What "Conservative Values" aren't based on bigotry?

[iiandyiiii]

@Scylla

Your personal interpretation differs from mine.

I made a series of assertions about present politics. Which of them do you disagree with?

[Scylla]

@iiandyiiii

I made a series of assertions about present politics. Which of them do you disagree with?

I’m not interested in your assertions. They are irrelevant and belong in IMHO.

Is there something about conservatism you wish to know, or do you think you have it all figured out?

[iiandyiiii]

@Scylla

I’m not interested in your assertions. They are irrelevant and belong in IMHO.

Is there something about conservatism you wish to know, or do you think you have it all figured out?

I’m interested in knowing how conservatives think, and how those who support Trump continue to rationalize and excuse supporting ongoing misogyny, bigotry, and hatefulness. I’m very critical of such folks, but I don’t claim to understand how they think.

[Sam_Stone]

@Chimera

Dude, stop being disingenuous. You’re arguing in bad faith here.

NO ONE in the USA is arguing in favor of a managed system. Not one of the people you call Socialists is arguing in favor of a Soviet style managed economy. It isn’t happening, we aren’t calling for it, “socialists” aren’t calling for it and belaboring this point and persistently claiming that Socialists in America want this is blatantly, disingenuously FALSE.

You just finished arguing for policies which would destroy capitalism and put the money in the hands of government to be distributed. So just who is being disingenuous?

And as for no one advocating the destruction of capitalism… Did you see what happened to John Hickenlooper when he said he supported Capitalism in front of a bunch of Democrats? They booed him off the stage.

[Chimera]

@Sam_Stone

You just finished arguing for policies which would destroy capitalism and put the money in the hands of government to be distributed. So just who is being disingenuous?

I did no such thing. I have no desire to destroy capitalism and socialism is NOT the diametric opposite of Capitalism, despite your personal opinion of it.

Also ‘putting money in the hands of government to be distributed’ is NOT “Socialism”. It’s fucking GOVERNMENT, unless you define every government that has ever existed from the dawn of Humanity as being socialist because they gathered taxes, controlled resources and distributed them to their people.

By that logic, the Babylonians and Akkadians were socialists because their governments purchased grain and supplied it to the poor. The Dwight D. Eisenhower National Transportation and Defense Highway is Socialist because the government collected taxes and distributed them to build a national network of roads. Every government ever has been socialist because they controlled the money (coinage) and distributed it.

No American Democrat is advocating Marxist collectivism, yet you continue to insist that, despite all evidence, we are. Your position is faulty and you refuse to admit it.

And as for no one advocating the destruction of capitalism… Did you see what happened to John Hickenlooper when he said he supported Capitalism in front of a bunch of Democrats? They booed him off the stage.

He said ‘Socialism is not the answer’, repeating the same bullshit you are. That was not, by any stretch of a reasonable person’s imagination, a ‘defense of capitalism’, nor is boo’ing that a condemnation of Capitalism. You’re drawing conclusions in line with your personal opinions, which is that Socialism is evil and will destroy Capitalism. if allowed to. Considering all of the current and long-term socialist policies in this nation and others, you’re quite off your nut with this one, repeating far-right talking points without any factual evidence or logic behind them.

In short, you have a grossly distorted and fearful idea of what Socialism actually is and you’re insistent that it is utterly evil. If you want to continue to argue from that position, then your position is not worth debating or engaging.

[GIGObuster]

@Sam_Stone

You just finished arguing for policies which would destroy capitalism and put the money in the hands of government to be distributed. So just who is being disingenuous?

Piffle.

Many other capitalist nations show that it is the USA the place where the powerful convinced many that it is raining when in reality they are peeing on them nowadays.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Has the Better Tax Argument

If high incomes are the prize that motivates entrepreneurs, high marginal rates weaken the prize and make it harder for new firms to scale up. Plus, reducing entrepreneurship in one generation might deplete the supply of start-up advisers and investors for the next.

