop throwing trash on the street? Yes, while we are a major contributor to climate change, just the US stopping won't force anyone else to stop. But it does give us a moral position to do something like charging carbon tariffs. We can hardly ask anyone else to fix the problem if we ignore it - and if we do less than some other countries.
But that involves solutions - I was talking about denial. Which you are dancing around.


Quote:
Obesity is the same simple matter that could be fixed by taking personal responsibility for what you allow yourself to be put into your body, as well as how much work you are willing to do to curtail the detrimental things that you do eat.
Actually, obesity has a significant genetic component, and isn't just personal responsibility. I can say this because I can eat tons of calories and never gain a pound. That doesn't make me better than someone who gains when looking at food. And you of course missed the point entirely - eating only 10% of a normal diet is going to have more severe health consequences than the obesity it is supposed to cure. As would your "solution."
Quote:
As far as doctors go, they make mistakes just like Joe utz does. The reason the government is held, rightly, to a much higher standard is because when they fuck up, it is on a much higher scale and everyone shares in that burden.
You think Joe Putz and a trained doctor would have the same error rate? That's what you're implying. And any entity whose errors would have a large impact needs to be held to a higher standard. Talk to Boeing about that. Notice that they took responsibility for certifying the plane from the big bad government. How did that work out?
Quote:

Policies shouldn't be rushed through as a feather in a politicians hat. They should ALL be bi-partisan.
Obama thought that. It was his biggest mistake. Note no Republicans voted for ACA despite it being a basically Republican program (aka Romneycare.)
Washington hoped for everything to be bipartisan. Didn't last for long. If everything has to be bipartisan, you might pass a Thanksgiving resolution, and that's about it. Government would collapse, which is perhaps what you want. Call yourself a moderate? Right.
Quote:
We are getting far afield of the liberal elite discussion but the part where the liberal elites come in and tell Joe Schmo that "just vote for us, we will take care of you since you have your ill informed view" isn't aligned with our view for what we have for YOU smacks of arrogance. The problem is they don't know, THEY are the ill informed ones (and they ssimply don't listen because they KNOW better) or we simply would not have been having to deal with Trump for the past three years …
Much of what the liberal elite wants is stuff like feeding people if they have no food. What I hear from conservatives is more "it's your fault, just get a job and stop bothering us." That said that during the recession also, remember?
I'm trying to think of things liberals force on people. Social Security, perhaps? Like it or not, you contribute. Given the pitiful state of retirement savings, I'd say that forcing savings (and forcing employer contributions) is pretty good. What would you tell people who wind up at 66 without money and without being able to work? Tough? At least we didn't know better than you?
Quote:
You bring up the military as a case in point to the collective benefit a sub provides. I don't disagree with you, however just like economic policy, it should be sold to the public and agreed upon by both sides.
Which it is, in Congress. By people who do this full time and have aides to help. I'm retired and I don't have enough time to study every issue that comes up.
  #112  
Old 10-30-2019, 12:19 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASL v2.0 View Post
IDK about any of that. Charitable giving by the ultra-rich is one of those things that conservatives like to point to as "proof" that taxes are bad, people with money are good, and that all the "social safety net" functions can be filled "better" by a hodge-podge of charities, and if only people weren’t taxed so much already they could donate that money to said charities.

So I don’t know if Gates is truly liberal, and even if he is I’m sure there are plenty of card-carrying Republicans who happily give to charity and would insist that they should be allowed to give to charity instead of pay taxes.
I think Gates qualifies as a liberal. I'm not sure if I've read about conservatives who claim charity can replace taxes, but I have read of some who say that social programs could be replaced by charity and a tax cut. We just got the tax cut - anyone have evidence about an increase in charitable giving for the poor?
  #113  
Old 10-30-2019, 01:23 PM
Kearsen1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voyager View Post
So, even if you stop throwing trash on the street some other guys will still do it, so you shouldn't stop throwing trash on the street? Yes, while we are a major contributor to climate change, just the US stopping won't force anyone else to stop. But it does give us a moral position to do something like charging carbon tariffs. We can hardly ask anyone else to fix the problem if we ignore it - and if we do less than some other countries.
But that involves solutions - I was talking about denial. Which you are dancing around.



Actually, obesity has a significant genetic component, and isn't just personal responsibility. I can say this because I can eat tons of calories and never gain a pound. That doesn't make me better than someone who gains when looking at food. And you of course missed the point entirely - eating only 10% of a normal diet is going to have more severe health consequences than the obesity it is supposed to cure. As would your "solution."


You think Joe Putz and a trained doctor would have the same error rate? That's what you're implying. And any entity whose errors would have a large impact needs to be held to a higher standard. Talk to Boeing about that. Notice that they took responsibility for certifying the plane from the big bad government. How did that work out?

