It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Conservatives Happier Than Liberals

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 7 2008 @ 01:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
And yet, taxes on the wealthy have gone down massively during conservative administrations.


Try making some money and see how false that statement is.


The poor and middle class don't have much money, so taxing them more wouldn't necessarily get more money for the government.


Every time we raise taxes on corporations we raise taxes on the poor and everyone else who buys things because all cost of production is passed onto the consumer as it should be.


Another example would be education. Logically, we'd want as many of our students to actually learn as possible, and not just develop into standardized test taking machines, and yet with a conservative administration we have the 'No Child Left Behind' act which removes government funding from public schools with low test scores. It seems to me that we'd want to increase the funding to these schools so that they're better equipped to teach. Again, logic and sympathy working hand in hand.


In the last twenty years nearly every inner city school was upgraded and trillions of dollars spent on education, yet there has been no improvement in learning. More leftwing boondoggle, but on the upside the money spent helped the economy.


No one is looking for the government to take care of them, just for the government to be fair when dealing with it's citizens.


Is that why it cost the taxpayers trillions of dollars every year to pay for all those millions of people who do want the government to take care of them?

And that’s on top of the billions of dollars from private programs and food pantries throughout the country.

There are plenty of people who love receiving handouts, beats earning a living




posted on May, 7 2008 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
reply to post by gdeed
 


Hitler was a left wing dictator?
Funny guy!!


Yup, Socialist, but lefties don't want anyone to mention it or they throw a fit.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   
The mediation involved in the running of the parties in Britain is interesting; it has become a popularity contest rather than a real battle of issues. Both liberals and conservatives are having to make concessions for the other, as in some ways, both are right. We need conservatism in order to survive and progress, whereas we need liberalism to make sure that conservatism doesn't get out of control and damage society.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000

Originally posted by gdeed
Like stopping Hilter and other leftwing dictators

Dude, you need to do a little research on the political spectrum. Hilter was a right wing fascist. Like I said, people don't even know their own party.


Just because those on the left don't want to claim him don't mean he wasn’t on the left.

Hitler was a Socialist, Mussolini was a communist fascist. It's all in the history books.

But perhaps not in the left leaning history books



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by gdeed
Hitler was a Socialist, Mussolini was a communist fascist. It's all in the history books.

Hilter and Mussolini were both fascists and thats why they were allied. Fascists don't like socialists and that why they were enemies of Russia who was socialist/communist. You really don't have a clue, do you?



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:15 PM
link   
Socialism is a form of economy. Fascism is a form of government. You can be a fascist ruler in a socialist state.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:16 PM
link   
Can someone who actually believes the National Socialists were ACTUAL socialists please cite just ONE example of a truly socialist policy in their government? Example: NO welfare state, total corporatocracy. Fact is those shallow, vampiric cretins just USED the word "socialism" because it was the popular buzzword at the time that implied high-minded intellectualism...

Anyway, on topic, I believe there's plenty of ignorance among both idiotic labels of "liberal" and "conservative." Both really worship their real "god" that is the National Security state (or rule by official secrecy) anyway, and their ignorance amounts to something very far from bliss.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Lightworth
 



What Mises identified was that private ownership of the means of production existed in name only under the Nazis and that the actual substance of ownership of the means of production resided in the German government. For it was the German government and not the nominal private owners that exercised all of the substantive powers of ownership: it, not the nominal private owners, decided what was to be produced, in what quantity, by what methods, and to whom it was to be distributed, as well as what prices would be charged and what wages would be paid, and what dividends or other income the nominal private owners would be permitted to receive. The position of the alleged private owners, Mises showed, was reduced essentially to that of government pensioners.



The combination of price controls with this further set of controls constitutes the de facto socialization of the economic system. For it means that the government then exercises all of the substantive powers of ownership.



Furthermore, in any type of socialist state, Nazi or Communist, the government's economic plan is part of the supreme law of the land.


mises.org...



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Wow gdeed, the more I read your threads / posts the more I think you should travel more, read more and go out more...I mean...seriously...



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lightworth
Can someone who actually believes the National Socialists were ACTUAL socialists please cite just ONE example of a truly socialist policy in their government? Example: NO welfare state, total corporatocracy. Fact is those shallow, vampiric cretins just USED the word "socialism" because it was the popular buzzword at the time that implied high-minded intellectualism...

Anyway, on topic, I believe there's plenty of ignorance among both idiotic labels of "liberal" and "conservative." Both really worship their real "god" that is the National Security state (or rule by official secrecy) anyway, and their ignorance amounts to something very far from bliss.


Much like the soviet union and china. Hiding behind "socialism" is a convienent way to pursue other more sinister agendas. True socialism is a mixture of capitalism and communism in that all major industry is government owned while medium to small enterprises are private.

