Not so much that wealth is evil, as that it is entirely too powerful. In politics and in government, the rich generally get their way regardless of what anyone else wants. That has always been true to some extent, but not since the Gilded Age has it been like it is now.
And I hope we are past being duped that supply-side economic policies will ever produce “increased industry and new opportunities for economic growth.”
These are not conservative positions, or positions that set conservatives apart from liberals.
The fact that you think they are is an example of how conservative credibility is exhausted.
More of an own goal on your part. Not really all that special to declare that you think that someone will disagree with your assertions, then claim them to be predicable that they disagreed with your assertions.
Anyway…
Foresight, sure. Capital… How much capital did Bezos have when he started Amazon? I started a business with just the capital I was able to squeeze out of my home equity, which I built up while working fairly low wage jobs.
You don’t need the wealthy to start and grow businesses. In fact, it is usually the not wealthy that start businesses, grow them, and grow their labor rolls over time.
It’s not really a myth. You used to be able to walk into a factory and get a job that would pay for a house and a family of 4. There are not that many of those jobs anymore.
And you used to have to have more people working at the combined number of local retailers than you need Amazon warehouse workers.
You used to have the owners of those businesses as part of your community.
The numbers don’t really agree with you.
That’s an odd claim, it both has a bit of false assertion, while also admitting that you do know the truth.
It is not through only or even primarily dividends, but many other options that are available to the ultra wealthy that they use to leverage their money into more money.
I don’t see how this is possible, as almost by definition, to have that sort of wealth involves being a national, if not international corporation. They are not earning millions or billions from their local economy.
Ah yes, they do. And they pay a lower rate on those realized gains than most people do on the income they earn from their labor.
And that’s assuming that they don’t do some accounting tricks to lower it even more. For instance, Trump managed to bankrupt a casino, get others to bail him out, and then get to use those losses to offset his taxes for the next decade.
That is simply poor perception on your part. It is not related to reality.
I’m not sure your point here. I am an Amazon customer, but I still think that they should be responsible corporate citizens. I shop at Wal-Mart, but I do think that they should pay better.
Just because someone has little choice but to be a customer of a massive corporation does not mean that they endorse its practices.
You tried making some sort of either-or excluded middle argument, but it was really just a fallacy.
Sure, but American conservatism doesn’t have anything to do with any of that.
Now, I don’t mean to suggest that conservatism will not remain an important presence in American politics for some time to come. There is still Trump’s base of hardcore loyalists, a minority but now a politically self-aware minority, ready to be mobilized by whoever can find a new way harness them; and there is the truly astonishing network of well-funded RW activist groups, think-tanks, media outlets, academic institutions, and (most importantly of all) business groups; and then there is the federal judiciary. The RW will remain in a position to mount a hard fight on any issue, and will sometimes win – but will always be on the defensive. The “Moon Party” is not necessarily reduced to irrelevance – during the 1932-1980 period of “liberal consensus” in American politics, there were three Republican presidents.
As for the WNs, without Trump to embolden and normalize them, I suspect they will revert to their previous low-profile presence, and gradually dwindle from there. Time is not on their side, neither demographically nor ideologically. They represent a fading remnant of what was once a general consensus in American society, and that is the only reason they remain at all relevant.
Now, that does not rule out the survival of a less conscious and less extremist racism in much broader swathes of American society.
I think there are only a few true conservatives left in this country. 45 exploited a swing to the radical that had been growing since the 70’s and managed to get it to a level of divisiveness that is alarming. The recent political climate with the RNC censure of their own party members over 1/6 are examples of exactly the type of rift that has developed and seems impossible at this time to fix. It means that there are those that believe in and rely on the available facts, attempt to actually research credible sources of information, and those still stuck in the conspiracy news/fake news/alternative facts world and mainstreamed in 2016-2017. Current facts surrounding the central figure that embraces science and facts when it got their narrative are disregarded as seen with current headlines of deflection of responsibility over classified materials brazenly mishandled and combativeness against their own self interests when it is perceived their are cast in a negative light. Recipient of cutting edge scientifically developed drugs to combat SARS-Cov2 yet peddling proven ineffective treatments and dangerous behaviors that endanger the population as a whole, no care for fellow citizens…these have become the identifiers with which most identify a “conservative” not those who have been moderates and what were conservatives of the past. So…how do we reconcile a moderate, science embracing conservative in this climate? We are given a binary choice, again as a result of current culture, of liberal or conservative…is there room for a politically agnostic, laodicean individual to participate? I hope so, but the burden, unfortunately, falls to you to identify as a Chaney/Kizenger conservative…or not at all. Just my opinion FWIW
The main difficulty for true conservatives is that there isn’t a home for them anymore. They aren’t wanted in the Trump Party. They aren’t wanted in the Democratic Party. 3rd parties have no clout. They’re politically homeless.