Obama thought that. It was his biggest mistake. Note no Republicans voted for ACA despite it being a basically Republican program (aka Romneycare.)
Washington hoped for everything to be bipartisan. Didn't last for long. If everything has to be bipartisan, you might pass a Thanksgiving resolution, and that's about it. Government would collapse, which is perhaps what you want. Call yourself a moderate? Right.

Much of what the liberal elite wants is stuff like feeding people if they have no food. What I hear from conservatives is more "it's your fault, just get a job and stop bothering us." That said that during the recession also, remember?
I'm trying to think of things liberals force on people. Social Security, perhaps? Like it or not, you contribute. Given the pitiful state of retirement savings, I'd say that forcing savings (and forcing employer contributions) is pretty good. What would you tell people who wind up at 66 without money and without being able to work? Tough? At least we didn't know better than you?

Which it is, in Congress. By people who do this full time and have aides to help. I'm retired and I don't have enough time to study every issue that comes up.
I haven't denied climate change, but you keep bringing up hypotheticals that don't fix anything either. Propose a solution so I can shoot it down?
But this topic is an offshoot of why liberal elites are supposedly liberal elites. It's because they think they know better than the other guys what to do to fix the other guys ills.
Bipartisan bills used to be the norm. I personally don't give 2 shits what has happened in the last 3 or 4 presidencies, let's fix that and we can have bi-partisan bills again. Just throwing up your hands and saying "well, look at what they do" isn't ever going to resolve the issue. I don't have a solution for this except to get the MONEY out of politics.

As far as the liberal elites in Congress, bipartisanship would solve all of those woes.
Forced retirement contributions, or an expansion of Social Security, or even a Basic Guaranteed income , if any of those could be agreed upon and who and how to pay for such things (once upon a time, they may have been able to come to terms)

If people choose for themselves to eat cake until they can't afford cake anymore, I don't feel the need to be sorry for them all that much. Do we let them die? Probably not, but they can exist on ramen and water.
Our prison system is another example of being too cush. Prison should be PRISON, full on chain gang type work being done while there. THAT acts as a deterrent, not the gym having, games playing, TV/library time stuff that they get now. With that said, end the war on drugs and Prison should really only be for the violent criminals.
  #114  
Old 10-30-2019, 01:48 PM
Pardel-Lux's Avatar
Pardel-Lux is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Berlin
Posts: 225
I always thought that the term refered to me, but I am not dangerous or arrogant. Well, arrogant only in the eyes of the lesser beings, I am told, but that is their problem and I don't care.
__________________
'Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge.' - Charles Darwin.
I am living proof of that.
  #115  
Old 10-31-2019, 06:13 AM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,889
I used to work around this one guy who was a liberal and was big into the idea he wasnt racist and loved MLK and all and claimed I was but then I pointed out his hypocrisy in that he lived in a majority white neighborhood, sent his kids to all white schools, and attended an all white church. Then I pointed out where I lived, worked, and went to church which wasnt exactly diversity-equal but way better than him, and he got angry and dropped the subject.
  #116  
Old 10-31-2019, 06:24 AM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post


We are getting far afield of the liberal elite discussion but the part where the liberal elites come in and tell Joe Schmo that "just vote for us, we will take care of you since you have your ill informed view" isn't aligned with our view for what we have for YOU smacks of arrogance. The problem is they don't know, THEY are the ill informed ones (and they ssimply don't listen because they KNOW better) or we simply would not have been having to deal with Trump for the past three years …
ents.
This reminds me of a policy under Obama where they were (rightfully so) upset about the high statistics of black male middle and high school students being suspended and expelled at a higher rate than others and thus creating a "school to prison pipeline".

So under Obama they instituted policies that said schools couldnt suspend or expel black students and instead, had to come up with alternate programs. The result was chaos in our schools with discipline problems skyrocketing and some schools turning chaotic as administrators were powerless to do anything about it.

Thing is Obama listened to the wrong people - the educational elites who mostly work at the university level, instead of the teachers working in the bad schools.
  #117  
Old 10-31-2019, 07:27 AM
Kobal2's Avatar
Kobal2 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 18,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
I used to work around this one guy who was a liberal and was big into the idea he wasnt racist and loved MLK and all and claimed I was but then I pointed out his hypocrisy in that he lived in a majority white neighborhood, sent his kids to all white schools, and attended an all white church. Then I pointed out where I lived, worked, and went to church which wasnt exactly diversity-equal but way better than him, and he got angry and dropped the subject.
Cool story, bro.
  #118  
Old 10-31-2019, 07:37 AM
Annoyed is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 431
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
In what way is that different in the case of right wing conservative politicians and political loudmouths who advocate for their policies?

