My problem with Liberals...

[Czarcasm]

@horhay_achoa

Instead of forcing people to do things against their will I would rather see an effort to change people’s will.

How much would you have the federal government(and it would take the federal government to counter the advertising budget of the multinational corporations) spend on advertising the right paths for us to follow, and who would determine which paths would be good for us?

[foolsguinea]

Did I say cocaine? Rather, heroin. Cocaine (or Novocaine or the like) is what the dentist gives you so you don’t jump out from the chair when he drills. Heroin (or oxycodone) is what you take so you don’t mind the pain & never go to the dentist.

The pain being collapsing infrastructure, millions of homeless, a poisoned world.

Our dentists are heroin dealers now.

[mswas]

@foolsguinea

I don’t know if market forces can be trusted to educate the best & brightest to their full potential either. But I would love to make mandatory education only through eighth grade. But it might also be good to outlaw non-accredited church schools & unsupervised home schooling. SOME standard education is good for social cohesion.

True.

[AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet]

Sure, most if not all government institutions could be improved - but how many private institutions could you not say the same about? Further, many government institutions serve functions that would not be handled by private industry. And very few private organizations have to act on as large a scale as the feds, or justify the services they provide to the entire range of the population.

Yes. The corruption issues are endimic. It’s not just that “big government” is evil.
Private industry also has a ton of corruption.
It just seems like libs and small govt Repubs seem to think that privatization is some glorious utopia magic bullet.

[AboutAsWeirdAsYouCanGet]

If privatitizing stuff works so well then how come privatizing Philly’s school administration worked so well?
The only reason why privatization works is that they tend to skim the best of the best …Meaning they can pick and chose their population.
Yes, there’s corruption in the public spere…but what about Bank Of America exces getting tons in bonuses with the bailout?

[cosmosdan]

@foolsguinea

“Raising awareness”? What kind of weak tea is that? No, you’re sure not a conservative, you’re a silly libertarian optimist! “Raising awareness” is namby-pamby limp-wristed Hollywood liberal gobshite. In the real world, those who want to accomplish something take power & do things.

Do, or do not.

We need both. I think the attempts at doing and the people advocating certain changes brings us to the contention and conflict that eventually raises awareness about a particular issue. Look at our history of civil rights. It took decades of doing and some bloody conflict before the overall awareness of society shifted the pendulum on certain issues. It’s still happening. We need the doing, but without raising awareness the doing won’t actually change anything.

[cosmosdan]

@Voyager

Really? Do you think people are less compassionate now than they were 50 years ago? Or 100? Big government is a fairly new invention. If small government leads to better people, we should have all been saints a long time ago. But with “freedom” from government we had slavery. We had sweatshops. We had people going hungry. Much of the food stamp program today comes from a CBS documentary in 1968 called Hunger in America (scroll down to 1968.) We’re not evil, we’re just human and distracted.

Yep. I tend to agree with the poster who pointed out that to some extent we are the government. Libertarians and conservatives tout the free market but that only works in some ideal situation where business is operated in some honorable honest competition world. That’s not the one we live in. Greed is a powerful motivator and many people are still willing to screw over their fellow citizens to gain an advantage or line their pockets.

I see Joe average do it all the time. Should we be surprised that execs and politicians give into temptation when a lot more money is at stake. If the society as a whole really addressed poverty as a priority we wouldn’t need government programs. The average citizen either doesn’t see or won’t acknowledge and act on the long term consequences of certain choices. Until a problem becomes very serious and is thrust in our face we won’t bother to take the steps to address it.

I think we’ll continue the cycle until more citizens see themselves as part of the problem or part of the solution and step up to participate. As we the citizens do more we won’t need some government agency to do it.

[SteveG1]

@horhay_achoa

I agree with this. I would like less involvement from both parties…especially people trying to ram their conservative social agendas down my throat.

The same goes for their “pseudo relgious” garbage and their arbitrary ways of measuring loyalty to the country - I’m loyal to a country, not a political party or individual. And free speech - which doesn’t mean I’m only free to agree with you or have to go to some so called “free speech zone”. And chickenhawks who somehow avoid service but bang the drum and call other people (including veterans) cowards and traitors. And the idea that you can lock people away indefinitely without filing charges or holding a trial, just by yelling “terrorist”.

Here’s what I want.

Government should do the things it’s supposed to do. Common welfare, domestic tranquility, interstae commerce. blah blah blah. But when it comes to our private lives, and our ability to think what we want instead of what someone tells us to, and hold our own opinions, and read what we want without the “secret police” checking the library on us, etc etc etc.

If the last few years are what conservativism is, to hell with that.

Sorry about the rant, but it gets to a point where some “conservative” trying to tell a “liberal” how bad he is, is beyond tiresome.

[SteveG1]

@ITR_champion

I’m just a plain, old-fashioned liberal, but I have seen examples of the same split that you mention here. Many of my fellows seem to think that if the government would just make a law, we could easily end cigarette smoking, force people to eat healthy diets, establish racial and gender equality in all organizations, make people invest their money properly, cure all environmental ills, promote scientific research, and establish a wonderful health care system. Yet at the same time, we all know perfectly well that while the Republicans were in power, they used that power to reward political cronies, pile up pork-barrel spending, spread destructive things such as ethanol, give contracts in reward for campaign contributions, screw up our schools, and promote warfare and militarism. Moreover, the more honest among us know that there are many Democrats who will use their newfound power to do the same things, though corruption won’t reach nearly the same scale as it did under the Republicans.

Why the difference? What makes anyone think that government intervention now will be just and fair, when it never has been in the past? I think it’s a little bit of denial and cognitive dissonance (we just can’t accept how thoroughly corrupt our government is) mixed with a emotional concern about problems overriding rational judgment of solutions.

Like I said in my previous post. I want government to stay the hell out of my private life. That include the “but it’s for your own good” crap too.