 |
|
niDe
|
|
as long as bush isn't an edenist
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:34
|
|
Just saw this thread. Good for you, Imran. 
Though I'm not a registered Republican, I come from a Republican-voting family, and am of the "fiscal conservative" mold. I've been appalled at the direction the Repubs have been going in, basically ever since Bush I. The pandering to the Religious Right sickens me, as does the crazy deficit spending, while cutting taxes.  Add in Bush's horrific mishandling of diplomacy, and I'm at the point you're at: I'll vote for damn near anyone before Bush.
If the Repubs would dump the RR and get back to the idea of spending within our means, I'd be a Republican. But I doubt that's gonna happen. Put together that alternate party, Imran, and you've got my vote.
Agathon: one can, in fact, be a mixture of fiscal conservative and social liberal. Obviously, those are subjective terms, so their definitions will vary from person to person (say, you to me). There has to be give and take between those two at times, since liberal social policy usually means $$$. But being socially liberal can also mean *not* doing things (legislation of morality). And being fiscally conservative doesn't always mean "cut taxes and screw the poor!" It can simply mean avoiding spending more than we can afford.
I'm not one of those fiscal conservatives that only cares about lowering my taxes. I'll pay the goddamned taxes, I just want the government to at least TRY to spend my money wisely. To me, this means avoiding huge deficits (limited deficit spending during recession is ok by me, *IF* once times are good again we pay off the debt we racked up. But we don't do that, do we?). The Repubs have been worse than the Dems, the party typically associated with big spending. Hell, at least the Dems "tax and spend" instead of borrowing the money instead.
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Arrian
Agathon: one can, in fact, be a mixture of fiscal conservative and social liberal. |
It depends on what you understand them to mean.
quote:
Obviously, those are subjective terms, so their definitions will vary from person to person (say, you to me). |
[philosopher ****]I wouldn't say that. I'd say they are cluster terms which enclose many different positions.[/philosopher ****]
quote:
There has to be give and take between those two at times, since liberal social policy usually means $$$. |
Sure, but not spending on such policies leads to other costs, particuarly to the environment, to the victims of crime and to future generations who have to deal with the lack of educated citizens due to underfunding of schools and the subsequent erosion of democracy (which needs a reasonable standard of public education to avoid descending into mindless populism). People are too dumb to see that tax cuts will usually cost them more in things they then have to pay for than the amount they got in the cut.
quote:
But being socially liberal can also mean *not* doing things (legislation of morality). |
My concern is when being economically rightist leads to control of the polity by a few, who will then seek to enforce morality on others to aid their own exploitative practices. Think of Fordism.
quote:
And being fiscally conservative doesn't always mean "cut taxes and screw the poor!" It can simply mean avoiding spending more than we can afford. |
That's simply fiscal prudence in my view. But often the former masks itself as the latter.
quote:
I'm not one of those fiscal conservatives that only cares about lowering my taxes. I'll pay the goddamned taxes, I just want the government to at least TRY to spend my money wisely. |
By and large it does. There is always some degree of corruption and mistakes, but these are unavoidable. Part of the problem is that we are so used to the goods that come from government that we don't realize they exist. A good example of this is water quality. In most developed countries people just expect to be able to drink water from the tap. Obviously, they can do this because the government either runs water distribution or regulates it.
What happened here in Ontario is that the tories cut the regulators and people started to get sick and in some cases died. This opened people's eyes to the reality of the situation. Hopefully they'll stay open for a couple of years.
quote:
To me, this means avoiding huge deficits (limited deficit spending during recession is ok by me, *IF* once times are good again we pay off the debt we racked up. But we don't do that, do we?). |
Partly it's the voters' fault. They know in the back of their minds that debt will go up or social services will be cut to pay for the tax cut, but they hope that others will be taxed more to pay for it and that they will get a free ride. It's a classic collective action problem.
quote:
The Repubs have been worse than the Dems, the party typically associated with big spending. Hell, at least the Dems "tax and spend" instead of borrowing the money instead. |
Which makes it all the more amazing that people think they are prudent.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-03-2004 12:54
@ this thread.
|