The Liberal Advantage

I know what you are saying is utter nonsense - but thanks for the reminder.

Roads, Infrastructure, Police and a wide array of other things - are paid for from the collective pot. These things existed prior to the to the Business you are speaking of existing - so your claim is false - and utter nonsense.

Wealth redistribution is socialist policy. Sorry to burst the fairly tale bubble you are living in.

 

Nonsense. Roads are not socialialism. They aren't even a means of production.

 

The mis-understanding is intentional.

 

Of course it is.

 

G - quit pretending you are not out of your depth as soon as the word Socialism is mentioned.

For example - The Interstate Project - as per Wiki -
"The Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, commonly known as the Interstate Highway System, is a network of controlled-access highways that forms part of the National Highway System in the United States. Construction of the system was authorized by the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956. The system extends throughout the contiguous United States and has routes in Hawaii, Alaska, and Puerto Rico.

The U.S. federal government first funded roadways through the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916, and began an effort to construct a national road grid with the passage of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1921"

It was Gov't money that paid for that - money collected from taxes - which the main form of wealth redistribution in most nations - Socialist or otherwise.

Notice I used the term "Socialist Policy" - to make it less confusing for those who are picking an idealized definition - and seem to not understand that the definition of Socialism is more complex - and that there are many definitions - sub classes and so on.

Is Universal Healthcare not "Socialist Policy" ? - according to your definition - it is not "Socialism" - because your definition of Socialism consists only of a system where the State controls/owns all resources and means of Production.

What you fail to understand - is that using this definition is pointless when referring to US Politics - as this does not exist here - and neither red or blue is pushing for this. So by your definition - there is no socialism in the US.

For the rest of us - the one's that understand that wealth redistribution is a form of "Partial Ownership" - anything paid for by monies collected through wealth redistribution (taxes and so on) is Socialist policy- because that is how Socialism functions these days - through various amounts of Partial Ownership.

This is the definition by which every "Socialist Nation" defines Socialist policy.

You are using a black vs white paradigm that does not exist in the real world .. in any significant sense. A world where wealth redistribution is not socialist policy - because the Gov't already owns Everything.

If we want to mathematically dig into how ludicrous you trying to apply this idealized definition to the real world is.

Suppose The Gov't Raised taxes to 100% - effectively taking ownership of all revenue from the means of production.
Socialism - full on - 100% ownership of the means of production - this fits your definition of Socialism.

Gov't Raising taxes to 99% - Doesn't

Wealth redistribution is Socialist policy - by any normal/applicable definition of the word - it is taking money from the collective - and doing something with it.

Even if we say "NO NO - That's not Socialism" - taking my money against my will is something that makes me unhappy - what would you like to term this if not Socialist Policy - Theft ? fine no problem .. I can work with that.

The money that was used to build those roads - collected through theft - did not all come from Businesses - never mind businesses that existed after the roads were built. "Someone else paid for that" - "Someone Else built that" - and you are benefiting from this - as is McDonalds. McDonalds benefiting orders of magnitude more than you as an individual.

So 1) Your claim - Business people trying to make money paid for almost all - is False. The tax split between corporations/business and personal taxes was roughly 50/50 back in the 50's 60's - Now it is something like 80/20 - the worker paying the 80%.

It is the worker that pays almost all.

2) your claim that wealth redistribution is not Socialist Policy - unless it is 100% - is not applicable to the real world - and Universal Healthcare is not Socialism according to you - nor are there any Socialists of any significance on the Blue side - and Bernie Sanders is a raging "Something other than Socialist - because according to your definition - he is not a Socialist"

 

Interestingly, conservative college entrants have higher GPA’s and SAT scores than liberals. By the fourth year of college liberal grades are better in social sciences, equal in professional career path areas, and lower in hard sciences compared to conservatives.

Conservatives consistently report higher satisfaction with their college experience.

 

I will be reading through that. Sounds interesting.

 

You have probably been listening to too much right wing rhetoric and not enough time paying attention to the world as it is.

