Sure it is. It’s providing everyone an equal look at the game regardless of age, sex, colour or creed. Huzzah ! Or, as **thorny locust **told you, equality of impact and equality of requirements are merely two aspects of “equality” or “fairness”. One is not more “equal” than the other ; much less the only *real *equal.
Conservatives believe that capital gains should be taxed at the same rate as regular income tax? Conservatives believe that corporations should be taxed at the same rate as people? Conservatives believe that anything of value a person receives through inheritance should be taxed at the same rate as income tax?
I wasn’t aware of these beliefs.
News to me!
The point of DWI laws is to prevent the literal impact upon other people on the road caused by drunk drivers. There’s no way to accomplish that without imposing a requirement that is, indeed, harder on the alcoholic. (Though the alcoholic also probably benefits more, as their chances of also dying in such impacts are reduced.)
The point of taxation is to get things paid for that the society thinks is worth doing. If one of the things society thinks is worth doing is to keep people from starving to death on the streets, then imposing a tax system that requires people who already don’t have enough to live on to pay the same percentage or flat amount that’s assessed on somebody who could otherwise afford to buy a third jet works against the aim, not towards it.
If you provide ham sandwiches for everybody whenever it’s Easter, are you treating the Christians, Jews, and Muslims all equally?
I’ve seen another version of that which is even better.
Panel one: tall person, medium person, small person all trying to watch the game. Solid opaque fence, and only the tall person can see over it.
Panel two: boxes have been provided. Medium person gets a box, short person gets two. Everybody can now see over the fence.
Panel three: the fence has been redesigned to be taller, but made of open mesh, small enough openings to stop a ball, large enough to easily see through. Everybody can now see the game without any of them having to stand on boxes – and not even the tall guy is going to get hit in the face with an errant ball.
My guess is that there’s nevertheless somebody somewhere complaining that money was spent on that new fence, and in their day nobody thought anything was wrong with the old fence and why should they have to listen to short people anyway?
More likely, the complaints would be from everybody who profits from ticket sales to see the game Nothing is free.
Meanwhile, as I type this, the man 60-odd million conservatives voted for is leading a White Power rally:
We have found the new campaign slogan.
I bring this up because the argument that Trump != conservative implies that “conservatism” is such a small factor in the minds of those voters… and rally goers… that the values of low taxes/free enterprise/small government is now an impotent force in American politics.
Do I have this right?
ISTM that the drop in Trump’s votes from 2016 to 2020 will show us how strong the “no racism conservative” vote is. I eagerly await the results!
In the example being given, the tall person was getting to watch the game for free all along.
At least, unless all three of them had to buy a ticket to get as far as the fence.
But the game might be played by volunteers, or by paid players funded the same way as the park, at a public park funded by taxes, or Tshirt sales, or a lot of little donations from people living in the area, or a lottery, or a gift from a philanthropist who happened to like ball games and decided that they didn’t need to buy even two jets, or . . .
there’s a lot of ways to redesign that fence. Also a lot of ways to pay whatever actual expenses are involved in the ball game.
- hmmm. Are conservatives opposed to children getting into events for lower prices than adults have to pay? I don’t think I’ve ever heard a complaint about that one.
Sheds an interesting light on the frequent conservative claim that they have nothing against immigrants, just illegal immigrants. Here’s an American citizen whose family legally obtained asylum over 20 years ago, who became a US citizen at 17, and as soon as she says something they don’t like, what do the bigots yell? “Send her back”.
Conservative values 4eva. :rolleyes:
Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen, and Katz just released a memo begging their clients to not be tempted to break the law due to the… how did they put it… “the significant drop over the past two years in both the number of white collar prosecutions and the scale of corporate fines and penalties.”
Knowing that Friedman, Rand, et al, convinced me at one time that capitalism is a moral system for it demands honesty of all participants, I look forward to the conservative blowback against Trump regarding this pressing issue.
Point please
This thread having gone off the rails already, I might as well nitpick.
People didn’t use f in place of s. They used the letter s. But the letter s used to be written in two different ways; the short s which is now the standard and the long s - ſ - which is no longer used.
But both forms were the same letter, just as 𝒻 and f are the same, even if they don’t resemble each other.
Interesting poll in USA Today yesterday.
70% of Republicans and 31% of Democrats polled agreed with the statement “accusations of racism are usually made in bad faith.”
So, I would say that a conservative value is that they think liberals are biased, insincere and unreliable in their accusations of bigotry and racism. Apparently, this is also a significant minority view among liberals.
Isn’t this what conservatives talk about all the time? It’s the fact that while liberals will argue that they want equality of opportunity, what they really want is equality of outcome.
This is probably another conservative value that is consistent over the past half century, if not longer, based on the polling I’ve seen.
I know that. 
To whom shall I point? People who mistakenly believe that conservatives want to “tax people equally”?
So 70% of Republicans have had experiences similar to reading the OP and many of the posts in response. That I can believe. And 31% of Democrats have enough insight to recognize it, or are at least honest enough to 'fess up. Better, frankly, than I expected.
Regards,
Shodan
Or, perhaps, a large number of republicans are insufficiently self aware that their stated positions and attitudes are racist and feel put upon when confronted with the fact.
Not at all. Maybe Dad enjoys watching the game a lot more than Little Timmy. Maybe Little Timmy would rather play Candy Crush or step on ants. But the important thing is that he should not be functionally and systematically barred from watching the game at all just because he was born (temporarily) tiny.