Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

[rolmops]

Yes I know all of these are big loaded words.Put on top of that feelings about freedom and patriotism and the right mixture for a big political conversation(as in fight)are all present.<br />Here is some food for thought,that might make opposites appreciate each other a bit more.This guy Karl Marx(you know that commie)came up with an interesting concept called :"thesis,antithesis and synthesis".What he meant to say was that if one idea is promoted by one group,then there usually is another group that is radically opposed to this idea.The two groups fight each other a bit, both compromise a bit and out comes the synthesis which is a workable solution to a problem.<br />Here is an idea of mine.<br />I believe that socialists,communists,republicans and liberals all have one thing in common.they all want to be happy and a little bit better of as far as their livelihood is concerned.The difference of opinion is not in the ultimate goal,it is mostly in how to do the dividing.This is where we get off course.We are so involved in discussing what means to use, that we loose the original common point of view along the way and we end up attacking each other for out of anger or spite!<br />How would you feel if we tried to concentrate on the purpose we have in common and tried to get to a synthesis on how to divide the material goods.<br />So we can get back to the pursuit of happiness?<br />Maybe I am out in Lalaland,but can you please add your opinion to this train of thought?<br />Thanks,Rolmops.

 

[roscoe]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

The difference of opinion is not in the ultimate goal,it is mostly in how to do the dividing.

Well, I'd bet that 95% of you have more than me, so you all can send me some.<br /><br />

How would you feel if we tried to concentrate on the purpose we have in common and tried to get to a synthesis on how to divide the material goods.<br />

What gives you the idea that it should be divided up? Earn it, buy it, you got it, but wait... you better send me your boat cause you have too much. Afterall, no one needs a boat, its a waste of resources, a play thing. And you don't need that truck anymore, since you don't have a boat any longer. And what are you doing with that garage, you don't need that, you have no truck or boat to put into it anyway.<br /><br />Problem with your synthesis, is that it takes all the incentive away to produce, and we have enough non producers in this country/world.<br /><br />Hey, wait a minute, maybe we can divide up my debt. I'd be willing to send some of that your direction.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

The difference of opinion is not in the ultimate goal,it is mostly in how to do the dividing.<br /><br />synthesis on how to divide the material goods.<br />

Your thesis assumes life is a zero sum game. It is not. That is a nutshell is what is wrong with socialistic thinking. The pie is not a fixed size and the fight is not over how to divide it up. The goal is to create the largest size pie possible and to be rewarded in proportion to your contribution in making the pie.<br /><br />If life were a zero sum game we would all still be living in caves.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

You know Rosco.I lived in a commune for a few years and learned first hand what parasites are all about,but what I meant by dividing is what you call "earn it".The last thing we need is freeloaders.My idea is more that a person who works an honest work week of forty or fifty hours,should be able to feed his family instead of having to go out and work another 20 hours because minimal wages are no longer sufficient to put bread on the table.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Not all contributions are valued the same or require the same skills and/or effort. Therefore, the rewards the free market (society) awards are proportional.<br /><br />If we all got rewarded for doing the least, there would be know incentive to work harder, acquire more skills and therefore, contribute more to society by increasing the size of the pie. <br /><br />A janitor is not equal to a doctor. Many people can be janitors but few people can be doctors and society rewards their skills accordingly.<br /><br />I'll close by pointing out that the free market system has created the greatest, richest, most successful nation (society) in the history of man. That is proof enough that the system is the best man has developed.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Very often, the left vs right arguments are over the degree to which the free market system should be allowed to operate unhampered by governmental intervention.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Sorry, but your arguement is based on a false premise. Equal distribution of wealth is desireable and attainable. <br /><br />FYI: Marx had a working experiment, it failed. Compromise, as convenient as it sounds is not self sustaining. It is the least of all great ideas and is suceptable to creeping incrementalism, which will never address greatness or individuality which is sometimes more valued than wealth or property. As soon as the ends justify the means the theory fails to address its primary objective, "equal distribution of wealth". This is because someone will eventually be empowered to cut up the pie, and nobody, anywhere is capable of being completely equitable; creating an upper or lower class.<br /><br />It also fails to address human nature or distribution based on need. It is a mathmatical equation in a human environment and that is inconsistant.<br /><br />Try this one:<br /><br />Intellegence/education = Money/resources = Power/Authority = Sex <br /><br />Think about that formula for heirarchy of the modern society.

