Progressivism: Enemy of America. Enemy of Humanity.

The left is incapable of seeing the entire picture. Their rush to make a point or actual decision has proven throughout history to be their worst enemy and cause of failure!

 

I guarantee you use cheap labor in the production of your services. You just haven't looked downstream enough to realize it.
Your clients use cheap labor to have enough money to pay higher labor rates in your field of work. We all leverage cheaper labor at one point or another - unless you are growing your own food, mining your own raw materials and cleaning your own toilets.

 

The problem with your post is not that your premise is wrong (Leftist ideology is definitely a step backwards). The problem is that you do not state what this ideology is. "Leftist ideology is a broad term" not all of which is the enemy of personal freedom.

You also failed to explain that the Right hates personal freedom even more than the Leftists.

Hint - Utilitarianism as justification for Law.

Red Establishment hates the Rule of law.

If you have to pay rent (property tax) to keep a property you don't really own that property. Red is no different than Blue in this respect except that Red Establishment is worse because their policy makes the rent higher.

All hated by Red Establishment

Red Establishment loves the Police State - on this basis some of the above comments are laughable.

Red Establishment hates the founding principles

 

No they did not. Conservative has always been conservative and liberal has always been liberal. What has changed is the makeup of the political parties.

Our nation began with the Jeffersonians which quickly became the Democratic-Republicans and was the liberal party. The opposition was the Federalists which was the conservative party. As Jefferson put it, one party favored the wealthy and powerful, ie, the Federalists. And the other favored the people, ie he and his party. The Democratic Republicans proved so successful that the Federalists party faded into history. By the time of Andrew Jackson, the Democratic Republicans had shortened their name to just the Democratic Party, and, due to its unchecked power had become the conservative party, the party that favored the wealthy and powerful. Thus arose the Whig Party as a liberal counterweight to the Democratic Party. Eventually the Whigs joined up to form a union with the suffragettes, abolitionists, and prohibitionists to form the Republican Party, which was rather liberal.

By the early 1900's the Republican Party began to be taken over by wealthy industrialists and becoming the conservative party. It was Taft's hard turn to the right, that caused Roosevelt to leave the party. Wilson won by running to the left of Roosevelt bring the Democratic Party, in parts, with him.

FDR brought us out of the Depression by using liberal ideas, that is ideas that primarily went to help everyday people. If he was a conservative, he would have just helped the wealthy, such as the instincts in Republican politics of today.

 

You seem entirely upset that folks might not subscribe to your meritless assertion. Sorry. It doesn't fly.

 

Sorry, but that is factually not correct.

 

No one ever got rich keeping their head to the grindstone, as the saying goes. One gets rich by profiting off of the labor of others. It is one of those things that the Heritage Foundation has tried to hide from the flock. Constant in right wing rhetoric is the idea that as the wealthy gain wealth, workers gain proportionally. The whole rising boats theory that has never happened.

 

Then you are confused, plain and simple.

 

Gasp.... are you actually admitting that folks who don't actually work, like those in government are getting rich off the labor of others??? Oh the ground must be cracking open under your feet for that blasphemy to the democratic party...

 

That's totally inaccurate! Not everyone "Wealthy" starts out rich.. In fact I know many that have "WORKED" their way up from the grindstone from hourly to owners and then wealthy.. I see at least eight Hispanic owners of businesses here that once worked for someone but eventually started their own versions of what they were doing and now employ half a dozen workers and are quite well off..

The single line in your post is the very reason many Americans NEVER get ahead and why immigrants excel in the same environment with LESS opportunity! Clearly some Americans don't subscribe to any amount of hard work or "Nose to the grindstone" and would rather complain and follow the misconception that hard work doesn't get you anywhere

 

It was one of the most defeatist posts I have seen from leftist, not surprised mind you! But always amused by them, and reaffirms my opinion of them and why their hatred for the wealthy

 

Ever take a class in economics? Business? Read a book on the subject

Say I get people to pay me $1000 to paint their house. But I can also find plenty of people willing to paint houses for only $800. Say I can get 10 men to paint a house a week at $800 each that makes $8000 but I would be getting $1000 each house x10 would make it $10,000, leaving $2000 for myself. Thus by paying 10 people $800 each to do the work, I could make $2000 without doing any work. Double the workers and add a salesman to the mix and I could be making $3200 while my employees would be doing all the work for only $800 a piece.