Is it a common term of reference to call them, "conservative elites"?
Non Sequitur.
  #119  
Old 10-31-2019, 08:34 AM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Annoyed View Post
Non Sequitur.
Yeah, I can see how someone might find that an inconvenient question, better avoided.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #120  
Old 10-31-2019, 12:05 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
You do you. Other people can judge as they see fit. If you're talking about the calculation of the arctangent of an angle, you could be objectively correct. If you're talking about the best way to order a person's affairs to maximize utility, an attitude of humility is better than one of arrogance.
What if we are talking about vaccinations? Is the "common sense" position as valid as the elitist doctor?
  #121  
Old 10-31-2019, 12:22 PM
Kearsen1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
What if we are talking about vaccinations? Is the "common sense" position as valid as the elitist doctor?
Are vaccines mandated by the government?

Here is the crux of the thought process. YOU think you know better and should be able to tell the general public what is and what isn't in their best interests. We/I disagree.
Common sense or not.

Now a case could be made specifically to vaccines that it could or does directly harm the general populace. But most other platform positions would need to be sold (like vaccines) to the populace first. We don't live in nor would we want to live in a Nanny State but that is exactly how "liberal elites" think.
  #122  
Old 10-31-2019, 12:53 PM
k9bfriender is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 11,564
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Are vaccines mandated by the government?
Depends on your perspective. Anti-vaxxers certainly seem to think so when they can't enroll their child in school without vaccines.
Quote:
Here is the crux of the thought process. YOU think you know better and should be able to tell the general public what is and what isn't in their best interests. We/I disagree.
Common sense or not.
And there are cases where we actually do know better, like vaccines, for a relatively uncontroversial one, but also in terms of climate and economics and healthcare. There really are positions that are objectively better. The opposition is based on ignorance, not knowledge.
Quote:
Now a case could be made specifically to vaccines that it could or does directly harm the general populace. But most other platform positions would need to be sold (like vaccines) to the populace first.
Vaccines were sold to the public, and the public LOVED them. People lined up around the block to get this new life saving technology injected into themselves and into their children.

Then people decided that they knew better than the experts, they knew what was in their best interests, and that anyone who claimed to know better than them was a "liberal elite."

Quote:
We don't live in nor would we want to live in a Nanny State but that is exactly how "liberal elites" think.
Ah, so you know better than liberal elites what liberal elites think? I'd say that the limit of that should be that they think that policy should be based on knowledge and research, not ignorance and superstition. Any further reading of their minds is doomed to fail, as not only is it rather projecting, it's also not describing a monolithic, nor hive based, mindset.

Last edited by k9bfriender; 10-31-2019 at 12:55 PM.
  #123  
Old 10-31-2019, 01:15 PM
Kearsen1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 368
I think most of you attempting to defend the usage of the term aren't liberal elites at all, even though some of you may think you are. K9, for example, is all knee jerk in his defense of knowing better.

As I said, among others, it isn't the objective decisions or attempts at solving things with an objective reality what makes them 'elitists', it's the subjective ones.
  #124  
Old 10-31-2019, 01:40 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post

Vaccines were sold to the public, and the public LOVED them. People lined up around the block to get this new life saving technology injected into themselves and into their children.

Then people decided that they knew better than the experts, they knew what was in their best interests, and that anyone who claimed to know better than them was a "liberal elite."

.
Well hold on. Yes, people stood in line line for the vaccine for smallpox which they first invented in the 1800's. Then over time there were more and more vaccinations. For example in the 1970's there were 7 vaccinations. Now there are 14 (Source). These new ones were for things like mumps, measles, and chicken pox which many people remembered just as a common diseases of childhood. NOT dreaded diseases like polio and smallpox.

Also many conditions that were almost non-existant years ago are now common today. For example allergies to nuts and wheat which has got many people to stop and pause to think, maybe we are over vaccinating?

And the pushback. If you act in anyways cautious your labeled "antivax" and refuse to have a discussion.
  #125  
Old 10-31-2019, 02:03 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Well hold on. Yes, people stood in line line for the vaccine for smallpox which they first invented in the 1800's. Then over time there were more and more vaccinations. For example in the 1970's there were 7 vaccinations. Now there are 14 (Source). These new ones were for things like mumps, measles, and chicken pox which many people remembered just as a common diseases of childhood. NOT dreaded diseases like polio and smallpox.

Also many conditions that were almost non-existant years ago are now common today. For example allergies to nuts and wheat which has got many people to stop and pause to think, maybe we are over vaccinating?

And the pushback. If you act in anyways cautious your labeled "antivax" and refuse to have a discussion.
Excellent example. I suppose it would be elitist of me to point out that there is no evidence for your claim that vaccines cause allergies. I suppose peddling conspiracy theories such as the one you just suggested is an example of 'different evaluations of the relative utility of a given choice set' that Bone was talking about up-thread.

By all means, let's have a discussion about it. But first, to save us both some time, provide a legitimate cite that shows there is a discussion worth having.
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 10-31-2019 at 02:05 PM.
  #126  
Old 10-31-2019, 02:06 PM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
I think most of you attempting to defend the usage of the term aren't liberal elites at all, even though some of you may think you are. K9, for example, is all knee jerk in his defense of knowing better.

