Label Yourself

[BigBallinStalin]

I find it better to assume that people know when you're employing some rhetorical device, and to never explain that you are, because if people don't know, they're probably not worth telling.

<searches for rhetorical device in above post>

[pmchugh]

I voted "Liberal", although I don't really associate with any political party I will happily click the opposite of conservatism. Also I like the connotations of the word liberal, i.e. freedom of the people. If there is one problem with most traditional leftists it is that they rely too much on state control and thus authoritarianism.

[ViperOverLord]

I voted "Liberal", although I don't really associate with any political party I will happily click the opposite of conservatism. Also I like the connotations of the word liberal, i.e. freedom of the people. If there is one problem with most traditional leftists it is that they rely too much on state control and thus authoritarianism.

Yea. I dont know how you can claim that liberals are about freedom for the people and also state control and authoritarianism. It sounds like a face value contradiction but I'm sure you have some rationale that I look forward to hearing.

[pmchugh]

I voted "Liberal", although I don't really associate with any political party I will happily click the opposite of conservatism. Also I like the connotations of the word liberal, i.e. freedom of the people. If there is one problem with most traditional leftists it is that they rely too much on state control and thus authoritarianism.

Yea. I dont know how you can claim that liberals are about freedom for the people and also state control and authoritarianism. It sounds like a face value contradiction but I'm sure you have some rationale that I look forward to hearing.

I guess my post was confusing as I hopped from one topic to the next. I will try break it down.

I voted "Liberal", although I don't really associate with any political party I will happily click the opposite of conservatism.

This is talking about the american concepts of liberal vs conservatism, democrat vs republic etc.

Also I like the connotations of the word liberal, i.e. freedom of the people.

I am talking about the origins of the term liberal here.

If there is one problem with most traditional leftists it is that they rely too much on state control and thus authoritarianism.

This statement is talking about socialism, communism and left wing politics in general.

[ViperOverLord]

^^^

That all makes sense. It sounds like you relate to some classic liberal concepts if not the modern day implementation of those concepts.

One thing I still don't understand, you mention the dem vs. GOP (lib vs. conservative) argument and state that you relate to lib/dems while hating state control. Do you not feel like modern day democrats are moving more and more towards state control?

[heavycola]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Then decide if it relates more closely to conservatism or liberalism.

Isnt that sort of enforced partisan thinking part of the problem? There is a whole spectrum of political agreement, and it isnt impossible to agree with views from more than one point on that spectrum. Pigeonholing is unhelpful, divisive and typically rightwing (kidding).

How about labelling yourself a free thinker who reaches his or her own conclusions?

[ViperOverLord]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Then decide if it relates more closely to conservatism or liberalism.

Isnt that sort of enforced partisan thinking part of the problem? There is a whole spectrum of political agreement, and it isnt impossible to agree with views from more than one point on that spectrum. Pigeonholing is unhelpful, divisive and typically rightwing (kidding).

How about labelling yourself a free thinker who reaches his or her own conclusions?

Yea b/c clearly if you are liberal or conservative then you can't be a free thinker. Rather you are a zombie that gets told what to think.

[heavycola]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Then decide if it relates more closely to conservatism or liberalism.

Isnt that sort of enforced partisan thinking part of the problem? There is a whole spectrum of political agreement, and it isnt impossible to agree with views from more than one point on that spectrum. Pigeonholing is unhelpful, divisive and typically rightwing (kidding).

How about labelling yourself a free thinker who reaches his or her own conclusions?

Yea b/c clearly if you are liberal or conservative then you can't be a free thinker. Rather you are a zombie that gets told what to think.

That wasn't really my point, or indeed any words I used. Your thread is titled 'label yourself' and yet there are only really two choices. Then when someone asks about libertarianism, you tell them to squeeze that into one of your two answers rather than, i dunno, expand your poll options. In fact I'm not sure what the point of the poll is.

[ViperOverLord]

That wasn't really my point, or indeed any words I used. Your thread is titled 'label yourself' and yet there are only really two choices. Then when someone asks about libertarianism, you tell them to squeeze that into one of your two answers rather than, i dunno, expand your poll options. In fact I'm not sure what the point of the poll is.

Yes. I get that there's a political spectrum. I get that issues are often complex. I get that people can be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. But the point of this exercise in part is still to regard which ideological base we more closely relate to, push come to shove. That's why there's no I don't know option. There's no I'm an independent bla bla option. There's no I'm a gay rights activist but I'm fiscally conservative option. There's no I'm a classic liberal economist but militaristic warhawk option. There's no this all sucks cubes anyhow option etc.

[BigBallinStalin]

That wasn't really my point, or indeed any words I used. Your thread is titled 'label yourself' and yet there are only really two choices. Then when someone asks about libertarianism, you tell them to squeeze that into one of your two answers rather than, i dunno, expand your poll options. In fact I'm not sure what the point of the poll is.

Yes. I get that there's a political spectrum. I get that issues are often complex. I get that people can be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. But the point of this exercise in part is still to regard which ideological base we more closely relate to, push come to shove. That's why there's no I don't know option. There's no I'm an independent bla bla option. There's no I'm a gay rights activist but I'm fiscally conservative option. There's no I'm a classic liberal economist but militaristic warhawk option. There's no this all sucks cubes anyhow option etc.

