 |
| |
|
|
Berzerker
|
 |
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:21
|
|
Bosh quote:
Aaaaargh! I'm agreeing with some of what berzerker says!
*bashes head into wall*
Really tight-knit extended families are wonderful things to see in action. I never really had one at home and its been really interesting to start being inducted into one here in Korea... |
Molly quote:
I think it's more bizarre associating divorce with liberalism, and not bothering to place divorce in context or in fact defining 'liberalism'. |
I identified certain policies, liberal policies, that I believe resulted in higher divorce rates and out of wedlock birthrates. If this is the case, higher divorce rates, not divorce itself, are linked to liberalism. You haven't even tried to refute anything in my post so how can you call it bizarre?
quote:
But then I don't expect the quotidian from you, and I didn't defend the Welfare State with Henry VIII. |
You're disputing my critique of the welfare state and the results of it which includes higher divorce rates by sarcastically pointing out that Henry VIII was not a liberal. I never said your defense of the welfare state was effective or even made sense, but since that was all you offered I had to consider it an attempted rebuttal. 
MrFun quote:
Or how about the basic reality that families could no longer live off of one person's income for quite some time now.
You really outta catch up with the times, man. |
Covered by my 4th point, I mentioned high taxes (and regulations which have the effect of a tax) as a cause of more families needing 2 income earners.
John T quote:
n regards to this, I would counter-argue that the reason so many parents "have" to have two careers is their inability to "suffer" a decrease in their standard of living just for the sake of a child. |
If that is destructive of the family, then it is self-inflicted. That doesn't counter the complicity of liberalism though, it merely shows there are multiple causes. But for parents most in danger, young parents with little income and very young children - the formative years - both parents working just to get by because of liberal policies and tax rates hurts those families.
Sandman quote:
Yes, life is so much better in those places without welfare, women's rights, taxes and divorce. Places where the family is king. Places like Kurdistan, India and Nigeria. |
The family is king in those places? They are all former colonies still stuffering the effects of foreign rulers and the bureaucracies they set up to run their colonies, not intact extended families. Strange argument...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Odin
|
 |
Biology Nerd at Minnesota State University Moorhead
Sep 2000
time: 23:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Bosh
Molly
I identified certain policies, liberal policies, that I believe resulted in higher divorce rates and out of wedlock birthrates. If this is the case, higher divorce rates, not divorce itself, are linked to liberalism. You haven't even tried to refute anything in my post so how can you call it bizarre?
You're disputing my critique of the welfare state and the results of it which includes higher divorce rates by sarcastically pointing out that Henry VIII was not a liberal. I never said your defense of the welfare state was effective or even made sense, but since that was all you offered I had to consider it an attempted rebuttal.
MrFun
Covered by my 4th point, I mentioned high taxes (and regulations which have the effect of a tax) as a cause of more families needing 2 income earners.
John T
If that is destructive of the family, then it is self-inflicted. That doesn't counter the complicity of liberalism though, it merely shows there are multiple causes. But for parents most in danger, young parents with little income and very young children - the formative years - both parents working just to get by because of liberal policies and tax rates hurts those families.
Sandman
The family is king in those places? They are all former colonies still stuffering the effects of foreign rulers and the bureaucracies they set up to run their colonies, not intact extended families. Strange argument... |
Berz, you are such a BAM it's not even funny. You say this crap, yet you give NO DATA TO BACK IT UP. Untill then you are pulling this stuff out of your ass.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:21
|
|
Doc quote:
Maybe if employers and the government didn't have such a libertarian attitude in this country people would be paid enough that they could look after their own kids. |
We dont have free trade in this country, far from it. But this is where liberalism runs into trouble again, liberals condemn Nike for employing a bunch of people in the 3rd world at low wages but dont want to trade freely with those people. How is the 3rd world to progress if all the left wing countries try to keep them down? Paraphrasing Ben Franklin, no country was ever ruined by free trade.
quote:
I think that our over-sexed, me-first, self-centered culture is more likely at fault. |
Welfare states have the effect of absolving people of responsibility.
quote:
The average teen boy generally isn't thinking "Aw heck, if we screw up let the government pay for it" when he seduces Sally, they don't think that far in advance. |
True, but when it comes time for those average teens to raise their child, he does get to walk away because the government is there to take over his job as provider and the extended family may be so split up due to other liberal policies there just isn't enough family support.
quote:
He's thinking about how all the other young bucks have mucho notches in their sex pistols and he neds to work over time to catch up. Ditto with the girls. Maybe if we didn''t have such a libertarian attitude about sex in this country the out of wedlock rate wouldn't be so high. |
You're confusing libertarianism with libertinism and trying to separate the welfare state from the results we see coming from it. Obviously teens will have sex, that has nothing to do with ideology. But ideology does become a factor when it induces the choices people make after conceiving a child. If the boy can walk because a liberal policy assumes his responsibility, the family is hurt in the long run.
quote:
So libertarianism isn't for women too? My, my, my |
Read my first post again, I clearly said these were the socially conservative arguments against liberal policies.