As I said, among others, it isn't the objective decisions or attempts at solving things with an objective reality what makes them 'elitists', it's the subjective ones.
Serious question: Is Urbanredneck being elitist by suggesting that vaccines cause nut and wheat allergies? Or am I being elitist by rejecting his hypothesis because it has no scientific basis?
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.

Last edited by QuickSilver; 10-31-2019 at 02:08 PM.
  #127  
Old 10-31-2019, 03:20 PM
Kearsen1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Serious question: Is Urbanredneck being elitist by suggesting that vaccines cause nut and wheat allergies? Or am I being elitist by rejecting his hypothesis because it has no scientific basis?
I'd go with neither.

They could both be based upon science, they currently are not.

The problem is two fold. His is that he has provided no scientific back up of his assertion and yours while less based upon science is the outright rejection of what might be seen as a common sense hypothesis that NEEDS further study.
  #128  
Old 10-31-2019, 03:22 PM
Urbanredneck is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 7,889
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuickSilver View Post
Excellent example. I suppose it would be elitist of me to point out that there is no evidence for your claim that vaccines cause allergies. I suppose peddling conspiracy theories such as the one you just suggested is an example of 'different evaluations of the relative utility of a given choice set' that Bone was talking about up-thread.

By all means, let's have a discussion about it. But first, to save us both some time, provide a legitimate cite that shows there is a discussion worth having.
I dont have to quote a study to know that when I grew up I didnt know a single kid with a peanut allergy. Now schools have to set aside lunchroom tables specifically for those kids or else ban peanut butter and other items all together.

Was this caused by vaccines?

I dont know.

Again, I'm not the horrible antivax person that you imply that wants to bring back polio. I'm only asking questions.
  #129  
Old 10-31-2019, 03:22 PM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,993
Quote:
Originally Posted by k9bfriender View Post
What if we are talking about vaccinations? Is the "common sense" position as valid as the elitist doctor?
This seems like some attempt at a gotcha. You haven't presented what the "common sense" position is. You haven't made any assertion, or identified an assertion. You haven't delineated if you're talking about the concept of vaccinations, particular vaccinations, or all of them. You haven't identified what you see as objective in the missing assertions, nor what you view as subjective.

Without that, there's no there there to respond to. That being said, I don't think everything can be looked at through an elitist lens because it gets silly.
  #130  
Old 10-31-2019, 03:31 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 44,557
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
I dont have to quote a study to know that when I grew up I didnt know a single kid with a peanut allergy. Now schools have to set aside lunchroom tables specifically for those kids or else ban peanut butter and other items all together.

Was this caused by vaccines?

I dont know.

Again, I'm not the horrible antivax person that you imply that wants to bring back polio. I'm only asking questions.
When you were a kid, nobody had peanut allergies, and Rush Limbaugh did not have a career as a radio personality. Now, Rush Limbaugh has a career as a radio personality, and people have all sorts of food allergies.

Does Rush Limbaugh cause food allergies?

I don't know, but I have precisely as much evidence to back up my question as you have to back up yours.
  #131  
Old 10-31-2019, 04:28 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
I dont have to quote a study to know that when I grew up I didnt know a single kid with a peanut allergy. Now schools have to set aside lunchroom tables specifically for those kids or else ban peanut butter and other items all together.

Was this caused by vaccines?

I dont know.

Again, I'm not the horrible antivax person that you imply that wants to bring back polio. I'm only asking questions.
This seems like a good example of the contrast between "liberal elitism" and whatever one wants to call its opposite.

A "liberal elite", obsessed as they are with things like facts and evidence, would want to know what the facts are about the rise in food allergies in recent years and their possible causes, and the current knowns and unknowns on these issues. The would want to read, for instance, a recent report on the matter from the National Academy of Sciences by a committee of pediatricians and other distinguished experts in public health providing a number of evidence-based hypotheses for food allergies and analyses of the underlying factors. A "liberal elite" would also be interested in the results of the LEAP clinical trials on peanut allergies.

The alternative, which I suppose we can take to be the "non-liberal-elite" position, is to state that "I dont have to quote a study" to know things, and to implicate vaccines as a probable cause of peanut allergies based on zero evidence, through the time-honored means of Just Asking Questions™ based on zero information.