The right wing, and by right wing I mean those who think that the wealthy should rule. Anyhow, the right wing has spent the past 70 years in a concerted effort to demonize liberals and liberal thought. So much so that many moderates, who otherwise would have identified with liberals and liberal ideas, call themselves progressives. Even within the Democratic Party, liberals are in the minority. The Democratic Party is mostly controlled by moderates who call themselves progressives.

As hard as the right wing has tried, liberalism stubbornly marches on. The reason you can't kill liberalism is because it is not so much an ideology as it is biological. I did not become a liberal, I was born liberal. I have always been a liberal and always will be. It is who I am. They have done studies, using brain scans. Different parts of liberal brains light up compared to others.

Conservatives like to characterize liberals as those who sit in their parents' basement playing video games, collecting government benefits. Of course, while big strong conservatives are out there breaking their backs to make the money to pay the taxes to support said liberals.

When I was growing up, ever since I was a little kid, my bedroom was in the basement. Being in the basement, where no one else wanted to go, except my mom (because the washer and dryer were down there), I was able to construct a larger than average bedroom. On one side was my bed and dresser, on the other side was a workbench full of various electrical and scientific experiments in various states of investigation. Even had a killer stereo system made out of components salvaged from parts set aside from my dad's square dance caller PA system.

I had learned to control lights, be they incandescent or LED, along with electrical audio signals. By time I was in high school I had lights all over my room that would react to, and dance to the sounds in the room. I even had a skull from a coyote that begin to glow as one entered the room. Perhaps it was the perfect teenage nerd room, but when I brought down girls, especially when certain mind altering substances were involved, with all the high tech gadgetry and dancing lights, magic would happen.

My son, also a liberal, played video games when he was a kid. Inspired him to design video games for a living. Whenever I hangout with my son and his friends, they don't mention video games much. They seem to be more into board games, which have greatly evolved in recent years.


Sometime in the seventies a group of visionaries got together. It was clear to the group that the US had just about run its course, as an economic leader in the world. From their perspective the best way forward was to embrace the emerging digital revolution. Thus they sought governmental support. The most influential of the politicians they enlisted were Al Gore, Gary Hart, and Tim Worth, the guy most responsible for breaking up AT&T. Most of the efforts were ignored but places like Colorado and California eagerly jumped on board, even offering incentives to companies, and modified the curriculum in their colleges to support the high tech industry. Oregon and Washington have since signed on. The net effect was to inspire many liberal minded individuals to move to Colorado and the West Coast to get in on the action. That, more than anything else explains the liberal dominance in the West. And would you not know it, over the past few decades, nearly all the new wealth coming into America, almost all the increased economic activity has come from the high tech industry. Most of the wealth going into liberal pockets.

Conservatives like to pretend that liberalism naturally leads to a failed state like Venezuela. Yet when one looks to the most liberal city in America, Boulder Colorado, one sees nothing in common with Venezuela. Rather one sees a well run city and county that outperforms the rest of the country.

 

Speaking of listening to too much left-wing rhetoric and not enough time paying attention to the world as it is...

Virtually no one believes this, especially those you so broadly paint as "right wing".

And thus, we see your problem:
You use terms you do not understand, at least not in the context of how they exist in the real world.

 

By your ridiculous definition government is by definition socialist, Hitler is a socialist Thomas Jefferson is a socialist. Building roads and highway isn't socialist. It's what governments have done since ancient Rome. Good grief.

 

What is this Gibberish ? - you start out with Ad Hom fallacy - some comment about r/w talk radio being related to my claim.

You build a huge strawman - trying to cast me as some right wing zealot - despite clicking "Like" on many of my posts slamming Red - and then proceed to attack the big fantasy strawman you created - without once addressing my point.

What part of Blue Establishment hates many of the principles of Classical Liberalism - is not sinking in ?

"Conservatives like to pretend that liberalism naturally leads to a failed state like Venezuela."

Which is something I constantly rail against. Oddly enough - I just did a post an hour or so ago on this exact topic - correcting a misinformed right wing poster trying to claim roads are not socialism. So why are you telling me this .