Now let’s lift our eyes from theory and look out into the real world. Does it reflect conservative logic?

I don’t think so.

[ul]

[li]The two most important hubs of innovation in the United States are the Bay Area and New York City. But according to the Tax Foundation, California and New York have the 48th and the 49th most favorable business-tax climates in the country. Sky-high tax rates in Mountain View and Manhattan haven’t blunted their advantage.[/li][li] Average tax rates on most income groups have been declining since the early 1980s, which you’d think would supercharge start-ups, but the official entrepreneurship rate in the United States has been falling over that entire period.[/li][li] The United States has lower marginal tax rates on income than much of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development does, but the U.S. entrepreneurship rate is lower than those of many Western and Central European countries.[/li][li] When the top marginal tax rates were about 90 percent in the 1950s and ’60s, the U.S. productivity rate was higher, men landed on the moon, and scientists invented the internet, satellites, and the transistor, planting the seeds of the entire computer revolution that now defines innovation.[/li][/ul]

@Sam_Stone

And as for no one advocating the destruction of capitalism… Did you see what happened to John Hickenlooper when he said he supported Capitalism in front of a bunch of Democrats? They booed him off the stage.

I remember reading that Democrats in California overwhelmingly voted for Diane Feinstein, so I wouldn’t assume that “booing” is representative of California Democrats. I think that there was a lot of truth when someone else said that “As California Goes, So Goes the Country”. The reality is that as Silicon Valley and Hollywood shows, capitalism is not ending. It is changing in ways that still annoy socialists but I have seen many conservatives truly hate how those capitalists from California when they are willing to finally look at their integration issues, to look for more social justice and to be against bigotry andother issues that are willfully ignored by capitalists that just want to see the world burn.

[Little_Nemo]

@Scylla

Conservatism and liberalism are political philosophies. They tend to be associated with Republican and Democrat. But really, the Republicans aren’t very conservative, and the Democrats seem to have abandoned liberalism for leftism.

If you want to talk about these things you need to know what they mean. I don’t think many here do.

So what do you think conservatives are going to do in 2020? What do you plan on doing on Election Day 2020?

1. Vote for the Republican nominee, who will almost certainly be Donald Trump.
2. Vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever that might be.
3. Vote for some third party candidate or stay home.

I await your answer along with an explanation of how the Republican party and the conservatism and the Trump campaign are all completely separate.

[Little_Nemo]

@Scylla

So according to you the Republicans have been hoodwinked and fooled, and Trump’s failings are classically Democrat.

Not at all. I feel Trump found his natural home in the modern Republican party. He’s now in the party where he fits in. The Republicans weren’t hoodwinked or fooled; they knew what they were getting and they approved.

[Miller]

@Scylla

Thank you.

Why are you the only one? Any ideas? It’s actually depressing.

I’ll cop to saying “conservative” when I should have said “Republican” in my first post to Sam Stone, but in my posts to you, I was consistent in referring to the political party, not the vague ideological inclination.

[Cheesesteak]

@bump

It’s hideously inefficient, in that the allocation is about as related to demand as flying a plane over the city and throwing them out so people can pick them up. It’s totally dependent on when someone got in line.

No, it’s dependent on how long someone is willing to stand in line. It’s dependent on their willingness to plan ahead, and how much of their day they are willing to devote to this endeavor. It’s very much related to demand, and the amount of your personal resources you are willing to trade for the ticket. It’s just completely disconnected from the amount of money in your pocket.

Markets are generally economically efficient, even if they’re not compassionate or convenient. Meaning that they make sure that the goods get to those most willing to pay for them, because the price is high. (someone help me out here; my economics class experience was a long time ago)

No help needed, you’re absolutely right. The free market is very efficient, which is why I said it was convenient and effective at distributing resources. You said not convenient, that’s for the less heeled purchaser, but I consider it convenient for the economy, because we don’t have to engineer an alternate distribution methodology, the free market is self starting.