I leave it to the reader to judge which outcome is more likely to reflect reality, and which would be the preferred approach to making voting decisions.
  #132  
Old 10-31-2019, 08:27 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
I haven't denied climate change, but you keep bringing up hypotheticals that don't fix anything either. Propose a solution so I can shoot it down?
But this topic is an offshoot of why liberal elites are supposedly liberal elites. It's because they think they know better than the other guys what to do to fix the other guys ills.
Bipartisan bills used to be the norm. I personally don't give 2 shits what has happened in the last 3 or 4 presidencies, let's fix that and we can have bi-partisan bills again. Just throwing up your hands and saying "well, look at what they do" isn't ever going to resolve the issue. I don't have a solution for this except to get the MONEY out of politics.
I agree with you that bipartisanship would help. But let's be clear how bipartisanship went away. For instance, McConnell not allowing bills to even be debated. Like Republicans who supported a program like ACA being pressured to vote against it to hurt Obama. We'll see how big a smoking gun is required to force some Republicans to turn against Trump. They did come around against Nixon, they deserve credit for that.
Democrats in general are more for restricting money in politics, but given the current system are not going to unilaterally disarm, so you'll be able to find many examples of them taking money too.
I wasn't worried about your position on climate change, but rather that of Republicans in power.
Quote:
Forced retirement contributions, or an expansion of Social Security, or even a Basic Guaranteed income , if any of those could be agreed upon and who and how to pay for such things (once upon a time, they may have been able to come to terms)
Ronald Reagan did a great job in saving Social Security. If only there were Republicans around like him. I'm sure it helps that he wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth and a big salary when he was 2.
Quote:
If people choose for themselves to eat cake until they can't afford cake anymore, I don't feel the need to be sorry for them all that much. Do we let them die? Probably not, but they can exist on ramen and water.
Our prison system is another example of being too cush. Prison should be PRISON, full on chain gang type work being done while there. THAT acts as a deterrent, not the gym having, games playing, TV/library time stuff that they get now. With that said, end the war on drugs and Prison should really only be for the violent criminals.
Thank you for that excellent example of conservative elitism. People don't drain their IRAs to buy cake, they drain them to try to keep their houses when they are laid off and are worried about having food to eat. Or they panic and sell low.
The cushy prisons are where the white collar criminals are sent. California prisons not for white collar criminals were so cushy that a judge pretty much forced the government to release the non-violent (I agree with you, somewhat) to get somewhere close to capacity.
  #133  
Old 10-31-2019, 08:38 PM
Voyager's Avatar
Voyager is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Deep Space
Posts: 46,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
Well hold on. Yes, people stood in line line for the vaccine for smallpox which they first invented in the 1800's. Then over time there were more and more vaccinations. For example in the 1970's there were 7 vaccinations. Now there are 14 (Source). These new ones were for things like mumps, measles, and chicken pox which many people remembered just as a common diseases of childhood. NOT dreaded diseases like polio and smallpox.

Also many conditions that were almost non-existant years ago are now common today. For example allergies to nuts and wheat which has got many people to stop and pause to think, maybe we are over vaccinating?

And the pushback. If you act in anyways cautious your labeled "antivax" and refuse to have a discussion.
110,000 people died of measles worldwide in 2017. Cite.
There are more vaccines because we have developed them to prevent diseases. How many people do you want to be seriously ill or die because you don't understand about vaccines?
If it is elitism for people who know something about a topic correcting the blather of people who don't, I'm all for elitism.
Want to provide scientific support for any of your claims?
  #134  
Old 11-02-2019, 07:57 PM
Ukulele Ike is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 17,833
This is a vastly entertaining thread. (taps ash from Cuban cigar and lifts his snifter of fine Armagnac)

— Uke, confirmed liberal (radical Wobbly) elite complete with the Ivy degree and living within the “Brooklyn Bubble”)
__________________
Uke
  #135  
Old 11-02-2019, 10:46 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
I haven't denied climate change, but you keep bringing up hypotheticals that don't fix anything either. Propose a solution so I can shoot it down?
But this topic is an offshoot of why liberal elites are supposedly liberal elites. It's because they think they know better than the other guys what to do to fix the other guys ills.
...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Our prison system is another example of being too cush. Prison should be PRISON, full on chain gang type work being done while there. THAT acts as a deterrent, not the gym having, games playing, TV/library time stuff that they get now. With that said, end the war on drugs and Prison should really only be for the violent criminals.
Not a good item to bring forward when implying strongly that conservatives will know better..

https://www.businessinsider.com/norw...prisons-2018-6
Quote:
In recent years a local newspaper claimed that 80% of Norwegians want stricter punishments, and a 2010 survey showed that a majority felt punishments were generally too lenient. "It's your media that's also responsible," Tom says, biting into a slice of whole-grain toast with brown cheese.

"American TV shows about tough prisons and talk about being ‘tough on crime.' It influences people here. But thankfully that's started to change. All the bad press in the past few years from you guys has started to make us not take you all so seriously anymore. Especially in elections. In the political speeches, those biblical references by a secular country? And Sarah Palin? People are laughing and also crying — this is a country we want to imitate?"

I sigh. It's disturbing, the way media can make and unmake the problem. I say as much, adding that the culture of fear is to blame. I tell him a little about my Australian experience and the Murdoch media.

...