What part of the phrase - "Blue Establishment hates many of the principles of Classical Liberalism" - makes your brain go into la la land ?

 

I have not given a definition my - which makes your comment even more ridiculous.

You are projecting again - accusing others of your issues.

I merely pointed out how you were wrong - using your own definition - and you can't deal with this reality .. and so you have gone spinning into an ad hom tizzy - desperately trying to avoid defending your claim - which was nonsensical and false.

Pathetic and Hopeless.

 

What is pathetic and silly is your inability to differentiate between the normal functions of government and socialsim. Then again I understand your confusion as no two socialists seem to agree as to what socialism is today.

 

I scored a composite of 30 on the ACT test back when the highest score was 32. I aced the science section and did worse on the English part. That was after a night of heavy partying. The Marines had offered me a scholarship after I had mostly aced the Armed Services test.

It was a fun test. They had all the seniors in the cafeteria taking four tests over two days. Before every test they told us that when we were done, to bring our test up to the front, place it on the table and then go outside so as not to disturb the others. When I finished the first test, I looked up and noticed that no one else had finished and there was plenty of time left. So I double checked all my answers and just as I finished, another kid was placing his test on the table. I placed mine second. For the next three tests I placed my finished test first.

One of the tests was a matching game. Like where they would show a picture of a nail followed by four pictures, a hammer, a screw driver, a wrench, and a paint brush. The test taker would then have to decide which tool to use for the nail. If I remember right, we had and hour and a half to take the test. I found it so easy that I was done and out the door in less than 30 minutes. Afterwards there was a group of kids who tried to harrass me about it. They even accused me of just marking dots without really taking the test.

Chief among them was a large conservative type. I'm not sure why, but he really disliked me, even though his younger sisters liked me quite a bit. He walked with a limp after a mishap during football practice earlier that year. A result of tenth graders taking revenge on a bully. When we got the results, the first thing I did was show the big guy my scores. He just walked away.

In the conversation with the Marine recruiter he told me that he traveled the country looking for people like me, and my unique qualifications. He seemed most impressed that I had scored higher on the Armed Services test than anyone else in my school. Which makes me feel even more happy than just the fact that I had finished those tests in significantly less time than my classmates, I did so while picking the better answers.

It wasn't just the tests and my academic record that impressed him, but that in four years of high school I had lettered in five sports, tennis, football, basketball, swimming, and track. He seemed most impressed by the combination of intelligence and athletic ability.

It was a lucrative deal, but I went with a scholarship I got from the state of Colorado because it allowed me much more freedom. It got me a degree in physics, tuition free. I might of worked a little bit at it, as I did get all A's. I had a lot of fun. I think that my college experience was a life enhancing experience, opened my curious eyes to a lot of new things. Gave me a lot of confidence.

 

I did differentiate - and by your definition of Socialism - Sanders is not a Socialist - nor is Universal Healthcare.

So once again you are projecting - as it is by your definition of Socialism - that Bernie Sanders and Universal Healthcare are not Socialist program - so it is you who's perspective is pathetic, silly - and contradictory to your own positions.

Do you think Universal Healthcare is a Socialist Program or not ?

 

Meanwhile, liberal States and cities are going bankrupt, falling into disrepair, ridden with violent crime and poverty, etc.

Apparently, being musical and tech savvy doesn't make you politically competent.

 

Where in hell did you get that idea?

 

We botched the Roundup Ready technology but I believe learned our lesson. We should have not used that single chemistry so much and let weeds develop resistance. Traits with single modes of action and no refuge acreages of non GMO lead to resistance in the insecticide traits as well. In the past, it was the law refuge had to be planted but it was difficult and time consuming so compliance was not 100%. Now refuge and GMO seed comes mixed in the bag or box and compliance is much higher. Also, seed companies are mixing multiple technologies in a single plant so development of resistance is far less likely.

At this point we have enough evidence in my opinion GMOs pose far less threat than chemicals they replace. I think every new trait should be judged on its merits, not rejected out of hand. Of course there remains the ethical basis of opposition I’ve heard from some religious folks that we shouldn’t mess with genetics at all. Have you heard that one in the UK?

