What are conservatives... for?

Author: Double_R

Posts

Total: 207
#181
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Please at least attempt to answer the question before brandishing your next vague RED-HERRING.
Ok well then explain why whenever and where ever competition is allowed to exist that the Unionized industries consistently go bankrupt without government subsidies. It's precisely because the Union has both no incentive mechanism for attracting workers that produce more than the communist collectively bargained wage and also no mechanism for penalizing workers that do not produce at the level of the collective wage.

Adam Smith said an economy without incentives is an economy of fiat.
This is all very interesting and I'd love to dive into this pile of bald assertions and pickled RED-HERRINGS, but none of this answers the question.

Which one of TRUMP'S labor nominees do you consider PRO-LABOR?
#182
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
What "Constitutional regulations" are you in favor of?
Ones that do not deprive Americans of the pursuit of happiness by destroying competition with subsidies and regulations.


The original intent of the Commerce Clause was to make “normal” or “regular” commerce between the states; thus it was designed to promote trade and exchange not restrict it. Further, it was specifically aimed at preventing the states from enacting impediments to the free flow of “commerce” such as tariffs, quotas and taxes.

The clause was specifically meant as a check on the abuse of State power to enact crony economics. NOT as permission to regulate individuals!
#183
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Which one of TRUMP'S labor nominees do you consider PRO-LABOR?
Any one of them that have created a job is pro-labor.
#184
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Most rational Historians agree the official end of the  American Dream was precisely when Wickard v. Filburn gave the Federal Government the Constitutional Authority to regulate life, liberty, and happiness on an individual level.
#185
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Which one of TRUMP'S labor nominees do you consider PRO-LABOR?
Any one of them that have created a job is pro-labor.
Is this the extent of your support for your claim that LABOR UNIONS should support TRUMP instead of BIDEN?
#186
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
it was specifically aimed at preventing the states from enacting impediments to the free flow of “commerce” such as tariffs, quotas and taxes.
I AGREE.
#187
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
YES.  IF THE GRAIN NEVER CROSSES STATE LINES IT IS OBVIOUSLY THE EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION OF THE STATE IN WHICH IT WAS GROWN. [**]
#188
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL

This was during the neo-fascist period of the FDR era.

"if you cannot say no, then you do not have a right"
#189
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
"if you cannot say no, then you do not have a right"
I'm afraid that rights are mostly granted by mob democracy. A man's right to life and liberty can be taken away by any group larger, better armed and/or better organized than his. The mechanism is and always has been concerned citizens fighting against the status quo for the betterment of the status quo.
In effect, this is somewhat true. Though, I wouldn't necessarily characterize them as "rights" in this context given that, as you pointed out, they can be taken away. "Legal privileges" would be more apropos. With that said, my arguments will always be in service to the "ideals" or rights. If we conform or concede the ideal in order to be, as I often see in response, "more practical," then there is no point to rights.

It's simply contracting with mobsters for temporary periods of survival.

#190
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Wicker V Filburn allows the government to create indentured servants with the full force of the Army behind them by forcing individual people to produce what the government says you must produce and buy what the government says you must buy. The end of the American Dream.


"if you cannot say no, then you do not have a right"
#191
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Wicker V Filburn allows the government to create indentured servants with the full force of the Army behind them by forcing individual people to produce what the government says you must produce and buy what the government says you must buy. The end of the American Dream.
NOT TO MENTION "EMERGENCY" ECONOMIC POWERS.
#192
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
#193
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@Double_R
I'd say the following is true:

Conservatives care about personal responsibility and small government, and worldwide freedom(in that order).  In the event of a conflict, they care about personal responsibility.  This is why they are pro life, pro gun, oppose welfare, oppose UHC, support increased military spending.  I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.

Libetarians care about small government.  This is why they are pro choice, pro gun, oppose welfare and UHC, and support a smaller military.  I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.

Liberals I think care about minimizing pain and extending life.  In the event of a conflict, they care about minimizing pain.  This is why they are pro choice, relatively anti gun, support welfare, support UHC, support decreased military spending.  I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.

