It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The Main Issue with New Liberalism

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 08:39 PM

Originally posted by narwahl
reply to post by darkbake

And yet for some wierd reason high-tax, high-regulation countries and states have high incomes...

Fun little fact about the austrian school of economics:
Ludwig Mises was a monarchist. Otto Habsburg was a friend of the Mises institute, and Mises wrote at least one Letter advising Habsburg how he might get Austria back after WWII.

Well, I believe in this kind of thing, actually. I just don't think that people should have an unrealistic animosity towards the rich, if the rich have earned their way.

I think everyone has seen that wealth distribution chart or video by now, right? Well, I think with a more even wealth distribution, there would be a better chance that the poor and the rich could relate and socialize with each other, thus increasing the overall community and communication between parties.

However, there has to be a healthy incentive for people to get college degrees or masters degrees or doctorates, and a healthy incentive for people to start their own, new companies. The government should approach corporations with the idea of making them healthy (able to fully function while reducing the amount of corruption and usury) instead of attacking them.

For the corporations, it is in their best interest to have healthy policies and management or else they will go bankrupt - and I don't think the government should have the "too big to fail" policy. The government should let corporations that have unhealthy business management FAIL and FAIL HARD.

The more people that get laid off the better, because the more violent they will become towards the corrupt board members, who will hopefully be put in prison.

This thread was especially in response to the recent thread about public health care and rationing, and also to Obama's declaration in the past that he was going to be improving the economy through adding more government jobs.

What I'm saying is, if you are a corrupt rich person who is going to harm the economy, your corporation in the long run, and citizens of this country, I hate you. If you are an honorable rich person, good job. And our country should work on ways to promote new businesses and even expand old ones, while making sure that they are not practicing unhealthy business practices.
edit on 10-3-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 08:49 PM

Originally posted by neo96
Big news on Facebooks refund anyone who gets a refund means they were paying taxes.

posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 08:50 PM

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by neo96

Although I don't totally agree with you Neo on this point. What I do agree with, is that the Progressives most definately feed off of creating victims, versus trying to do something to help them better their lives.....
edit on 10-3-2013 by seeker1963 because: (no reason given)

This is another point I was making, for the individual who is following the New Liberal way, they are being encouraged to not have families, they are being encouraged to get government aid, etc. - but they are not being encouraged to learn how to support themselves and their future generations.

I literally worry about it - a lot of it is the economy - but there are some forces that people don't think about which are going to place them in a bad situation financially in the future. I do struggle with this exact thing. I receive government aid and it has been a struggle to be able to support myself...

Luckily, I am using the aid in such a way that I can make progress easier, with the hopes of getting off, which is a good way to use it, but that's on my own initiative - and it takes being pretty creative to do.
edit on 10-3-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

edit on 10-3-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 08:58 PM
reply to post by seeker1963

Hmm... the propaganda thing might be true, I recently moved to a conservative state and I think that half the people or more here have been learning false information. If I bring up a forum topic, I will present an opinion, and hope to start a discussion so that I can learn the different viewpoints on it and correct fallacies on my part.

I am not entirely convinced that liberals provide more for the economy than conservatives, but I would believe it, with all of the technology companies.

I think if someone would research the amounts that conservatives vs. liberals provide for the economy (not counting government jobs) and they were more or less even, then the argument about liberals using other people's money instead of their own to be "altruistic" would be at least a bit hurt...?
edit on 10-3-2013 by darkbake because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 10:09 PM
reply to post by darkbake

It's ironic/funny you bring up learning false information . . . that's what this whole thread exemplifies, as does America in general.

Liberalism is derived from the writing/philosophy of John Locke, which is rooted in the rights of the individual. The comments about "liberals" in this country not being liberal is spot on. They are Progressives and that is a left leaning Collectivist philosophy. Nothing liberal about their ideology or policies. Austrian economic theory is based on Laissez Faire economics, which is exemplified by a free and open market devoid of tariff, tax, and subsidies. There is no place for Corporatism in the current Anachro-Capitalist form of Austrian theory, proposed by Rothsbard. Progressives like to put it there to make themselves appear to be "for the people" . . . even though it's a collective practice and benefits much more from the Progressive ideology.

If you want to delve into the left/right divide . . . let's look at the extremes on both sides. Left - Communism/Socialism. Right - Facism (like the NAZI party). So, instead of squabbling over the differences, which is merely in practice, let's look at how they are the same. They are all Collectivist ideologies, meaning the whole outweighs the individual. Quigley explained the whole left/right paradigm sham in "Tragedy and Hope" and how the US use this to continue Collectivist policy, while appearing to provide a choice:

The argument of two parties should represent opposed ideas and policies, one perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinate and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy. The policies that are vital and necessary for America are no longer subjects of significant disagreement, but are disputable only in details of procedure, priority, or method

The antithesis of this would be Individualism. Yet, through using the methods of Lippman (Public Opinion) and Bernays (Crystallizing Public Opinion and Propaganda), our government has given all of the illusion that there is actually a difference between the Left and Right. When, in actuallity, they are both Collectivist groups simply fighting over who will be the dominant team.

When there are actual Individualist movements that benefit the citizens, they are quickly gobbled up by one side or the other and subverted. The Tea Party, Libertarianism, Civil Rights movement, Occupy, etc . . . subverted and then either marginalized or propagandized to limit their individual rights aspects. Again, through the brilliant use of the methods outlined by Lippman and Bernays. We all either end up "crazy", "unpatriotic", "racist", "religious extremists", "domestic terrorists", "communists", etc, etc, etc.

And, while we all point fingers back and forth and feel some sense of pride when our team wins . . . the march continues to crush the individual and the free market. Meanwhile . . . Clinton's Anti-Terrorism bill becomes Bush's Patriot Act becomes Obama's NDAA.

The people of this country have all been bamboozled . . . willingly. More people should really think for themselves and pick up a book, once and a while. If those on a "conspiracy theory" site can't even see through the spiritual malaise of being played by both sides, only to keep us divided, really what hope does America have? Guess I'll just go back to buying apps on my iPad . . .

edit on 3/10/13 by solomons path because: (no reason given)

edit on 3/10/13 by solomons path because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 10 2013 @ 10:19 PM

Originally posted by NeverMind2013

It's so Sad

It really blows me away that there is still a liberal vs conservative argument here on a site with the motto "Deny Ignorance". Being "Cheerleaders" for either of the corrupt puppet organisations is so fox or msnbc.

edit on 10-3-2013 by NeverMind2013 because: (no reason given)

Someone who gets it . . . too bad when people say things like this they are quickly put in the "crazy" box.

Star for you . . . wish I could give you two!

posted on Mar, 11 2013 @ 11:07 AM
reply to post by solomons path

Thanks, that was really informative.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in