Jump to content
Nick4Iowa

What makes a Liberal?

Recommended Posts

Hello, I am new here, and I think this topic may be a good one for my first post. I am not american, I am italian actually, but I would really like to participate to this forum for a number of reasons, especially in these times... My only concern is that I am not sure how to label myself. The following is a list of my 'beliefs':

 

Every argument should be approached by logic, reason and SCIENCE.

 

Religion should have no place in the world, and should be limited to private houses (I see Richard Dawkings as a too moderate atheist). "Religion poisons everything" (Hitchens) is one of the best quotes ever and explains roughly 50% of the world problems (depending on the areas could get up to 90%).

 

I believe in free market and free trade, but not among countries with huge disparities of labour rights and wages (i.e. I think Europe and USA should have a totally free market among them, but not with China, unless they stop treating their workers like slaves).

 

I believe that manufacturing industry should be roughly equally shared among coutries (as much as possible, at least). Here is what I mean with a brief example: do you, Ford, want to sell your cars in my area? No problem, no custom taxes, but build those cars in my area (as long as the area is big enough for it to be worth it).

 

I would prohibit the very existence of pure financial banks. Banks should only operate to provide loans and mortgage to individuals, families and companies, with very strict regulations from governments.

 

I am not sure if these points mark me as a liberal, I would say more like a social democrat (as explained a few posts above), but I still hope I could partecipate in this Room, as for what I have read till now, I agree with most of what is written here. I tried to read the No Holds Barred, but I really couldn't stand it for more that 5 minutes, I had no idea conservatives in the States could be so bad...

 

P.S. I'm sorry for my english, I know it's far from perfect.

 

Religion - Agree that religion should be out of public policy. But when a particular belief system fails to respect the sanctity of life - which I would assume is at the core of Liberal ideology of "caring" more than the Right - then said religion is fair game from a political perspective.

 

Free Markets/Trade - Interesting perspective. For an "emerging" country with limited labor and wage protections, are there any historical examples of a developed country demanding fair labor practices before beginning to trade with them? Otherwise, is it possible that by definition the free market forces emerging countries to raise labor standards over time as the labor force gains more bargaining power due to increased developed market investment and accelerating economic growth?

 

Manufacturing - That suggestion appears inefficient, and likely to raise prices for consumers if in fact it was implemented?

 

Banks - To this point, Gary Cohn appears to be pushing for breaking up the banks. Would be very good, IMO. Would you support pure investment banks and pure traditional deposit/lending banks? Or no investment banks period? If so, where do those functions go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Religion - Agree that religion should be out of public policy. But when a particular belief system fails to respect the sanctity of life - which I would assume is at the core of Liberal ideology of "caring" more than the Right - then said religion is fair game from a political perspective.

 

 

Free Markets/Trade - Interesting perspective. For an "emerging" country with limited labor and wage protections, are there any historical examples of a developed country demanding fair labor practices before beginning to trade with them? Otherwise, is it possible that by definition the free market forces emerging countries to raise labor standards over time as the labor force gains more bargaining power due to increased developed market investment and accelerating economic growth?

 

Manufacturing - That suggestion appears inefficient, and likely to raise prices for consumers if in fact it was implemented?

 

Banks - To this point, Gary Cohn appears to be pushing for breaking up the banks. Would be very good, IMO. Would you support pure investment banks and pure traditional deposit/lending banks? Or no investment banks period? If so, where do those functions go?

On the point of Religion, I think that people of faith should have A voice in government but not be the voice. As an atheist, I'm not bothered by congressional prayer as long as its not required of private citizens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the point of Religion, I think that people of faith should have A voice in government but not be the voice. As an atheist, I'm not bothered by congressional prayer as long as its not required of private citizens.

Take gay marriage and abortion: Should religion have a voice in those debates?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take gay marriage and abortion: Should religion have a voice in those debates?

They can protest and denounce it as much as they want as per their rights. Do we have to like it, No. Do we let the government censor them? No.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Take gay marriage and abortion: Should religion have a voice in those debates?

 

Wrong thread for this conversation. Start a new thread if you really insist on going there.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Test

(Apologies for the "test" post - was blocked from editing it for some reason.)

 

So what makes a Liberal liberal and a Conservative conservative? Simple: Government versus Free Market.

 

We can debate ad nauseum the personality types of each world view; there is just too much overlap for the debate to be of any use. Better to stick to issues.

 

The non-group healthcare insurance market is one of the most poignant demonstrations of the Government v. Free Market debate. The Left believes the federal government should fund and run it; the Right believes the free market should fund it and run it. Both are right. Both are wrong.

 

The free market cannot fund it because the "return on investment" does not meet free market hurdle rates. Look no further than the large insurance companies pulling out of ACA exchanges. There is no debate here, as there are 28.4 million people uninsured.

 

But likewise, the federal government cannot run it, as evidence by the hideous acceptance rates. By design the federal government is a bureaucratic behemoth, meant to move slowly and methodically. The federal government must unshackle the states in order to allow free market implementation of government insurance programs.

