Do conservatives genuinely not understand the liberal position on wealth? (Fox News oped)

[Wrenching_Spanners]

Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners

So yes, I do believe that innovation and investment is bringing people out of poverty, and those innovators and investors should be rewarded, not penalised.

@GIGObuster

That really has very little to do with the tax situation in the USA, or what had taken place in the USA if a monopoly like the Bell one had been allowed to remain.

So the liberal position on wealth is that monopolies are bad? Hey, that’s great. Speaking as a conservative who believes in the role of competition in the economy, I endorse that position.

Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners

As to the Internet, when was the last time there was government led innovation to the Internet? I like bbc.co.uk. They’re quasi-governmental, but they’re hardly innovative. There are lots of government websites. I’ve never noticed any of them bringing something new to the Internet. What I have noticed is the government websites adopting practices started on corporate websites.

@GIGObuster

You have the history backwards there, it was thanks to government efforts that we got the Internet itself.

I’m very sure that history starts in the past and moves towards the future. “When was the last time there was government led innovation to the Internet?” is a question about the recent past and not the historical past. A question you haven’t answered.

@GIGObuster

There is a method here, first I do want to see what kind of conservative you are.

Unlike you, I’ve actually declared a position, a conservative one, towards wealth. See post #140:
Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners

• People should be allowed to keep the majority of the income they earn.
• Wealth, which is different than income as noted above, should not be taxed.
• Unrealised gains should not be taxed.
• Some people are good at, and enjoy, making money. Absent other information about wrongdoing, there is nothing inherently wrong with these people.
• The creation of new wealth is chiefly through innovation and not exploitation.
• Corporations should be taxed on their domestic income* and not on revenue.

I define myself as a conservative, or at least centre-right, and I believe in the principles behind each of those statements.
<snip>
*For global corporations, it probably is necessary for governments to take a restrictive definition of domestic income. For example, licensing software or intellectual property from Barbados in order to avoid taxes should be restricted.

@GIGObuster

And one main point I made was that you are trying to get an official liberal position when in reality there is really none, and I want to make special notice at your tactic that really sounds as if nothing will satisfy you. One will have to agree to disagree on your attempt at finding an official “liberal position” this is a case were the process of government will give us the proposal to work and discuss and maybe, just maybe to pass it in congress.

So your position on “Do conservatives genuinely not understand the liberal position on wealth?” is that, regarding that position: “an official liberal position when in reality there is really none”.

So, conservatives are expected to understand a liberal position that doesn’t actually exist? One that will be defined in the future, but one that is based on current US liberal rhetoric that the rich/wealthy are bad? But not all the rich/wealthy, only the ones that the liberals denounce, which are the only ones that the conservatives like.

Originally Posted by Wrenching Spanners

Is it the wealth tax that you brought up back in post #149? Going back to the OP, do you believe people with entrenched wealth “should be the ones who are “punished” by paying a larger share in taxes, whether of their income or wealth”? How do liberals distinguish between entrenched wealth and entrepreneurial wealth?

@GIGObuster

Read the OP again, as I noted I do not agree 100% with it, but that are the parameters for the discussion here.

I’ve read the OP again. Twice above, in the question about entrenched wealth and the paragraph above the quote, I’ve stated my interpretations of it. Didn’t you, in post #218 refer to the OP’s idea as “the nuttiest member(s) of a group” and “a poor representative of the group”? What percentage of the OP do you back?

My belief is that the conservative understanding of the “the liberal position on wealth” is that the “the liberal position on wealth?” is based on biased perceptions and sloganeering and emotional reactions and not based on sound reasoning or detailed review of the implications of their ideas. The inability of you and the other liberal participants in this debate to dispute that understanding indicates that the conservative understanding is correct.