More immigration, or increased social spending?

Author: rbelivb

Posts

Total: 84
#31
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
I think that I was agreeing with you in a round about way. That is if I understood you correctly.

A blames B for A's problems.

A has a tendency to wallow in the past and is fearful for the future. 
#32
Pinkfreud08
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Debates: 17
Posts: 578
2
7
11
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Pinkfreud08
2
7
11
-->
@rbelivb
many conservatives claim to value the free market and the exchange of ideas, but advocate social policies which would further isolate distinct social groups based upon ethnicity, which seems antithetical to an open market.
Glad someone else noticed this too.



#33
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Pinkfreud08
...advocate social policies which would further isolate distinct social groups based upon ethnicity,
Can you produce an example of such a policy?
#34
SirAnonymous
SirAnonymous's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 4,140
3
7
10
SirAnonymous's avatar
SirAnonymous
3
7
10
-->
@rbelivb
I guess I am asking, in opposition to what? Aren't today's progressives basically arguing for the same thing? I.e. a nation-state founded upon abstract principles of universalism.
No. Modern-day progressives advocate for equality of outcomes rather than equality of opportunity.

#35
Pinkfreud08
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Debates: 17
Posts: 578
2
7
11
Pinkfreud08's avatar
Pinkfreud08
2
7
11
-->
@ethang5
Look no further than Trump's immigration rules
#36
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@Pinkfreud08
This is incorrect and unfair. The man said,

...social policies which would further isolate distinct social groups based upon ethnicity,
American conservatives make policies for Americans, not foreigners. Foreigners are ALREADY a distinct and isolated social group.

Further, Trumps immigration policies are not based on ethnicity but on behavior. And it is prudent and correct to isolate groups based on behavior. This is why we imprison murders and deport dangerous foreigners.

So do you have an example of American conservatives advocating social policies which further isolate distinct American social groups based upon ethnicity?

I don't think you can.
#37
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
When you  picture an American conservative in you minds eye, what do you see.

And be honest.
#38
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
Ronald Reagan
#39
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,081
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@ethang5
Good answer.

And Ronald Reagan was a truly admirable character.

But when viewed in comparison with Donnie was Ronnie really that much of a conservative?
#40
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@ethang5
Ronald Reagan wasn't very fiscally conservative. He cut taxes, but also increased a lot of spending.

#41
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
When was the last fiscally conservative president? 
#42
WaterPhoenix
WaterPhoenix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,094
3
3
10
WaterPhoenix's avatar
WaterPhoenix
3
3
10
-->
@rbelivb
If you had to choose only one of these outcomes, which would you pick?

  • Opening up immigration to allow more people in, or
  • Increasing government spending on welfare programs?
Welfare programs cause I don't want to make America into a giant refugee camp.


#43
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,006
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WaterPhoenix
But free stuffs?
#44
WaterPhoenix
WaterPhoenix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,094
3
3
10
WaterPhoenix's avatar
WaterPhoenix
3
3
10
-->
@SirAnonymous
No. Modern-day progressives advocate for equality of outcomes rather than equality of opportunity.
Wiser words have not been said.


#45
WaterPhoenix
WaterPhoenix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,094
3
3
10
WaterPhoenix's avatar
WaterPhoenix
3
3
10
-->
@Greyparrot
Depending on what welfare programs. I think healthcare should be pretty cheap but everything else no.

#46
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,006
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WaterPhoenix
What do you do for work?
#47
WaterPhoenix
WaterPhoenix's avatar
Debates: 12
Posts: 2,094
3
3
10
WaterPhoenix's avatar
WaterPhoenix
3
3
10
-->
@Greyparrot
What? How is this even relevant.
#48
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Well, the issue is that not many presidents have been super fiscally conservative, except a few like Coolidge. Many lower taxes, but then refuse to lower spending. That is half conservative but completely irresponsible.

#49
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,006
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@WaterPhoenix
Just wanted to know what your reaction would be if someone demanded your work product be devalued.
#50
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@rbelivb
I'd want open borders along with banned welfare and a pie chart method to allow the conservatives to retain power in a country that would be 60% liberal.
#51
TheRealNihilist
TheRealNihilist's avatar
Debates: 44
Posts: 4,920
4
9
11
TheRealNihilist's avatar
TheRealNihilist
4
9
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
Well, the issue is that not many presidents have been super fiscally conservative, except a few like Coolidge. Many lower taxes, but then refuse to lower spending. That is half conservative but completely irresponsible.
Should I take anyone who calls themselves fiscally conservative serious? If no why?
#52
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@TheRealNihilist
Should I take anyone who calls themselves fiscally conservative serious? If no why?

Most people, no. There are lots of people in congress like Rand Paul and Jim Banks who are actually fiscal conservatives. Anyone elected president isn't likely to be one because it is unpopular to propose decreases in spending.