They constitute maybe, I dunno, 5% or 8% of the American populace at the moment.
The main difficulty for true conservatives is that there isn’t a home for them anymore. They aren’t wanted in the Trump Party. They aren’t wanted in the Democratic Party. 3rd parties have no clout. They’re politically homeless.
The issue of masking in grade school and primary school is an example of something I, as a self-identified conservative, feel alienated on. As far as I am aware, the science is unclear whether mandating masks for the very young kids is helpful. I don’t think the cloth masks are effective against the latest variant, and it’s asking a lot to expect kids to properly wear and maintain N95s. Lacking strong arguments for a mandate, and with no clear reason this cannot be addressed locally, I feel like the decision should be made on a community basis - whether that means the school board or per city, I’m open to arguments. Community is central to conservatism - it is antithetical to issue a statewide or national mandate for something like this unless the reasons to do so are overwhelming. (Of course, if private schools want to require masks where the law does not require masks, that’s their business.) But from what I can tell the political parties both advocate for statewide rules - the Democrats, at least until recently, pushing for a statewide school mask mandate; the Republicans pushing for a statewide ban on mandates.
~Max
This feels like a conservative default argument, but I’m not sure why it makes sense in this case. The virus is the same in every community, the efficacy of masks is the same in every community, kids are kids in every community, etc. etc. Individual communities have no individual basis for making this call other than, “Well, here we feel this way.”
I don’t see any benefit to letting communities make this decision versus the state or even the whole country making the decision, other than the tautological benefit of community-level decision-making being a good thing.
Exactly, it is my default position that the decision should be made at the local level. One thing to take into consideration is that different communities will have different levels of compliance - especially with the kids, if they aren’t in a situation where the parents regularly mask up, good luck getting the little ones to do it right. That is going to vary from town to town.
I did think, wouldn’t it be nice to have one standard statewide just for convenience? But we’re talking about schools - you won’t have many kids switching schools mid year (unlike say, confusion of tourists and general mask mandates) and if they do, it’s reasonable to have them deal with new rules that fit the new community. And it would be trivially easy to generate a county by county or town by town or even school by school list of mask policies, should the state want all the info in one place for the public.
~Max
See, this would be my argument against community decision-making. Again, there’s no difference from community to community in the benefits of kids wearing masks while they’re in school. If there’s a significant benefit* to it, then schools in communities where parents don’t wear masks are just that much more in need of the mandate, just as schools in communities where parents, say, make poor dietary choices are more in need of schools that offer nutritious lunches.
*Aha, cries the conservative, but who’s to say if the benefit is significant? To be sure there’s some subjectivity there, but only in the interpretation, not the science itself. And one community subjectively deciding the benefits aren’t significant doesn’t make their lack of compliance any less detrimental to the people in the next community who take masking more seriously.
Right. A significant benefit, as opposed to peace of mind or an abundance of caution, is a “strong argument”
~Max
OK, I’ll concede the point. But – purely as a devil’s advocate – if there isn’t a significant benefit, why should individual communities have the right to force kids to mask up?
As you quoted, peace of mind and abundance of caution.
Here is an example,
Tay Anderson, vice president of the Denver school board, said Wednesday that he believed the board should take up the issue of whether or not to end the mask mandate, writing in a Medium post that he wanted to temporarily add masks to the district’s dress code, but he did not have the support for such a policy.
“…I must express my deep concerns with ending our mask mandate before the end of the school year,” he wrote. “I still believe that out of an abundance of caution, our mask mandate should stay in place throughout the remainder of the semester.”
~Max
Anything Tay Anderson says - I will immediately take the opposite view. Here is his latest public embarrassment. He’s lucky he’s in Denver so that as long as Mayor Hancock is in office he can’t be the slimiest politician in the city. But give him credit - he’s trying.
I just Googled the dude and learned that he is a suspected serial sexual predator with 62 victims as young as 14 giving testimony before the state judiciary committee, and over 1,000 students walking out in protest of his actions. The school board censored him, then promptly promoted him to vice president.
[/Off topic]
~Max
I am a conservative who sees Trump as a narcissistic idiot with a big mouth. I still can’t believe he was able to win over so many people. I made a huge miscalculation. As far as Republican values go, I see one type of republican on the news and a complete different type in my daily life. I really don’t know what to believe anymore. I know very few that are homophobic or racist. I use to be a lot more verbal talking against Trump but the loyalty to him is evident and I have recently dropped my association with the republican party. I need to figure out what party suits me. I have no problem with most issues of democrats I just feel most of them are grossly misrepresented and appeal too much to emotions.
This is very good to read. If you want to know what Democrats believe (or at least some of us!), feel free to reach out to me, and probably several other Dopers as well.
Thank You, I just may do that.