Liberal v. conservative isn't the only spectrum which can accurately describe one's ideology; therefore, presenting only this one spectrum isn't useful.

[heavycola]

That wasn't really my point, or indeed any words I used. Your thread is titled 'label yourself' and yet there are only really two choices. Then when someone asks about libertarianism, you tell them to squeeze that into one of your two answers rather than, i dunno, expand your poll options. In fact I'm not sure what the point of the poll is.

Yes. I get that there's a political spectrum. I get that issues are often complex. I get that people can be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. But the point of this exercise in part is still to regard which ideological base we more closely relate to, push come to shove.

So - change the title of the thread from 'label yourself' to 'please simplify your political views as much as possible for my benefit'.

[ViperOverLord]

That wasn't really my point, or indeed any words I used. Your thread is titled 'label yourself' and yet there are only really two choices. Then when someone asks about libertarianism, you tell them to squeeze that into one of your two answers rather than, i dunno, expand your poll options. In fact I'm not sure what the point of the poll is.

Yes. I get that there's a political spectrum. I get that issues are often complex. I get that people can be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. But the point of this exercise in part is still to regard which ideological base we more closely relate to, push come to shove.

So - change the title of the thread from 'label yourself' to 'please simplify your political views as much as possible for my benefit'.

Yea__ that's so much better.

[heavycola]

That wasn't really my point, or indeed any words I used. Your thread is titled 'label yourself' and yet there are only really two choices. Then when someone asks about libertarianism, you tell them to squeeze that into one of your two answers rather than, i dunno, expand your poll options. In fact I'm not sure what the point of the poll is.

Yes. I get that there's a political spectrum. I get that issues are often complex. I get that people can be liberal on some issues and conservative on others. But the point of this exercise in part is still to regard which ideological base we more closely relate to, push come to shove.

So - change the title of the thread from 'label yourself' to 'please simplify your political views as much as possible for my benefit'.

Yea__ that's so much better.

you're welcome dude.

[rockfist]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Libertarian fits more closely with Liberal on Social issues and Conservative on Economic issues - so which of those issues is more important to you?

[ViperOverLord]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Libertarian fits more closely with Liberal on Social issues and Conservative on Economic issues - so which of those issues is more important to you?

That's not exactly true. While a Libertarian is less likely is less likely to oppose gay marriage or be more liberal concerning immigration; he's also going to be vehemently opposed to programs like Obamacare. But Libertarians are more fiscally conservative though or rather fiscally sound.

[pmchugh]

^^^

That all makes sense. It sounds like you relate to some classic liberal concepts if not the modern day implementation of those concepts.

One thing I still don't understand, you mention the dem vs. GOP (lib vs. conservative) argument and state that you relate to lib/dems while hating state control. Do you not feel like modern day democrats are moving more and more towards state control?

Hmm that's a tough question, I am from the UK so I don't particularly know the ins and outs of american politics so it is hard to say which direction it is heading in with any certainty.

Obama signing the patriot act extension would be a good argument for that, along with the SOPA/PIPA laws they would have introduced. However I still think your health care system needs a healthy dose of state intervention.

[rockfist]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Libertarian fits more closely with Liberal on Social issues and Conservative on Economic issues - so which of those issues is more important to you?

That's not exactly true. While a Libertarian is less likely is less likely to oppose gay marriage or be more liberal concerning immigration; he's also going to be vehemently opposed to programs like Obamacare. But Libertarians are more fiscally conservative though or rather fiscally sound.

Obamacare is a spending issue. A Libertarian would oppose it on those grounds.

[Symmetry]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Libertarian fits more closely with Liberal on Social issues and Conservative on Economic issues - so which of those issues is more important to you?

That's not exactly true. While a Libertarian is less likely is less likely to oppose gay marriage or be more liberal concerning immigration; he's also going to be vehemently opposed to programs like Obamacare. But Libertarians are more fiscally conservative though or rather fiscally sound.

Obamacare is a spending issue. A Libertarian would oppose it on those grounds.

Given the cost of US healthcare vs comparable western countries that use carious forms of socialised healthcare, I'm not sure a libertarian would have much ground to oppose it in terms of cost.

But looking at effective models has never been something that Libertarians really feel happy with when it comes to this topic.

[ViperOverLord]

I don't see Libertarian in that poll.....

Libertarian fits more closely with Liberal on Social issues and Conservative on Economic issues - so which of those issues is more important to you?

That's not exactly true. While a Libertarian is less likely is less likely to oppose gay marriage or be more liberal concerning immigration; he's also going to be vehemently opposed to programs like Obamacare. But Libertarians are more fiscally conservative though or rather fiscally sound.

Obamacare is a spending issue. A Libertarian would oppose it on those grounds.

Given the cost of US healthcare vs comparable western countries that use carious forms of socialised healthcare, I'm not sure a libertarian would have much ground to oppose it in terms of cost.