Authoritarians care about extending life.  This is why they are pro life, relatively anti gun, support welfare, and support UHC.  I think almost all of their beliefs can be tied to at least one of these principles.

Does this answer your question?
Topic's author
#194
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,276
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@TheUnderdog
I appreciate the response, but it doesn’t address the crux of what I am asking.

Small government is really not a value one can assert because it doesn’t lend itself to any particular outcome or direction. For example, if we were to accept this and downsize our government, what would be cut? The purpose of ideals is to serve as a guide for more complex decision making. “Small government” does nothing to assist in that process, all it does is feed into people’s opposition to government solutions while providing no solutions of their own.

Personal responsibility fits into a value system, I suppose, but ignores the complexity and interconnectedness of the real world. The difference between conservatism and liberalism isn’t whether one believes an individual should be responsible for their own actions but rather the question of to what extent the circumstances one faces is a result of their own actions.

I suppose my point is that when I look at the more predominantly asserted “conservative values” I don’t see any values at all, just opposition to any attempt by anyone else to assert their values.
#195
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
all it does is feed into people’s opposition to government solutions while providing no solutions of their own.
The government as an uncontested monopoly actively suppresses any ideas that could challenge their monopoly on power. A case in point is Biden's loyalty to the teacher's unions when the CDC has a solution.
Topic's author
#196
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,276
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
The government as an uncontested monopoly actively suppresses any ideas that could challenge their monopoly on power. A case in point is Biden's loyalty to the teacher's unions when the CDC has a solution.
You should take some time to read up on monopolies to understand what they are and why we recognize them.

Biden doesn’t have the power to suppress ideas, and taking a side on a contentious issue while doing whatever is in his power to effect the outcome is what political leaders are elected to do.
#197
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Biden doesn’t have the power to suppress ideas, and taking a side on a contentious issue while doing whatever is in his power to effect the outcome is what political leaders are elected to do.
Sure he does. He has already suppressed the CDC's science on schools by claiming CDC doesn't know anything about what they are talking about regarding schools.

Government is a monopoly because they have Authority to destroy their competition like the CDC and other political threats. 

all it does is feed into people’s opposition to government solutions while providing no solutions of their own.
CDC provided a solution. Government cares about preserving political power over doing the right thing.
Topic's author
#198
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,276
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Greyparrot
Sure he does. He has already suppressed the CDC's science on schools by claiming CDC doesn't know anything about what they are talking about regarding schools.
Just accepting your characterization as fact for the sake of argument... claiming another agency doesn’t know what they are talking about is not “suppressing ideas”. But if you really believe that then you must have been in a constant state of outrage over the last 4 years.


Government is a monopoly because they have Authority to destroy their competition like the CDC and other political threats. 
Government isn’t a business. It doesn’t have competition. What are you talking about?

CDC provided a solution. Government cares about preserving political power over doing the right thing.
What are you talking about? Government is not a person. “It” does not care about anything. “It” does not have political power.

Please explain what you think a government is.
#199
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Double_R
Government is not a person.
Please explain what you think a government is.
You are right. Government has a systemic incentive to maintain power at the expense of the public; the larger the Government, the greater the expense is. In Biden's case, Millions of American children are harmed, not just the thousand at the border.


This has been known for decades. It's not a new concept. Government has zero incentive to unemploy itself. The same is true of the administrative branch of the public school unions.
#200
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 26,023
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
It's no secret that American workers are getting older. Even as millennials become the biggest cohort in the labor force, the median age of all U.S. employees has crept up from 30 to 42 over the past 30 years. But when it comes to getting older, a POLITICO analysis finds, the private sector has nothing on the U.S. government.

The U.S. just elected the oldest new president in history, and Congress, too, has been getting consistently older, with its average age now up around 60.

But the vast majority of the government consists of the 2 million-strong federal civilian workforce. And thanks to slow-moving hiring practices and a huge cohort of baby boomers who haven’t retired at the predicted rates, it has grown significantly older than the American workforce overall. Today, just 17 percent of federal workers are under 35 years old. (In the private sector, almost 40 percent are.) And more than a quarter of federal employees are now older than 55.