It is simplified but that is the basic formula for getting rich. Scale it up to large enough of a company and one can become fabulously wealthy.

 

Oh yes, the Protestant work ethic. giggle giggle. Work hard and get ahead. giggle, giggle.

See previous post.

 

So, what you're really trying to prove is that you really don't have any idea how business works, or why your notions are infantile. Got it. I doubt that you'll be getting rich any time soon.

 

See previous post(S)

 

Make no mistake .. they are driven by ideology, not progress.

If at some point in the near future, the world changed in such a way that the only humane response was ultra-conservatism, would a Progressive embrace that, or resist it? You know full well that they would resist it. Resisting change is not progress, it's regress.

The genuine progressive is okay with any change which benefits the human condition. The form or politics of that change is utterly irrelevant.

 

1) you mean they would say the words "I accept"? sure, they'd do that. but they wouldn't last 24hrs once it was real. again, they're the very last people who'll give up their cushy lifestyles.

2) LOL

 

I'll assume you're aware that a work ethic is about far more than just 'working'. 50% of that ethic (some say 80%) is how we behave outside of work. IOW, how we spend.

And darned straight it will get you ahead. Hard work alone never will, though.

 

I can see why y'all are conservative. Ever notice that all the new wealth comes from the high tech sector? That the high tech sector is dominated by liberals?

As an adult I was never hired to work. The only time I punched a time card was the summer between 11th and 12th grade when I worked at a McDonalds. Mostly I have been paid to think, to come up with new ideas. Most executive types aren't all that bright, beyond their managerial skills. They need people like me to add ideas and creativity to the mix. I have done some of my best work taking long walks in nature.

Early on I came to the realization that one's income is inversly proportionally to the amount of actual work one does. Manual laborers do a lot of hard work that breaks their bodies down over time, and they are sone of the least paid people. Whereas executive types do almost no work at all. Look at Donald Trump, the president of low expectations. Look at his hands. I'll bet that doughboy hasn't done a joule of actual work in his while life.

My brother is one of those who embraced the Protestant work ethic. He worked 60 hour work weeks with hazardous materials, from nuclear to petroleum. He made a lot of money but I made more sitting in my nice cushy chair doing almost no physical at all. Unless one considers handling a pencil or typing on a keyboard physical work.

Early on I used to solder up prototype boards, but then I discovered I could just get one of the factory workers to do it for me. So I could spend more time doing more important things, like flipping through trade magazines to keep abreast of the latest developments.

 

I guess that explains why the most profitable parts of the country are in bright blue liberal oases. Why blue Congressional districts have twice the economic output of red districts. Why nine out ten of the top performing states as to economics are Democratically held and nine out of ten of the worse performing states are run by Republicans.

Of course you can continue to pretend it is otherwise, which I'm sure you will.

 

"The only humane response was ultra conservatism" has got to be one of the silliest thing I have ever heard. I don't think that I could ever drop so low as to think there was anything humane or even desirable about conservatism, let alone ultra conservatism.

You must know that the history of Western culture at least since the 1700's or so has followed a clear pattern. Liberals come up with new ideas and products which most of society initially rejects. Yet once the liberal ideas and products become viable progressives will join in and accept the new ideas and products. The conservatives will continue to resist until the new ideas and products become unavoidable and necessary and then reluctantly accept them. The Evangelicals tend to come to grips with the advancing ideas and products only after they find themselves left behind.

Take for instance computers. Just about every person involved in the development of computers, from Babbage on have been quite liberal leaning. As late as the 80's, conservatives were rejecting computers, claiming they were the work of the devil. Then, at some point they felt themselves left behind and slowly came to accept computers.


When have conservatives ever proposed a change for the future? Conservatism primarily concerns itself with the desire to return to the past that never was. You can't get much more regressive than that.

 

Accepting communism would end their cushy lifestyle pretty quickly.

 

Then you are devoid of historical context and syntax.

 

You couldn't have made your thoughts any clearer, just own um! Working hard leads to nothin, it's a typical leftist ideology and no one on either side of the isle is shocked by it ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯

 

A lot of that is a regional thing.. Weather, cost of living, opportunity, location and hundreds of other factors dictate much of that. Then again that is just a small part of a bigger picture and I wouldn't expect you to understand that Oliver ¯\_(º¸º)_/¯