 

[rolmops]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

I am not after equal distribution because that as others rightly pointed out takes all incentive to produce out of a man.Marx did not have a working experiment during his life time.He wrote most of his books in the Royal British Museum in London because at home with his seven kids he could not get any of this done.He died a miserable old man.The working experiment(USSR)miserably failed because there was no strong stabilizing opposition to the marxist thought and the result was a nation where lip service paid of handsomely and hard work was for the dumb ones who actually believed in the basic ideas of socialism.<br />I am neither communist nor socialist,but mostly a humanitarian libertarian who is an ardent student of history and a very curious one at that.It is from that angle that I ask my questions.<br />Rolmops

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Originally posted by rolmops:<br /><br />Maybe I am out in Lalaland,but can you please add your opinion to this train of thought?<br />

If I am understanding you correctly, rolmops, you have lots of company out in Lalaland. Marx, Lenin, Trotsky and all of the other high profile characters throughout history who have tried and failed. I purposefully exclude all of those who simply tried to use socialism/communism as a vehicle for dictatorship, though both require a controlling hand to accomplish. <br /><br />Do you think that this country has gotten where it is with a socialist ethic? Do you really think that "equal time for equal pay" would fuel the engine that is America. I dare say that it is more of the same idealism that is in total ignorance of the nature of God's creation.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Your other underlying assumption, that dissension and compromise produce optimal results has no basis in fact. Compromise often leads to suboptimal results and sows the seeds of future problems that must be dealt with again.

 

[Skinnywater]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Hmm, implied Utopia.<br />Rolmops, that would be the most vicious fight of all. To take a system away from those that are perfectly happy with Capitolism. A system that fully allows and encourages individual people to think, set goals and pursue their own happiness.<br />This is both practical and moral. <br /> <br />What would you do with the people who demand more of themselves then what other people do? <br />This is the opposite of the deadbeat and lazy. And equally a problem in the commune.<br /><br />

My idea is more that a person who works an honest work week of forty or fifty hours,should be able to feed his family instead of having to go out and work another 20 hours because minimal wages are no longer sufficient to put bread on the table.

This is another issue altogeather. <br />This is a "Who took my cheese" situation. I believe everyone once past the fretting over not having "The Cheese", must keep searching for "The Cheese". The more searching you do, the more you find. <br />Your own determination, is your only limit.

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Quote rolmops,<br /><br />The working experiment(USSR)miserably failed because there was no strong stabilizing opposition to the marxist thought and the result was a nation where lip service paid off handsomely and hard work was for the dumb ones who actually believed in the basic ideas of socialism.<br /><br />I believe you answered your own question.

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Originally posted by rolmops:<br />I am not after equal distribution because that as others rightly pointed out takes all incentive to produce out of a man.

I have no doubt your heart is in the right place, rolmops. At the same time, even in recognition of your statement above, I feel that you think that if there was just Someone who was wise enough and came up with just the right formula to "equitably" redistribute resources, that that would be just fine and desirable.<br /><br />Well a rose by any other name is still a rose. <br /><br />However about this, you are correct. A healthy debate, without lies and fearmongering, is an essential ingredient to keep the wheels of this great society moving in a positive direction.

