Simple view of liberal vs conservative

[stevepaa]

Yeah, I really think success traits are genetic, not learned. I think of a friend who was the leader from elementary school, high school quarterback, enlisted, made flight school and was up for admiral. As soon as you met him you knew. Same for a boss I had a few years ago who is now VP of Lockheed where I work. As soon as you spent a few hours with him, you knew he was going places. Now perhaps the years of success reinforce these traits but I think the traits are innate to start with.

[fintstone]

Originally posted by CamB
...
A lot of people are inferior at making their own and/or other people's lives pleasant. I mean there's a whole philisophical discussion underlying this about what "happy" is anyway. I'm not saying people should deliberately avoid saving for retirement and sponge off the govt, but through a lack of education about the long term consequences of ones actions, there are an awful lot of people who end up in "unworkable" situations wrt retirement.
...

It has nothing to do with "lack of education" about the consequences...
It has everything to do with the expectation of being bailed out by a government that will give them someone else's money if they squander their own....just to buy their vote for a lifetime.

[fintstone]

Originally posted by CamB
..Depending on where he lives, what his family looks like, and whether he can afford medical and other insurance, saving 10% is quite possibly an unattainable dream.

Mostly all of these are under his control. 10% is easy. 20% to 30% are realistic.

[Howard Agency]

Originally posted by fintstone
Mostly all of these are under his control. 10% is easy. 20% to 30% are realistic.

Agreed. 10% is just a matter of not spending the extra 50 cents for cheese on your burger. Is that 50 cents the difference between conservatives and liberals? And it tends to follow. Sometimes ya buy a 914 rather than a 911

I don't believe it's genetic or environmental. My daughter (who drives a Mercedes) laughed when I bought a Hyundai SUV.
"Dad, you could afford the Cayenne. Why did you buy this POS?"
"Sweety, the Hyundai came with a better CD; about $40,000 worth."

Sounds better than Bose to me

[Superman]

Originally posted by stevepaa
I think this is the crux of the issue. Some view this as failure. I don't. Society needs all its members doing what they do, but to regard those of lesser ability and achievement as failures is apparently a strong trait among some achievers. And from my viewpoint separates those who say "There by the grace of God go I" from those that don't.

I'll keep reading and I expect to find some good discussion but had to stop here just to say that Steve is terrifically lucid here. It's not an insult when I say many will not understand Steve's point. They will not see from this perspective. But Steve is right. I remember walking past a house recently that was no more than a shoebox. Perhaps 700 SF. In the living room was perhaps a 60" flat screen TV. Stunning picture.

Now, some folks would scoff and cast aspersions about this person's lifestyle. I couldn't help thinking that a shoebox house and superb TV probably makes a lot of sense for some folks.

Life is not a contest.

And another thing that's hard to grok: There is the joke about the aliens that come down to talk to us, and want to hear our views about Free Will. They'd heard of this, and wonder what the heck we might mean by that term. They say they understand genes and heredity. And they understand how experience combines with heredity to lead to a particular behavior or decision. No problem there. But then what, aside from heredity and environment, could impact or program and human's behavior. Or any other creature for that matter.

[Nathans_Dad]

Sorry I missed all the fun after my post...lots of good discussion going on...

Cam: I didn't say people were genetically inferior, that would be Steve. Look to him to support his argument, not me.

Steve: You asked for the prototypical conservative response...I'm not sure I can give that because I don't think I'm the prototypical conservative. But, I will give you MY response:

I don't think that people who don't succeed in America are genetically inferior to those that do. That is just another in the long line of excuses that make up the "victim generation". I can't get ahead because I'm poor, I can't get ahead because I'm black, I can't get ahead because I'm gay, I can't get ahead because the gubmint won't give me my welfare, I can't get ahead because my daddy left me when I was young, I can't get ahead because I'm short, or tall, or fat, or thin, or whatever. It's all a bunch of crap.

Are certain people born with advantages? Absolutely. No doubt. Is it harder for people who come from tough situations to make it? Yes. Without a doubt. Is that an EXCUSE for never doing anything with your life? HELL NO.

Case in point. I met a congressman from Illinois (I believe) about 3 years ago in D.C. He was speaking at the church my father attends. After his speech, I was able to talk with him (he is a black Democrat, by the way). The man was born in rural Alabama to a share-cropper. He had to WALK 5 miles to school every day (each way) and sit in an unairconditioned schoolhouse in the Alabama heat. His family did not have a dime to their name. Guess where he is now? He is a college graduate, a law school graduate and a US Congressman. So please get off the idea that some people are born to fail and it's up to the rest of us to support these poor, downtrodden, GENETICALLY INFERIOR (your words, not mine)members of our society.

In a country where someone can come up with a PET ROCK and make millions, I think there is plenty of opportunity for hard working people, even if they don't meet your definition of the "successful" person. Ever watch the show American Chopper? How about Monster Garage? I don't think Paul Sr. would fare very well in a classroom or in some upper management position. But the guy is a multi-millionaire from making custom motorcycles with his hands.

I think that social security is a good thing. I think that short-term programs to help those that have lost their jobs is a good thing. I think that programs to try and give the less fortunate a help up is a good thing. I think institutionizing poverty in the form of welfare and making a large percentage of our population dependent on the gubmint for their daily bread is a BAD THING. I believe in a hand UP, not a hand OUT.

BTW, it's very refreshing to see a debate thread that hasn't yet mentioned the I**q word...

[stevepaa]

Rick,
I need to carify. I believe we are the sum of probabilities. We have physical, mental, personality, etc. traits that span the spectrum. On each trait we fall somewhere on the curve and in summation we do the best we can with what we have to start with. Some have attributes that make success rather easy. Corporations look for those traits in young hires and then funnel them into special management programs that quickly reward them financially. Some have traits that don’t work in corporate America but they blossom in their own environment. Your example of Paul is good. But as you also note some have disadvantages which require extra work to overcome.