If they will both balance the budget and decrease spending, then they can be taken serious.
Topic's author
#53
rbelivb
rbelivb's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 210
1
2
5
rbelivb's avatar
rbelivb
1
2
5
-->
@Alec
I'd want open borders along with banned welfare and a pie chart method to allow the conservatives to retain power in a country that would be 60% liberal.
What is the pie chart method??
#54
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@zedvictor4
@bmdrocks21
But when viewed in comparison with Donnie was Ronnie really that much of a conservative?
Yes. During Reagan's time, the left had not yet infected mass media and did not seem as pervasive as now.

On which conservative issues does Trump differ from Reagan?

Ronald Reagan wasn't very fiscally conservative.
Zed asked for my minds eye version of a conservative, not my ideal conservative policy.

He cut taxes, but also increased a lot of spending
American Presidents have very little control concerning overall spending. Congress does. And Democratic congresses make sure to paint Republican Presidents as "cutting social welfare for the poor" so as to pork up the budget as much as possible.

The funny thing is, If Trump cuts the budget, they accuse him of not caring for the poor, and if he increases the budget, they accuse him of not being republican.

When he tries to bypasses congress, they stop it and argue that only congress has the authority to appropriate money, but when we go over budget, they blame Trump!

The OP's question, "More immigration, or increased social spending?" is a fake one anyway, as more immigration will mean increased social spending. What does the OP mean with "OR"? Is he implying we can have increased immigration without  increased social spending?
#55
bmdrocks21
bmdrocks21's avatar
Debates: 6
Posts: 2,798
4
6
11
bmdrocks21's avatar
bmdrocks21
4
6
11
-->
@ethang5
American Presidents have very little control concerning overall spending. Congress does. And Democratic congresses make sure to paint Republican Presidents as "cutting social welfare for the poor" so as to pork up the budget as much as possible.

The funny thing is, If Trump cuts the budget, they accuse him of not caring for the poor, and if he increases the budget, they accuse him of not being republican.

Sure, now, but how about when Republicans had majorities in Congress and had a Republican president for two years? You would think that they would have cut spending. You know, the conservative thing to do. But they didn't. They cut taxes and did nothing about spending, so the debt continued to rise.
#56
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@bmdrocks21
Two years isn't long enough.

Some things cannot be cut without a court order or two thirds of congress, and a majority party may still not have a two thirds majority.

In most cases, the minority party still has enough votes to block cuts or use activist judges to block policy.

Which is what happened.
#57
Alec
Alec's avatar
Debates: 42
Posts: 2,472
5
7
11
Alec's avatar
Alec
5
7
11
-->
@rbelivb
Under our current system, if you win only 60% of the electoral college, you end up winning 100% of a term.  Under NPV, if you win 51% of the vote, you get 100% of a presidential term to yourself and your party.  Under the pie chart method combined with NPV, if you win 55% of the vote, you get 55% of a term to yourself, instead of 100%.  This finally means that our 2 party system can break up and form more ideologically consistent, diverse parties instead of people compromising to one of the big 2.  It also means that everyone gets representation in the executive branch for a little bit, depending on how well they performed in the election.  Allows ideas to compete to see which one is the best and would help enable a battle of ideas.

Thoughts on it?


Topic's author
#58
rbelivb
rbelivb's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 210
1
2
5
rbelivb's avatar
rbelivb
1
2
5
-->
@Alec
Thoughts on it?
If I'm understanding correctly, this would come under the banner of direct democracy, or a move in that direction. Maybe I should write a separate thing on this, but in general I think direct democracy is an inherently unstable system, since democracy itself rests on the representational split between the population and the state which acts on its behalf. If the state loses the authority to determine the legitimate will of the population, then the political system degenerates into direct action or might makes right. In other words, the degree to which a society under direct democracy would follow a set of orderly rules would be the extent that groups within its population could consolidate their power in a corporate entity. I would advocate a system whose rules cannot be subject to the will of any corporate group within its population - a libertarian system is democratic in that the laws characterising it would reflect the preferences of the aggregate will of the majority of its population, but this would be an indirect representation of their preferences, filtered through their concrete decisions (among fixed alternatives weighted according to supply and demand) in a market economy.
Topic's author
#59
rbelivb
rbelivb's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 210
1
2
5
rbelivb's avatar
rbelivb
1
2
5
-->
@SirAnonymous
No. Modern-day progressives advocate for equality of outcomes rather than equality of opportunity.
This is a conservative meme and not a real distinction. People with better outcomes gain more opportunities too.
#60
ethang5
ethang5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 5,875
3
3
6
ethang5's avatar
ethang5
3
3
6
-->
@rbelivb
...not a real distinction.
Really? An equality of outcomes is a logical impossibility in the real world, and an equality of opportunity is the only fair way to run a society.

The distinction seems sharp.