I see you're trying to bring libertarianism into this. Why? This thread is about liberalism and the socially conservative critique of its policies. Furthermore, why is it anti-woman to point out that women who decide on careers with small children at home or on the way isn't wise unless the alternative is worse?
quote:
No, the vast majority of women work not because they want careers, unless you consider flipping burgers a "career", nor did they do so because of hubbies high taxes - the job that paid enough to but Dad into a tax bracket went overseas years ago. They went to work because they want a chance to live like everybody else - 2 cars, 2000+ feet of living space, a TV in every room. etc., etc. |
Where did I mention a vast majority of women? And if you think women dont have to work because of the cost of government, you're beyond the outfield wall... Millions of women work because they want careers or because they have to because of taxes. True or not?
quote:
In tightly knit clans the adult children remain essentially children until the parents are close to death. Think about Prince Charles. Divorce is high in this country because our culture so highly values individualism. Unfortunately the obverse side of that coin is often one person in the pairing sucking up mountains of abuse just to maintain the marriage. |
Individualism has not been increasing in this country Doc, its been on the decline ever since the welfare state started having an impact. Individualism involves responsibility, welfare states seek to decrease responsibility.
You ended your post by quoting me explaining this was a socially conservative critique, why did you keep trying to blame libertarianism for the results of a welfare state?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ben Kenobi
|
 |
McGregornobi!
Oct 2002
time: 21:21
|
|
quote:
I've tried to present what I think is the socially conservative set of arguments since they are under-represented here at Poly. The evidence is rather damning...
|
Well thank you Berz, but I never figured on you bringing up all these arguments which I agree with totally.
Interesting how economic conservativism coincides well with social conservatism, eh?
Last edited by Ben Kenobi on 22-05-2005 at 09:34
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Berzerker
|
|
topeka, kansas,USA
May 1999
time: 23:21
|
|
Odin quote:
The rise in divorce rates is a result of it not cariryng the social stigma it did 50 years ago, and because women are now less likely to stay in a bad marrige for economic reasons because the workforce is much more open for women than it was 50 years ago. |
Social conservatives opposed liberalising divorce law, especially no fault divorce, another nail in liberalisms' coffin? But I never said there was only one cause to the effect we see nor does identifying multiple causes exonerate liberalism of its complicity. Divorce for good reasons isn't bad, but if there are children, the dysfunction of a family would have to be severe before it could outweigh the negative consequences of divorce.
quote:
Berz's nonsense about how welfare is cauising divorce makes just as much sense as Ned's claim that Britian caused WW2. |
Hell, welfare induces out of wedlock births and you dont think it induces divorce? Dont be silly... I've known people who divorced to participate in welfare programs. If your parents become "independent" because of Social Security (dependent on politicians), they wont be there to help raise the kids. Its no coincidence "the nuclear family" entered the vernacular a few years after Social Security. So what is the nuclear family? Mom, Dad, and 2 1/2 kids. What happened to the dozen or so relatives - the clan, the village? The family unit has changed and not all the results are so good.
quote:
The reason both parent's work now is a result of the drop in wages relative to prices as a result of the 70's stagflation. That is traight from the mouths of both my US Government professor, who is a moderate libertarian Republican) and my US History proffesor (who is a centrist Democrat). So Berz, two of my Proffs say you are wrong, and they are no left-wingers, PWNED. QED. |
Is that called inflation? Welfare states can cause that too since the government pays for alot of stuff we should be paying for directly. Health care and education costs go up faster than the rate of inflation and government is involved. Liberals like to call national health care "single payer", it's 3rd party payer and it induces inflation because its "free". Now, wages and prices are another issue. If your professors have told you women dont enter the workforce to help pay off the government, get a refund and give it back to us. I doubt they said that...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
St Leo
|
 |
Member of the Apolyton Social Democratic Party
Jul 2005
time: 00:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Lets see if liberalism destroys families:
2) Welfare - who could argue with that? Help the poor, no different than giving money to a charity. Uh oh, out of wedlock birthrates skyrocket because government has taken over the father's role as provider. |
Does not.
quote:
misia:
Reason 5,987,231 that studying history is relevant: providing some basis for answering claims such as the oft-touted notion that single-parent families are an outcome of twentieth (and twenty-first) century breakdown of "family values."
To wit...
Research on sources surveyed by the Cambridge Group for the History of Population and Social Structure, covering 70 English communities from 1551 to 1851, has revealed that during that period about 19 percent of all families with dependent children were single-parent households, typically headed by women.
The 2000 US Census reported that approximately 9 percent of all U.S. households, were headed by a man or woman raising a child alone or without a spouse living at home.
In the United Kingdom, single-parent family homes were at 5.5 percent in 1999, according to data compiled by the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
 |
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:21
|
|
The real question is, do we want to preserve the family structure of the previous centuries or not? The current world is moving towards it's complete distruction, and I, as many others see it as a bad thing, yes. But the previous situation leaves much to be desired too.