"I tell people, we're releasing neighbors every year. Do you want to release them as ticking time bombs? Is that who you want living next to you? Hey" — he puts down his toast — "have you seen the film about the Attica warden?" Apparently a recently released Finnish documentary depicts a former Attica superintendent's tour of Halden, a new prison I'll be visiting later this week. They make a laughingstock of him, because where the Norwegian officials see rehabilitation and correction, the American sees risk and danger.

"He even looks at staff playing cards with the prisoners, chatting about each other's lives and calling each other by first names, and he is disgusted.

‘That is not safe,' he keeps saying. But where are the statistics to show that it's a danger? How can you help the prisoners if you are not sharing, about you and your life and your kids? The men here know my kids, my address, everything. Why should I be afraid?" It's as if Governor Tom were reading my mind.

After my visit, as I'm waiting for the yellow van to carry me back to the boat and to Oslo, a man with a chipped front tooth stands beside me."You are from America?" he asks. "You must think this place is crazy, huh?" Without letting me answer, he goes on."But if you treat people like shit, they will be shit. Why doesn't America get it?"
But I have to point also that you have harangued the "liberal elites" for not doing the right thing about climate change, forgetting that it is even less realistic to expect better solutions from the other elites, the ones that have allowed nonsense to guide their inaction. And then that side is the same as the one that now claims belatedly that it has also the best solutions if they ever bother to talk about that issue.

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-02-2019 at 10:48 PM.
  #136  
Old 11-03-2019, 12:33 AM
Velocity is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 15,674
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Our prison system is another example of being too cushy. Prison should be PRISON, full on chain gang type work being done while there. THAT acts as a deterrent, not the gym having, games playing, TV/library time stuff that they get now. With that said, end the war on drugs and Prison should really only be for the violent criminals.
I currently keep up mail correspondence with numerous prison inmates. While I haven't been to prison myself, I assure you, based off of their accounts, whatever small "perks" they may enjoy in American prisons such as a gym, games, or library by no means compensate for the agony of confinement and not being able to leave. One describes it as "even the air feels recycled; not free." It is not too cushy.
  #137  
Old 11-03-2019, 03:00 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 20,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urbanredneck View Post
... These new ones were for things like mumps, measles, and chicken pox which many people remembered just as a common diseases of childhood. NOT dreaded diseases like polio and smallpox.
Far from clear.

MUMPS
"Orchitis occurs in approximately 20–30% of unvaccinated and 6–7% of vaccinated postpubertal male mumps patients."
As one of the 6-7% of vaccinated postpubertal males who contracted orchitis, I recommend you avoid having a 20–30% chance of this painful condition.

MEASLES
"The World Health Organization estimates there were 145,700 deaths globally from measles in 2013."
The deaths were mostly in countries with poor nutrition or healthcare but should suggest that tthis disease is far from benign.

PERTUSSIS
"In the 20th century, pertussis was one of the most common childhood diseases and a major cause of childhood mortality in the United States. Before the availability of pertussis vaccine in the 1940s, more than 200,000 cases of pertussis were reported annually. "
DIPTHERIA
"The overall case-fatality rate for diphtheria is 5%-10%, with higher death rates (up to 20%) among persons younger than 5 and older than 40 years of age. The case-fatality rate for diphtheria has changed very little during the last 50 years."
RUBELLA
"A rubella epidemic in the United States in 1964–1965 resulted in 12.5 million cases of rubella infection and about 20,000 newborns with Congenital Rubella Syndrome. The estimated cost of the epidemic was $840 million. This does not include the emotional toll on the families involved."
These quotes are from www.cdc.gov. (Perhaps that will be dismissed as a purveyor of Fake Facts.)
  #138  
Old 11-03-2019, 10:32 AM
Jackmannii's Avatar
Jackmannii is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: the extreme center
Posts: 32,332
I associate "liberal elites" with wealthy people who read the New York Times, clucking to themselves over the plight of the poor while they shop for furs, diamonds and other luxury items prominently displayed in Times ads (one featuring the young entitled snot who's eventually going to inherit Daddy's incredibly expensive watch comes to mind). I suppose that's not as obnoxious as a wealthy person reading the Wall St. Journal*, sneering at stories about labor unions while drooling over ads for super-expensive sports cars, but it's still loathsome.

Journal editorials commonly refer to "the chattering classes", another term of disdain. I suppose that refers to news media, politicians and celebrities who yammer about things the Journal would prefer they stop yammering about.
  #139  
Old 11-03-2019, 11:37 AM
QuickSilver is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19,358
So what have we learned so far about the label, "liberal elites"?:

a) Liberals who voted for Obama
b) Informed liberals
c) Liberals in politics
d) Rich informed liberals
e) Rich informed liberals in politics
f) As outed by Conservative Media
g) I reserve the right to call 'em as I see 'em (based on what they read, where they live, etc...) -- Don't lump me in.
h) all of the above (QED OP)
__________________
St. QuickSilver: Patron Saint of Thermometers.
  #140  
Old 11-04-2019, 08:33 AM
Translucent Daydream is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Grand Valley
Posts: 1,829
I'm not sure that people that use "liberal elite" as a put down really know what it means. They might have a feeling, but I am not sure that is really a defined one.