But looking at effective models has never been something that Libertarians really feel happy with when it comes to this topic.

New CBO Report: Obamacare dramatically adds to the deficit.

First off, I think you're in denial about the costs of Obamacare. They already are cutting $500 billion from medicare to pay for it (Yea f*ck the old people that paid for their healthcare).

Second off, you clearly don't understand what Libertarians believe. Besides cost, Libertarians oppose Obamacare based on its adverse effect on free markets, personal liberties and state rights. The bill is a complete obamination to everything they believe.

[patches70]

Libertarians are opposed to the Collective. The Liberals and Conservatives, Democrats and Republicans are all Collectivists. They just have slightly different ideas of the rules of the Collective.

The Liberals and Conservatives both want State solutions to any and all problems. Liberals and Conservatives both create more and more problems that need to be solved by the State.

If one is a card carrying member of the GOP or the Democrats, a self identified Conservative or Liberal, both want the State by force of law to impose their own views on everyone.

Even if I agree in general on a particular issue from either side, I still don't believe I (or they) have the right nor the wisdom to force everyone else to go along with that particular "solution". Nor do I believe in the benevolence of the State. Nor do I trust the State or the people who run the State. The State is made of up flawed individuals (as we all are) and with their biases are too quick to impose the rule of law on everyone and tell themselves "It's for the greater good".

Too many people have died and been enslaved "For the greater good". It's all fine and dandy until the day you and your beliefs are up on the sacrificial altar to be given up for "The Greater Good". Screw that.

[Symmetry]

Free markets are pretty bad when it comes to stuff like this. Why be so adverse to looking at models that work better and cost less?

[ViperOverLord]

Free markets are pretty bad when it comes to stuff like this. Why be so adverse to looking at models that work better and cost less?

I've seen nothing that says state healthcare works better. In fact I've seen nothing but stats to the contrary. And the USA model is not based on a free market system (and hasn't been for decades) before you go off erroneously comparing us to other systems. The free market creates the best cost both for society and the individual. It truly is basic economics.

[patches70]

Free markets are pretty bad when it comes to stuff like this. Why be so adverse to looking at models that work better and cost less?

We haven't tried a free market approach to the health care in the US. Not even close. You might not understand how it works in the US so I shall explain.

The insurance companies in the US are cartels and they (with government blessing) have carved up the US into sectors. Only certain insurance companies are allowed to operate in any particular market. This informal cartel agreement is now well established through US Federal and state laws.

For instance, in any particular part of California one would only be able to shop about a half dozen to at most a dozen different insurance companies. There are over 1,200 insurance companies operating through out the entire US. But in any market you live you only have the opportunity to shop over but a tiny percentage of those companies. It is like this in every state of the Union.

This is enforced by state laws and Federal laws limiting the number of insurance companies that are allowed to operate in a given sector. This has the effect of insurance companies to keep prices high. It curtails competition. And the governments of individual states and the Central US government are all in cahoots with the system.

It's not a free market, it never has been.

There is also the other problems with rising health care that are never addressed. Such as the debasement of our currency. The Fed and the US government claim there is no inflation. Or that it is under control and acceptable. For two years there was no cost of living increase for SS.
In calculating inflation, official government statistics ignore one particular segment of the economy. Healthcare. Healthcare is not factored into the inflation models. Healthcare increase in cost 10X the national inflation rates in many segments of the nation.

There are no "solutions" to any problems in life. There are only trade offs. That's what people seem to lack understanding of. The more free markets are the better services tend to be in general. The better the quality as well if competition is allowed. There is none of that in the healthcare segment.

Currency debasement not only is the cause of inflation, it is also the root of problems across the board. Who cares if homosexuals can get married if no one has economic opportunity?
What good is it to have equal treatment under the law if we are all debt slaves?
How can we leave a better life for our children when more and more of the fruit of our labors is taken from us to "solve" these various social problems?
Our currency, our medium of trade, the measure of our labors is constantly being destroyed by The Federal Reserve and government spending policies. That's a bigger issue than some schmuck lighting up a cig in public or gays getting married, or any other myriad of problems different people perceive of as being "problems". Destroying our money is going to affect every single American and has disastrous consequences for nearly every nation on the planet.
Consequences that make all the social issues seem petty by comparison.

[Symmetry]

Free markets are pretty bad when it comes to stuff like this. Why be so adverse to looking at models that work better and cost less?

I've seen nothing that says state healthcare works better. In fact I've seen nothing but stats to the contrary. And the USA model is not based on a free market system (and hasn't been for decades) before you go off erroneously comparing us to other systems. The free market creates the best cost both for society and the individual. It truly is basic economics.

What standards are you going by? Life expectancy? Healthcare coverage? Percent of GDP spent on healthcare?

Could you provide an example of the model you think works? Pick a country where it's been implemented and works.

[the carpet man]

i will try to find the statistic i saw the other day (it was on the eurostat website). it looked at some of the european countries, and the amount of patients in each who say their medical need was met by the health service. the two best were uk and sweden, which have systems run and funded by the state and free at the point of use.

these two country also spend much less on health care than the usa does, which is a fact easy for you to find yourself