Europe a few decades ago was really socialistic; now its actually capitalistic since everything got sold to private hands. The only difference with the american version is that human rights and welfare(in the true sense) continue to be respected to a large degree.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by gdeed

Certainly, the leftwing sheeple believe what you just wrote. America was doing what it is doing now way before Bush came along. That's what super powers do, try and make the world a better place. Like stopping Hilter and other leftwing dictators

America is under attack not only by terrorist overseas but also by its own citizens, who wish to weaken it from the inside. That's how Rome fell.


Rome fell from greed my friend from trying to grow an empire and pissing a lot of people off on the way like the persians and visigoths. They had a currency that was not sound and a corrupt government...hmmm what does this sound like..oh yeah sounds like America now. Patriotism is not following your government blindly that is a sheeple and there is no getting around it. I want America to go back to its roots but we have come off so far...and you need to do more research on Hitler my friend you are waaaayyyy off.

[edit on 7-5-2008 by mybigunit]



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by gdeed
 

Before you continue to show your ignorance, maybe you should have a look at the following chart.



This is from the Wikipedia article: Political spectrum

You really need to read this.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000

Originally posted by gdeed
Hitler was a Socialist, Mussolini was a communist fascist. It's all in the history books.

Hilter and Mussolini were both fascists and thats why they were allied. Fascists don't like socialists and that why they were enemies of Russia who was socialist/communist. You really don't have a clue, do you?


I really dont think Gdeed has a clue about history or the present and cant even define a libertarian or conservative...its hard to debate people who dont know what they are talking about.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000

Originally posted by gdeed
Hitler was a Socialist, Mussolini was a communist fascist. It's all in the history books.

Hilter and Mussolini were both fascists and thats why they were allied. Fascists don't like socialists and that why they were enemies of Russia who was socialist/communist. You really don't have a clue, do you?


For a Hal9000 I would say you are clueless. Both Mussolini and Hitler dabbled in the left. Mussolini started Fascism. Hitler was never a fascist, he was a socialist. And he did like Russia, but realized that they were ambitious as he was if not more so. However, Hitler didn’t like the Bolsheviks. The rest is history, the history you should read more of.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by gdeed
 


You left out my point : CONSENT.

Advise and consent and consent of the governed are left out of all political discourse.

According to Wikipedia:

Mitchell: Eight Ways to Run the Country : In his book Eight Ways to Run the Country: A New and Revealing Look at Left and Right (ISBN 0275993582) Brian Patrick Mitchell identifies four main political traditions in Anglo-American history (republican constitutionalism, libertarian individualism, progressive democracy, and plutocratic nationalism) ...

There is nothing in here about consent of the governed. Nothing about the magna carta or the 1689 English Bill of Rights which hung on consent of the people.

The peoples consent is no longer considered a factor -- not in conservatism and certainly not in liberalism.

None of has a say in our future in terms of political process except as we can manipulate and be manipulated. That's how I read this present situation. In world history Liberty was possible, but I don't think it's possible any longer except for the very very rich.

Banks manipulate money, media manipulate opinions and government manipulates everybodys business.

We're in jail, walking around. My parents are in jail, my older brothers are in jail, my sister with her new baby has to go back to work to help support herself. We're all in jail and none of us CONSENTS to any of this.

And that's all I have time to rant today. Bell just rang.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hal9000
reply to post by gdeed
 

Before you continue to show your ignorance, maybe you should have a look at the following chart.


If I’m ignorant I’m certainly in good company here on this thread


So I can make up a chart and place whatever I want on that chart and that would make it gospel truth?


This is from the Wikipedia article: Political spectrum
You really need to read this.


Heck I and so can anyone else go on Wikipedia and make notations, I think I will.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I'd be happier too if I could make myself believe whatever authority figures told me.

Having to live in the "reality based" world sucks - it would be so much easier to believe whatever doublespeak BS my talk radio & televangelist heroes told me to


That said, the "liberal" end of the spectrum does seem really good at whiny victimization BS - but it's still a good deal less irritating to me personally than the deluded triumphalist crapola the right pumps out.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by gdeed
 


Perfect example of the slavishly ideological worldview of the right here.

"Right-wing" is "good" and "left-wing" is "bad", so therefore Hitler and Mussolini must have been "leftists"


Despite the fact that this is directly contradicted by historical fact, you'll believe it anyway because it's the only "politically correct" way for a good right wing nut to think...

Don't get me wrong, I've had the very same conversation with ideologically hidebound leftists, trying to tell me that Stalin and Mao were "right wing"



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by xmotex
 


Brilliant post! This just shows that people will believe whatever they want to believe and will never question their beliefs on reality (which I constantly do). Beliefs are not facts, they are just what they are.



posted on May, 7 2008 @ 03:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by xmotex
reply to post by gdeed
 


Despite the fact that this is directly contradicted by historical fact, you'll believe it anyway because it's the only "politically correct" way for a good right wing nut to think...



One of the more ironic things I've ever seen written. The "right" being called "politically correct", when any real conservative loathes PC - that cornerstone of liberal philosophy - with every fiber of their being. And very much akin to when a previous poster called hitler and mussolini "leftists".

[edit on 5/7/2008 by centurion1211]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join