The same thing is going on for people that say that the are "into Bowie." Yeah, you might think Fame and Lets Dance is cool, but you know nothing of the Low album or Tin Machine.

I was called some sort of version of "liberal elite" once, a little over ten years ago if memory serves me correct. I was the night administrator of a junior college in Texas, and I had to kick out some sort of Tea Party meeting in one of our conference rooms. They got out of hand and were getting really rowdy. The shit sprayed from the fan though when the basketball team came in there after a game, thinking it was the room that they were supposed to watch the game film in. I was called in, and had to kick them out for pointing fingers at the basketball kids and screaming "there is the problem with the country right there! I bet they all have niglets too on "FINANCIAL AID and WELFARE!!!"

When "niglets" came out of his mouth, I took the microphone away from the dude and told them they would all be leaving now or escorted off by the police. I was the PIC, and their access had just been revoked to the building. The leader of the rally guy, now without microphone, called me "liberal *something*", I just can't remember what it was. I want to say it was liberal douche, or liberal slime. I can't exactly remember. There was a lot going on. I guess that sweet ass 35k a year I was getting paid for that shit was just too much for the tea party rally guy though. I was also told by the tea bag folks that I was going to need to "watch my back" and "they knew who I was." They turned out to be impotent or something, because all this time later, I have never seen these guys again.

I feel like someone that would use "niglets" to refer to the children of black people would be likely to use the term "liberal elite". So if you want my respect, don't use "niglets" or "liberal elite" or "the south will rise again, son" or "Florida Garbage" or "cracker ass" to me in a sentance.
__________________
I promise it’s not as bad or as good as you think it is.
  #141  
Old 11-04-2019, 12:51 PM
Kearsen1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Velocity View Post
I currently keep up mail correspondence with numerous prison inmates. While I haven't been to prison myself, I assure you, based off of their accounts, whatever small "perks" they may enjoy in American prisons such as a gym, games, or library by no means compensate for the agony of confinement and not being able to leave. One describes it as "even the air feels recycled; not free." It is not too cushy.
Let's don't miss the forest for the trees. This isn't really about what is or isn't too cushy.

What it is about is that what the term liberal elite refers to is those set(s) of people who think to tell others what to think and how to better themselves, simply because they think they know better.

What we've seen in this thread (a shit ton of it) is that yes we know better so listen to us, believe us.

We have a whole lot of talking down to the poor unwashed masses instead of an educating that could possibly go on. You guys take this criticism and start behaving like children wanting to lay blame elsewhere, ANYWHERE else. The GOP this, Republicans that.

If I have said one thing it's that for the most part what the Democrats want comes from a good place in their hearts. You guys want change, you guys want to help.

Your single biggest problem is that it is too fractured, everyone wants to help everyone and everything. It costs too much and when the rubber hits the road you have no real way of paying for all the help that you wish to give.

The liberal elites don't give 2 shits about hurting others to help those that they deem to need the help.

Make no mistake, anytime you take from Peter to pay Paul, Peter gets hurt in some form or fashion but you guys make distinctions on WHO is going to get hurt all the time.

Hint: It's always those other guys (not the liberal elite themselves)


For all of these, is my main focus of needing bipartisan support for ANYTHING that greatly affects our UNION. With no one willing to work together, we will just stay fractured and keep trying to blame and/or hurt the OTHER SIDE.

Last edited by Kearsen1; 11-04-2019 at 12:54 PM.
  #142  
Old 11-04-2019, 01:16 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,953
Thank you for repeating all those talking points, but it really wasn't necessary.
  #143  
Old 11-04-2019, 04:06 PM
Kearsen1 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 368
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Thank you for repeating all those talking points, but it really wasn't necessary.
Let me add another problem:

The complete disregard of someone else's ideas, contributions, or thoughts.

None of those were talking points. I don't watch Fox or listen to Hannity or Rush, or whomever is on the air these days.
Nah, those came from me, the relevant middle of the roader willing to vote for whomever I see that benefits not only me, but the country.