 

What about taxes and spending? The Right wins on taxes, the Left on spending; the compromise should come via the overall federal deficit and debt, as I'll explain.

 

The Left's obsession with taxing the "rich" in order to redirect $$$ to the middle class is asinine for two reasons: 1) There are not enough truly rich citizens to tax enough to make a dent in funding requirements; 2) many "rich" folks are in fact medium size business owners that are forced to report business profits as personal income via the "S-Corp" structure...NOT the folks that need to pay more taxes.

 

The Right's obsession with tax cuts "wins" for two reasons: 1) It puts money directly back into the economy; but most importantly, 2) it lowers the "cost of capital" for free market investment projects, which has a direct impact across the economic landscape.

 

But on the flip side, from an operational standpoint the Right's common refrain that "the wealthy pay more than their fair share" is a flat out lie. And they know it. When you factor in Payroll Taxes, the "rich" pay barely more than their fair share.

 

Overarching tax reform goal should be: SIMPLIFICATION and fairness. Shrink the tax code, flatten rates, and lower them across the board when possible.

 

With regard to spending, the Left sees federal government as the means for providing goods and services that do not meet the free market's "return on investment" hurdle rate; while the Right views the federal government as "crowding out" private investment.

 

$ for $, taxes and spending have the exact same effect on private sector net worth. But given the cost of capital impact of taxation, taxes get the nod for bigger long-term impact.

 

Where the Right is absolutely outside of its mind is the outright rejection of the notion that the federal government must fund services that the free market cannot. There is NO better example than the Right refusing to vote for the early 2009 stimulus package. The political Right conducted the equivalent of a financial and economic holocaust by refusing to back the federal government stepping in to fill the void as the global economy and financial system was diving off of a cliff. All because it was "wasteful" spending and didn't let the free market work it out. It's pathetic.

 

From a bipartisan standpoint, the taxation and spending debate can be resolved by agreeing to an appropriate range of debt/GDP. The debt limit debate is asinine, as it does not account for economic growth. So once we decide on the appropriate debt ratio, depending on growth and interest rates we can back into what the appropriate level of taxation should be once all mandatory federal government spending is accounted for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(Apologies for the "test" post - was blocked from editing it for some reason.)

So what makes a Liberal liberal and a Conservative conservative? Simple: Government versus Free Market.

We can debate ad nauseum the personality types of each world view; there is just too much overlap for the debate to be of any use. Better to stick to issues.

The non-group healthcare insurance market is one of the most poignant demonstrations of the Government v. Free Market debate. The Left believes the federal government should fund and run it; the Right believes the free market should fund it and run it. Both are right. Both are wrong.

The free market cannot fund it because the "return on investment" does not meet free market hurdle rates. Look no further than the large insurance companies pulling out of ACA exchanges. There is no debate here, as there are 28.4 million people uninsured.

But likewise, the federal government cannot run it, as evidence by the hideous acceptance rates. By design the federal government is a bureaucratic behemoth, meant to move slowly and methodically. The federal government must unshackle the states in order to allow free market implementation of government insurance programs.

What about taxes and spending? The Right wins on taxes, the Left on spending; the compromise should come via the overall federal deficit and debt, as I'll explain.

The Left's obsession with taxing the "rich" in order to redirect $$$ to the middle class is asinine for two reasons: 1) There are not enough truly rich citizens to tax enough to make a dent in funding requirements; 2) many "rich" folks are in fact medium size business owners that are forced to report business profits as personal income via the "S-Corp" structure...NOT the folks that need to pay more taxes.

The Right's obsession with tax cuts "wins" for two reasons: 1) It puts money directly back into the economy; but most importantly, 2) it lowers the "cost of capital" for free market investment projects, which has a direct impact across the economic landscape.

But on the flip side, from an operational standpoint the Right's common refrain that "the wealthy pay more than their fair share" is a flat out lie. And they know it. When you factor in Payroll Taxes, the "rich" pay barely more than their fair share.

Overarching tax reform goal should be: SIMPLIFICATION and fairness. Shrink the tax code, flatten rates, and lower them across the board when possible.

With regard to spending, the Left sees federal government as the means for providing goods and services that do not meet the free market's "return on investment" hurdle rate; while the Right views the federal government as "crowding out" private investment.

$ for $, taxes and spending have the exact same effect on private sector net worth. But given the cost of capital impact of taxation, taxes get the nod for bigger long-term impact.

Where the Right is absolutely outside of its mind is the outright rejection of the notion that the federal government must fund services that the free market cannot. There is NO better example than the Right refusing to vote for the early 2009 stimulus package. The political Right conducted the equivalent of a financial and economic holocaust by refusing to back the federal government stepping in to fill the void as the global economy and financial system was diving off of a cliff. All because it was "wasteful" spending and didn't let the free market work it out. It's pathetic.

From a bipartisan standpoint, the taxation and spending debate can be resolved by agreeing to an appropriate range of debt/GDP. The debt limit debate is asinine, as it does not account for economic growth. So once we decide on the appropriate debt ratio, depending on growth and interest rates we can back into what the appropriate level of taxation should be once all mandatory federal government spending is accounted for.