The main question here is WHOSE scarce, really fucking important resources are those? Are they the owner/producer, who made them, or are they the property of the people who presumably need them?

THAT is the critical question here. Let’s say that aliens visit me and give me a couple million doses of nanobots that’ll cure pretty much any disease/condition- not just treat it, but cure it outright. Who owns those nanobots? Clearly it’s VERY important to the people who might be treated by them, but the aliens gave them to me.

Moral obligations aside, what right does anyone else have to tell me what to do with MY nanobots? That’s basically what you’re proposing here- to take someone else’s “really fucking important” scarce resources and redistribute them according to how someone else deems most important, without consideration of their ownership or desires in how to dispose of them.

Moral obligations aside? Without morality why should I (or throngs of well armed relatives of sick people) be concerned about your property rights? I can just take what I want.

If you want me to be a good person and respect your ownership of these nanobots, then I get to ask you to be a good person as well, and not just a morals-free profiteer.

[Scylla]

@Little_Nemo

Not at all. I feel Trump found his natural home in the modern Republican party. He’s now in the party where he fits in. The Republicans weren’t hoodwinked or fooled; they knew what they were getting and they approved.

Disingenuous rapey slimy womanizers are a Democrat stereotype.

Have you read Woodward’s book?

After having decent guys like Romney and McCain ripped through the mud with specious allegations racism, They found the worst person we could, a Democrat.

They beat you with your own monster.

[iiandyiiii]

@Scylla

Disingenuous rapey slimy womanizers are a Democrat stereotype.

Have you read Woodward’s book?

After having decent guys like Romney and McCain ripped through the mud with specious allegations racism, They found the worst person we could, a Democrat.

They beat you with your own monster.

Your efforts to blame Democrats for Trump are unconvincing. The people responsible for Trump are the ones who voted for him. There’s no excuse for continuing to support Trump.

Republicans used to emphasize personal responsibility. The words and actions of most conservatives and Republicans are the fault of most conservatives and Republicans.

[Taesahnim]

@ElvisL1ves

Let’s make it simple: Did *you *vote for Trump? Then *you *are personally responsible for the results.

Wow. Booming economy, repairing the damage done by Obama, long string of successes. Yeah, I’ll take those results any day of the week. Glad to be responsible for them.

[Lance_Turbo]

@Taesahnim

Wow. Booming economy, repairing the damage done by Obama, long string of successes. Yeah, I’ll take those results any day of the week. Glad to be responsible for them.

Awesome. Are you a conservative? Did you read Barry Goldwater’s 1960 book?

[Unreconstructed_Man]

@Taesahnim

Wow. Booming economy, repairing the damage done by Obama, long string of successes. Yeah, I’ll take those results any day of the week. Glad to be responsible for them.

The economy was already booming when Trump got in. And Obama managed it without actively going out of his way to rip children away from their mothers by the thousands at your Southern border.

[Little_Nemo]

@Scylla

Disingenuous rapey slimy womanizers are a Democrat stereotype.

Have you read Woodward’s book?

After having decent guys like Romney and McCain ripped through the mud with specious allegations racism, They found the worst person we could, a Democrat.

They beat you with your own monster.

Seriously, Scylla, are you listening to the things you’re saying?

The Republicans picked a Democrat as their nominee because they knew Democrats are rapists so they figured that would win them the election.

Do you see how crazy that sounds?

[Lance_Turbo]

That post is… Straight. Up. Bonkers.

[iiandyiiii]

@Lance_Turbo

That post is… Straight. Up. Bonkers.

Notably, it was in response to the proposition that most Republicans wanted Trump (or someone like him), they got Trump, and thus are responsible for Trump. Which seems like a pretty mundane and obvious proposition.

[Lance_Turbo]

Personal responsibility indeed.

[Chimera]

@Taesahnim

Wow. Booming economy, repairing the damage done by Obama, long string of successes. Yeah, I’ll take those results any day of the week. Glad to be responsible for them.

Please, tell me what damage was done by Obama that Trump repaired.