 

Me too, but I scored 31, and it was the USAF. Strategic operations and planning.
The Corps doesn't have as high a standard, I guess.

 

Not so much in terms of religion but definitely a lot of talk about ''unnatural''. This ignores the fact we have been genetically modifying plants and livestock for as long as we have been farming. A lot of objection from actual farmers rather than pink haired protesters is over the deliberate production of sterile crops and copyrights which don't allow farms to use the seeds which are viable. The monopolisation of seeds by companies like Monsanto is very unpopular.

 

Yeh, everything we do is natural if humans are a product of nature. We have had our share of farmers who didn’t want to pay for traits. They just saved seed and got sued if caught. For the most part farmers here are on board because traits make us more profitable, decrease workloads, and prevent us having to be exposed to dangerous pesticides. My sister-in-law almost died as a child from a corn root worm insecticide exposure.

 

I had to look up ''refuge areas''.
We have something similar to encourage insects around the borders of crop fields. The EU replaced subsidies on crops with a system of incentives for encouraging wildlife diversity called the countryside stewardship scheme. If you keep all your hedgerows and leave a 4 metre wide border between the hedge and crop the EU will pay you by the metre. It's voluntary rather than mandatory but even here on this small (100 acre) farm it is worth a few thousand pounds a year.
You can just about make it out in this satellite image of the farm.

The field layout here has been the subject of a few studies as the layout has remained unchanged since Anglo-Saxon times (over a thousand years). All the small fields with their ancient hedgerows are part of the farm and under 10 acres in size.
I live off-grid in a truck in the meadow opposite the field labeled Hulver farm.
The arable land is mostly wheat with barley, oats and field beans used in rotation.
The top right smaller rectangle of meadow is the field which we are having trouble with wireworm in since it was ploughed up for wheat last year.

 

What idea ? - did you forget your own proclamations again - or do you just not understand what follows from your definition of Socialism ?

 

Interesting article. You laid out a case for what you call liberalism. I do have a couple questions though.

1. Christianity seems to be a taboo to liberalism. Is God also a roadblock to liberalism?

2. The Constitution was pretty much drawn up on the moral teachings of Christians and Jewish scholars. Should the Constitution be eliminated?

3. You seem to make the case that the conservative lifestyle is inferior to the liberal lifestyle. Did it occur to you that many of us conservatives love our lifestyle and have no interest in hanging out with snobbish elitist's.?

4. Has it ever occurred to you that the reason conservatives oppose liberalism, is not so much in what you believe, but your tactics to use courts and government to impose your believes on everyone? There are many who consider lesbianism, homosexuality, transgenderism to be immoral and do not want those values imposed on them by the government.

5. There is overwhelming condemnation among conservatives over laws passed against free speech and the politically correct (a real misnomer) crowd. Do you people really think that such laws will control peoples thoughts and make them think higher of you?

6. Innovators seem to be your hero's. Do you believe they a lock on innovation? I know a couple of conservative types who would not fit the bill of liberal. One was my Dad, a pioneer in contact lenses and my grandfather who had patents on lathes and milling machines. One of my heroines was Hedy Lamar, a actress, who came to America around the same time my grandparents came and invented what is now the technology for Sonobouy's, WiFi, and Bluetooth. Also a conservative. Her and her husband also were some of the first developers of Aspen, Colorado.

7. If you believe liberalism is the Utopia for the masses then why is there such a economic divide in the rich and elite liberals and the poor liberals who are reaching their hands out for your help? Could it be that they don't dress or smell good enough?

8. Is liberalism for everybody or do you have to have special educational requirements and social graces?

 

Dang. If not for you bringing up the average modern liberals would really be outperformed on the ACT. I hope they are appreciative.

And here we are, so many years after your noble efforts to help “liberals” achieve parity with “conservative” college entrants on standardized tests, and almost every assertion in your posts is demonstrably false.

College was certainly a grand time, on that we agree. And I’m truly happy for your satisfaction with your life. You’ve done what made you happy and my support of that is what liberalism is all about.