The problem is, berz, it is true that some "liberal" things destroy the family, but it's also true that this happens because these tools are applied inefficiently, and the things are destroyed are often quite rotten. Voluntary social experiments worldwide have sort-of-provren that you can keep both community, freedom and long-term sustainable demographics, if you apply universal education, nursing homes and other collectivist measures to what we'd see as extreme measures.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
molly bloom
|
 |
Lundenwic
Oct 2001
time: 15:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Molly
I identified certain policies, liberal policies, that I believe resulted in higher divorce rates and out of wedlock birthrates. If this is the case, higher divorce rates, not divorce itself, are linked to liberalism. You haven't even tried to refute anything in my post so how can you call it bizarre?
You're disputing my critique of the welfare state and the results of it which includes higher divorce rates by sarcastically pointing out that Henry VIII was not a liberal. I never said your defense of the welfare state was effective or even made sense, but since that was all you offered I had to consider it an attempted rebuttal.
|
Please show where I 'defended' the Welfare State.
If you can't even be bothered to read my posts without interpreting them to your own ends, or putting words in my mouth, what's the point of posting ?
For the record: I pointed out that divorce is part of three monotheistic religions: Judaism, Islam and Christianity (at least the Protestant version).
I pointed out that one of the world's most notable divorcees, pre-Modern Era was a monarch famously obsessed with maintaining or creating a line of inheritance, because of the somewhat shaky basis of his family's claim to the kingdom.
This might have clued you in into what a major aspect of divorce was/is- part of a contract, and recognition (in modern times) that a woman is no longer her husband's or her husband's family's property.
You've shown no intrinsic link between 'liberal' policies as you define them, and divorce, or a higher divorce rate, since you haven't provided us with any notable examples of where a 'liberal' government altered divorce laws to make blame-free divorces or quickie divorces possible.
Quelle shock.
And somehow you converted this into my championing the cause of the 20th Century Welfare State.
Hilarious.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Berzerker
Doc
We dont have free trade in this country, far from it. But this is where liberalism runs into trouble again, liberals condemn Nike for employing a bunch of people in the 3rd world at low wages but dont want to trade freely with those people. How is the 3rd world to progress if all the left wing countries try to keep them down? Paraphrasing Ben Franklin, no country was ever ruined by free trade.
|
So the best we can do is try to alleviate the side effects of the reality of the world situation - a vast disparity in the economies of various countries leaves some countries with an advantage in labor cost, thus undercutting laborers in the higher wage countries. Sounds like an argument in favor of certain forms of welfare. quote:
Welfare states have the effect of absolving people of responsibility. |
Our culture has been leaning that way for a very long time. It's our essential ego-centrism that does it. quote:
True, but when it comes time for those average teens to raise their child, he does get to walk away because the government is there to take over his job as provider and the extended family may be so split up due to other liberal policies there just isn't enough family support.
|
I'ver known a lot of these guys. They don't give a second thought to the welfare, or lack thereof, of the mother and baby. quote:
You're confusing libertarianism with libertinism and trying to separate the welfare state from the results we see coming from it. Obviously teens will have sex, that has nothing to do with ideology. But ideology does become a factor when it induces the choices people make after conceiving a child. If the boy can walk because a liberal policy assumes his responsibility, the family is hurt in the long run. |
No I'm not. These guys have a "I can do whatever the f**k I want to" and a "me first" attitude". They don't walk because someone is going to assume their responsibility, they walk because they have utterly no sense of responsibility. quote:
Read my first post again, I clearly said these were the socially conservative arguments against liberal policies.
I see you're trying to bring libertarianism into this. Why? This thread is about liberalism and the socially conservative critique of its policies. Furthermore, why is it anti-woman to point out that women who decide on careers with small children at home or on the way isn't wise unless the alternative is worse? |
The origin of "Latchkey kids" is women who have to work because they've been abandoned by men with no sense of responsibility, or because they can't earn enough to pay the bills on the husband's income alone. Neither of these conditions is a result of liberalism, they're the result of attitudes that are more akin to libertarianism. quote:
Where did I mention a vast majority of women? And if you think women dont have to work because of the cost of government, you're beyond the outfield wall... Millions of women work because they want careers or because they have to because of taxes. True or not? |
Many of these families need the extra jobs just to get their income high enough to a point where their joint income is sufficient to put them into a taxable bracket. Sure there is such a thing as a career woman, but you're talking about more educated, higher paid people. They generally don't have the second job just to pay off taxes, but instead do so because they want to and because it augments the family's standard of living.
quote:
Individualism has not been increasing in this country Doc, its been on the decline ever since the welfare state started having an impact. Individualism involves responsibility, welfare states seek to decrease responsibility. |
I disagree. In the "good old days" people conducted their lives along lines set down by tradition and community standards. That's not individualism. Today such community restraints on behavior are very much diminished. quote:
You ended your post by quoting me explaining this was a socially conservative critique, why did you keep trying to blame libertarianism for the results of a welfare state? |
Because conservatives in general very often adopt libertarian positions when it suits them, but refuse to accept the consequences of their policies when the down side appears.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:21
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by molly bloom
If you can't even be bothered to read my posts without interpreting them to your own ends, or putting words in my mouth, what's the point of posting ? |
someone putting words into your mouth molly, well i'm certainly shocked.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:21.
Apolyton Time is 00:21. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-05-2005 22:32
|