In some agencies, the upward age shift is even starker. Sixty nine percent of NASA's workforce is over 45 years old. At the Department of Housing and Urban Development, it's 70 percent. At the tiny Government Publishing Office, it's even more extreme—80 percent.

In principle, there’s nothing wrong with older workers: They have more experience than younger ones and employers often report that they are more attentive at work. Age discrimination is not just illegal, but strips companies of experience and judgment; it's fair to say that plenty of Silicon Valley companies might benefit from the perspective of a more experienced cohort of employees. But workplaces that shift too far in any direction can suffer. There is evidence that offices with more older workers are less productive and, due to their workers' age, more expensive; health care costs are especially high, and a wave of retirements would leave the government on the hook for a major increase in pension spending. And broadly speaking, if the government is supposed to reflect America accurately—making small and large policy decisions that affect every aspect of the country—it’s only reasonable to expect that the federal workforce should reflect the generational makeup of the country.

Given the stereotypes about government employees, it's easy to assume that the major problem is that federal worker protections have led to a vast army of aging-in-place bureaucrats who simply can't be removed. But organizational experts and former federal human resource managers say the problem is also more complicated than that, and more troubling for good governance. They see an ineffective hiring system that is decades out of date. They have spent years warning policymakers that rules and laws were inhibiting their ability to hire and train new employees. These rules were specifically put in place to eliminate competition from younger workers for those jobs, helping to maintain the status quo for the existing workforce. The aging of the federal workforce, they say, is a symptom of Washington’s inability or unwillingness to keep up with modern-day management practices and to plan for the future—as well as a system hamstrung by rigid federal employment directives, some of which, ironically, were aimed at freshening up the workforce.

“It’s not so much a matter that old people are stupid and young people are smart,” said Don Kettl, a professor at the University of Maryland who has written extensively on government management. “It’s that smart agencies develop a plan for a pipeline. The federal government’s biggest problem is it’s not very good at pipeline planning.”


#201
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Conservatives care about personal responsibility
BLAME THE LOWEST PERSON IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND.

and small government,
IN PRINCIPLE ONLY, NEVER IN PRACTICE.

and worldwide freedom(in that order).
AT THE POINT OF A GUN.
#202
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Conservatives believe in what they do for a reason, so it's best to figure out what they want and see if they base their ideology off of it.  I'd say what conservatives want is personal responsibility.  It fits almost all of their beliefs on issues.
#203
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Conservatives care about personal responsibility
BLAME THE LOWEST PERSON IN THE CHAIN OF COMMAND.
How many "conservatives" were calling for BANK CEOs TO BE THROWN IN PRISON?

Who exactly was "personally responsible" for the housing (derivatives) market collapse?
#204
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,674
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@bmdrocks21
yeah i don't really like him now, i despise the small government talk too
#205
Dr.Franklin
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Debates: 32
Posts: 10,674
4
7
11
Dr.Franklin's avatar
Dr.Franklin
4
7
11
-->
@Greyparrot
It isn't. Conservatism today means conserving traditional values from the enlightened thinkers of Western Civilization that the founding fathers created the country on.

Liberalism is today focused on ramming postmodernist bullshit down our throats in an effort to destroy those western proscribed values.
defending from the fathers?
#206
TheUnderdog
TheUnderdog's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 4,340
3
5
10
TheUnderdog's avatar
TheUnderdog
3
5
10
-->
@3RU7AL
How many "conservatives" were calling for BANK CEOs TO BE THROWN IN PRISON?

Who exactly was "personally responsible" for the housing (derivatives) market collapse?
Not many people were calling for these people to be thrown in prison.  Recessions happen very frequently.  You can't jail someone for a recession that was out of their control.
#207
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@TheUnderdog
Not many people were calling for these people to be thrown in prison. 
ONLY BECAUSE "THE NEWS" BLAMED INDIVIDUAL HOME OWNERS FOR THE CRISIS.

PROSECUTORS HAD STRONG CASES AGAINST THOSE RESPONSIBLE AND THAT'S WHY THEY PAID $40 BILLION DOLLARS IN FINES. [**]

Recessions happen very frequently.  You can't jail someone for a recession that was out of their control.
FRAUD CAUSED THIS ONE.