 

[Link]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Oh yes...<br />Stalin, Hitler, SaDamn, they were just great men oh lets not forget Karl Marx.. North kORIEA..WITH THIER Prison Camps! Your a Great Person rolmops <br />I would invite you and the rest of Hollywierd to leave the United States of America but ofcourse you like Bill & hillary wont..<br /><br />Link

 

[mellowyellow]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

one step towards accomplishing this goal would<br />be to revise the tax code so that all people,<br />rich and poor, paid their fair share. offshore<br />corporations, non-profit foundations, and many<br />other loopholes allow the most wealthy to pay<br />a much lower tax rate than the avg. working stiff.<br />close the holes! maybe a "flat tax"? the tax<br />burden on the working middle class is much too<br />high these days IMHO. this makes it difficult<br />to make ends meet for a lot of families.<br />if the top 10% of earners paid the same rate as<br />most of us, the burden would be GREATLY reduced.<br />after all, it's not what you make, it's what you<br />keep that counts.<br />MY .02

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Oh man MY you drank the kool Aide!<br /><br />A quick Google search produced the following:<br /><br />Only The Rich Pay Taxes <br /> <br />Top 50% of Wage Earners Pay 96.03% of Income Taxes <br /> <br />October 10, 2003 <br /><br />There is new data for 2001. The share of total income taxes paid by the top 1% fell to 33.89% from 37.42% in 2000. This is mainly because their income share (not just wages) fell from 20.81% to 17.53%. However, their average tax rate actually rose slightly from 27.45% to 27.50%. <br /><br />

<br /><br />http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/menu/top_50__of_wage_earners_pay_96_09__of _income_taxes.guest.html

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/business/Tax2002/taxes_rich_020415.html <br /><br />Rich Paying More Taxes<br />Tax Burden Increasingly Falls on Wealthier Americans<br />The Associated Press<br /><br />W A S H I N G T O N, April 15 — Another way the rich are different: They pay the lion's share of the nation's income tax bill. <br /><br />The wealthiest 5 percent pay more than half the taxes, while people in the bottom half pay just 4 percent....<br /><br />The wealthiest 1 percent those earning $293,415 and up paid over a third of the taxes, while their share of the nation's taxable income was 19 percent. They pay income taxes at the top rate, now 38.6 percent, compared with a maximum rate of 15 percent for the majority of lower-earning taxpayers.<br /><br />Taxpayers in the bottom half paid only 4 percent of the income taxes in 1999, according to the IRS. These 63 million taxpayers earned, on average, less than $26,415 a year.<br /><br />Going back to 1989, the top 5 percent income group paid about 44 percent of income taxes, the bottom almost 6 percent. At that time, the top tax rate paid by high earners was 31 percent....

 

[POINTER94]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Ralph,<br /><br />One more example of redistribution of wealth and you are off the reservation.<br /><br />Our tax system is far from equitable, if it was, it would be a flat percentage. That would at least statistically provide for a level contribution. Creeping incrementalism, and liberalism has created a society of doer's and taker's. In my opinion the founding fathers are rolling over in their graves seeing what their original design has been proosituuded into.

 

[Ralph 123]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

What? <br /><br />I'm responding to MY's comment that the little guy is paying all the taxes...<br /><br />

many<br />other loopholes allow the most wealthy to pay<br />a much lower tax rate than the avg. working stiff.<br />

 

[Boomyal]

Re: Left, Right,Conservative,liberal.

Ralph, this is one mantra that the left will not let go of. If there was ever a good example of Joseph Goeble's theory of "the big lie told often enough", this is it. <br /><br />They continue to repeat it because they know that all of those people who disdain Alternate sources of information and who do not listen with "both ears" will just suck it up and become solid constituants.<br /><br />Additionally, I continue to emphasize that this all goes way beyond the mere quest for a fair and equitable place for government in our lives. There is a reason that one side has to continually lie and deceive to attract voters.<br /><br />I agree with Pointer on the flat tax. I never did agree with with the progressive income tax. Not only would a flat tax be fairer it would make it much more difficult for Washington (yes, both sides PW & MY) to use taxes for social engineering.