And you, amongst others, just disregard us. It's a mistake.
  #144  
Old 11-04-2019, 04:15 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,953
I find it somewhat surprising that almost none of the conservatives posting here "watch Fox or listen to Hannity or Rush, or whomever is on the air these days"-how is it they manage to stay on the air if their target audience doesn't watch, listen or read them?
  #145  
Old 11-04-2019, 04:20 PM
Larry Borgia's Avatar
Larry Borgia is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 10,675
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
I find it somewhat surprising that almost none of the conservatives posting here "watch Fox or listen to Hannity or Rush, or whomever is on the air these days"-how is it they manage to stay on the air if their target audience doesn't watch, listen or read them?
Their target audience is conservative SDMB posters? That's a pretty niche audience.
  #146  
Old 11-04-2019, 04:33 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is online now
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 62,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Borgia View Post
Their target audience is conservative SDMB posters? That's a pretty niche audience.
Their target audience is conservatives. I guess it is just a coincidence that the conservatives on this particular board, almost every one of them, don't listen, watch or read the most popular conservative venues...and yet manage to push the same points.
  #147  
Old 11-04-2019, 04:37 PM
begbert2 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Idaho
Posts: 13,498
I'm not going to worry about whether specific posters here are reluctant to admit that they watch or listen to the specific shit-stirrers in question, but will note that the target audience for them reaches way down into the sewer, to the level of troglodytes and deplorables that wouldn't last three days here for one reason or another or another. It's actually almost possibly sort of halfway credible that the conservatives who manage to survive here are actually above the bar for literally all mainstream sources of conservative thought.
  #148  
Old 11-04-2019, 04:47 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
And you, amongst others, just disregard us. It's a mistake.
Harder then to not disregard when the Republicans in power are ignoring even what they claimed before to be, they pretended all this time to be fiscally responsible.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/24/opini...zer/index.html

https://reason.com/2019/10/25/federa...p-took-office/
  #149  
Old 11-04-2019, 04:55 PM
GIGObuster's Avatar
GIGObuster is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Arizona
Posts: 29,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
Their target audience is conservatives. I guess it is just a coincidence that the conservatives on this particular board, almost every one of them, don't listen, watch or read the most popular conservative venues...and yet manage to push the same points.
Un-Social media explains a lot of that disconnection, I still remember one conservative poster that in the past claimed to be more independent minded since he never listened to Rush Limbaugh on the radio or watched FOX... and then later, in another thread, he cited and linked to a Rush article posted in his web site..

Last edited by GIGObuster; 11-04-2019 at 04:56 PM.
  #150  
Old 11-04-2019, 05:02 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
What it is about is that what the term liberal elite refers to is those set(s) of people who think to tell others what to think and how to better themselves, simply because they think they know better.

What we've seen in this thread (a shit ton of it) is that yes we know better so listen to us, believe us.
If you think you've seen a shit-ton of it in this thread, I will posit that you haven't really been paying attention. What I've maintained is that the whole concept of the "liberal elite" is a right-wing fabrication (specifically, a Republican fabrication) as a means of trying to discredit what is essentially an evidence-based approach to policy-making. What I've seen in this thread from some on the right (not from you, that I can recall, but some) are assertions along the lines of "I don't need no stinkin' 'studies' to tell me what I already know" whereas the left tends to rely much more on the evidence of academic research. Tell me: climate change denial, evolution denial in favor of clinging to religion, opposition to abortion for religious reasons and baseless unscientific assertions about "when human life begins", fabricated false "news" from Newsmax, Breitbart, and Fox News, not to mention lunatic sites like InfoWars -- which side of the political spectrum is all this nonsense firmly associated with? You know the answer as well as I do. Which side of the political spectrum believed that Medicare would be the end of freedom in America (look up "Operation Coffee Cup") and that Obamacare would kill your grandmother? How about the fact that conservative idol Donald J. Trump has so far uttered 13,435 lies since Inauguration Day, and most of the right-wing acolytes who elected him and are ready to do so again believe every single one of them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearsen1 View Post
Your single biggest problem is that it is too fractured, everyone wants to help everyone and everything. It costs too much and when the rubber hits the road you have no real way of paying for all the help that you wish to give.

The liberal elites don't give 2 shits about hurting others to help those that they deem to need the help.
The major and certainly financially biggest program that some Democrats advocate for is universal health care. How is this a matter of "costs too much" when in fact UHC systems in the entire rest of the world cost, in their totality, a mere fraction of what the US already pays for health care per capita through the combination of both public and private spending? This is a very complex issue but conservatives in general tend to greatly over-inflate the costs by willfully ignoring the huge potential efficiencies in an integrated UHC system. Other than that, Dems may want to incrementally improve social services and the social safety net. What is the cost of that compared to the monetary and social costs of America's bursting-at-the-seams overcrowded prison system featuring the highest incarceration rate in the civilized world?

On your last quoted sentence, I'd say that maybe liberals don't give two shits about "hurting" billionaires by taxing them a little higher so that more people can get a decent meal and maybe their kids get an opportunity for a useful education and a decent productive life. I'd say that's fair tradeoff, and probably a better one than condemning all taxes as "theft" because of the delusion that every cent you earn within the public infrastructure of a civilized and technological society is for some reason all incontrovertibly your own, even if it totals millions or billions or hundreds of billions of dollars.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:02 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017