Again, wrong thread to advance your pet issues. If you want to discuss stands on healthcare funding then start a new thread.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, wrong thread to advance your pet issues. If you want to discuss stands on healthcare funding then start a new thread.

 

Bill

So for discussing what makes a Liberal liberal, actual issues are off limits?

 

I think it's a fascinating thread, so would like to participate. Would appreciate the guidelines for the thread, thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So for discussing what makes a Liberal liberal, actual issues are off limits?

 

I think it's a fascinating thread, so would like to participate. Would appreciate the guidelines for the thread, thanks.

 

If you want to dig down into pet issues just create a new thread. Simple.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you want to dig down into pet issues just create a new thread. Simple.

 

Bill

I used an example of an issue that defined the Left and Right.

 

How does one discuss what makes a Liberal a Liberal if one cannot discuss issues?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I used an example of an issue that defined the Left and Right.

 

How does one discuss what makes a Liberal a Liberal if one cannot discuss issues?

 

Make a new thread to discuss you pet issues (or move along). OK?

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alrighty then, let's discuss Climate Change. What "makes a Liberal" on the Climate Change issue?

 

To start: Is the net economic benefit greater if the federal government mandates fuel emission standards for auto manufacturers, or to leave the auto industry to the free market while directly funding massive investments in eco-friendly transportation alternatives - batteries, self driving cars, nat gas-fueled public transit, etc?

 

Or is a "net economic benefit" framework not appropriate for this topic?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you want to dig down into pet issues just create a new thread. Simple.

 

Bill

I think you're splitting hairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Alrighty then, let's discuss Climate Change. What "makes a Liberal" on the Climate Change issue?

 

To start: Is the net economic benefit greater if the federal government mandates fuel emission standards for auto manufacturers, or to leave the auto industry to the free market while directly funding massive investments in eco-friendly transportation alternatives - batteries, self driving cars, nat gas-fueled public transit, etc?

 

Or is a "net economic benefit" framework not appropriate for this topic?

 

See above. If you want to discuss your pet issues, start a new thread rather than hijacking this one.

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you're splitting hairs.

 

 

 

See above. If you want to discuss your pet issues, start a new thread rather than hijacking this one.

 

Bill

 

SpyCar has been correct since post #114. This thread was pinned as a source of diverse opinion and fact exclusively about one subject "What Makes A Liberal". All other topics, about Liberal causes or issues should be posted as either new threads or added to existing non-pinned threads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SpyCar has been correct since post #114. This thread was pinned as a source of diverse opinion and fact exclusively about one subject "What Makes A Liberal". All other topics, about Liberal causes or issues should be posted as either new threads or added to existing non-pinned threads.

While you were on vactation I attempted to...

 

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

SpyCar has been correct since post #114. This thread was pinned as a source of diverse opinion and fact exclusively about one subject "What Makes A Liberal". All other topics, about Liberal causes or issues should be posted as either new threads or added to existing non-pinned threads.

I shall Abide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MemeGod - Your post has been deleted. Conservatives are not allowed to post in the Liberal's Only Room. Keep out.

That's not going to fly on LF either. I am going to try to run him down & talk some sense in him.

 

Long gone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't have a conservatives only forum? You guys must be scared of the truth. If I had known you segregated people here I would never have signed on. Tell you what, fuck liberals and fuck you.

So you didn't notice you were signing on to a forum called "LIBERAL FORUM", and then not notice the different chat rooms, with one of those chat rooms called LIBERALS ONLY ROOM, with rules that clearly spell out who is allowed to post in that room, and after not being bright enough to figure that out yourself, had a moderator in that room, explain to you, it was a room dedicated to LIBERALS ONLY, on a forum called "LIBERAL FORUM", and that still was confusing to you, so you swear at the moderator, claim ignorance, ask a dumb ass question, and lay claim that only a genius such as yourself knows what's true?

 

I have just one question for you.

 

You're not real bright, are you boy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is ripe is this butch has been here before. I have his IP addys. So he is lying and deceiving, typical con, and why we have an LO room to keep the filth out of here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not read the whole thread..I have been here since Dec 22 2016..My question to you guys is...

 

Am I a Liberal? I vote Dem but I might have voted for Powell had he run..maybe. Was a very dark time :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did not read the whole thread..I have been here since Dec 22 2016..My question to you guys is...

 

Am I a Liberal?

 

The rule reads "No conservatives allowed". You are not a conservative.

 

 

I vote Dem but I might have voted for Powell had he run..maybe. Was a very dark time :P

 

There is no purity test. The rules cover it all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Strootman:-- Welcome to the forum. IMO, your views are VERY Progressive and I agree with almost everything you said. As you observed in NHB, US Conservatives are often simplistic, self-destructive, abusive types who lack the sophistication to tell candy-coated lies from the truth. And they are attracted to demagogues like moths to a flame. But the many of the Conservatives in NHB represent the worst of the worst.

You bring up a good point. You're a progressive and looking for progressive views. I don't think liberal and progressive are the same thing, I think they're opposite viewpoints,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...