“Are certain people born with advantages? Absolutely. No doubt. Is it harder for people who come from tough situations to make it? Yes. Without a doubt. Is that an EXCUSE for never doing anything with your life? HELL NO.”

I don’t think it is an excuse either. Everyone should do the best they can. I am saying that we should not be surprised that some cannot make it and I would attribute that to a innate trait, genetics. I know some are born with a number of innate traits on the far side of the curve that will preclude them from being successful, whether financially, emotionally, or in relationships. Some of these traits from both sides of the curves can be seen in direct parents and some seemingly come out of nowhere.

“I don't think that people who don't succeed in America are genetically inferior to those that do. That is just another in the long line of excuses that make up the "victim generation". I can't get ahead because I'm poor, I can't get ahead because I'm black, I can't get ahead because I'm gay, I can't get ahead because the gubmint won't give me my welfare, I can't get ahead because my daddy left me when I was young, I can't get ahead because I'm short, or tall, or fat, or thin, or whatever. It's all a bunch of crap.”

No one should use their current state to define their future. I agree that leads to the “poor me” attitude. But we should not simply look upon those in need as if they could have changed their state by hard work. And it is the view with which you look at that person that I think is important. Again “There but by the grace of God, go I” versus “Well, he didn’t plan very well, did he?” Sometimes, no amount of hand up will work.

[Moses]

OK, Steve. I don't disagree with anything you've said but I have a question about the old fart at Kragens. Where's the tragedy? In this country he won't starve or go without health care. Are you arguing for a nicer safety net?

And about your "genetic predisposition" that precludes some to a lack of social and financial success; If they are pre-programmed to be homeless, unemployed and unhappy, why does society struggle to fix peoples lives that can't be fixed?

[Nathans_Dad]

Well Steve, this is where you and I will just have to agree to disagree. I patently reject the notion that some people are just destined to fail in life no matter how hard they work because they were "dealt a bad hand". Beethoven went DEAF in his childhood and still managed to compose some of the most beautiful music in our civilization. I have seen too many people pull themselves up by their bootstraps and make it in life to agree with the notion that some folks are just "losers" and we should put them on the gubmint dole. I completely am in favor of charity and I think that the government should have a support system for those who fall on hard times. But I think that support system should be geared towards bringing that person back into the workforce and returning them to productive society. Welfare, on the other hand, pays the individual for sitting on their can, pays them for having multiple children which they cannot support and penalizes them for going out and working (ever hear the stories of how people can't work at McDonalds while on welfare because they then "make too much" even though it is still less than their welfare check?).

Liberals need to realize that welfare is perpetuating poverty and reliance on the government for daily essentials in this country. It is NOT the government's job to provide a lifetime of welfare checks to those who choose to not work, even if you think they are genetically inferior to you.

[Rodeo]

With all due respect to some really thoughtful posters on this subject, I think everyone is talking around the issue.

What separates us (the lib vs. conservative spectrum) is not so much how we feel about the guy or gal that made nothing of their life. I'm on the left side but I would never think to say, "oh, that poor fellow he came from a poor family and got involved with drugs and then went to jail for stealing, I need to help him."

I know that is the parody a lot of conservatives play in their heads when thinking about "us." But its just not true ... I think that guy is a jerk that had opportunities but blew them, because he was lazy, dishonest, or whatever. I don't pity him.

But here's what separates us ... What do we do about him? What do we do about his kids? How do we build a society where there are fewer people like him?

Pretend you live in a small town of 100 people, including a crack-addicted woman with 4 kids aged 3-10. There are no other resources available to her or her kids except the town and its people. You control the town. What do you do about her? What do you do about her kids?

[Nathans_Dad]

Originally posted by Moses
And about your "genetic predisposition" that precludes some to a lack of social and financial success; If they are pre-programmed to be homeless, unemployed and unhappy, why does society struggle to fix peoples lives that can't be fixed?

I almost asked this same question Moses, but I am sure Steve doesn't want to take that road to its end so I didn't. BUT....since YOU brought it up

This kind of thinking leads to the conclusion that perhaps if those people are just destined to fail and will never provide any contribution to society......maybe we should just get rid of them. Restrict their rights to procreate and produce more genetically inferior kids who will never amount to anything either. Hrm...or maybe send those genetically inferior people to the gas chambers so that they will no longer weigh down the rest of us...where have I heard that before?? Can't quite place it...

[Superman]

Moses, the Kragens fart cannot afford his own retirement. Certainly not the medical part. Or at least, if he's one of those folks who don't get a (medical insurance) seat when the music stops playing then he might need some help. As long as he gets what he needs, we libs are happy. Don't know where the elite assumption comes from. Well, yes I do I guess.

If life is a carousel, then some folks have an outside horse and some have an inside horse. You cannot reach the brass ring from an inside horse.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Rodeo
How do we build a society where there are fewer people like him?

Simple. Personal accountability and responsibility.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Superman
Moses, the Kragens fart cannot afford his own retirement. Certainly not the medical part. Or at least, if he's one of those folks who don't get a (medical insurance) seat when the music stops playing then he might need some help. As long as he gets what he needs, we libs are happy. Don't know where the elite assumption comes from. Well, yes I do I guess.

If life is a carousel, then some folks have an outside horse and some have an inside horse. You cannot reach the brass ring from an inside horse.

The Kragen guy will get Medicare like everyone else. If he cannot work till he qualifies, he'll get Medicaid. He'll also get a check from Social Security. No brass ring for the guy at Kragen, but like I said, if he had chosen to swing a framing hammer instead of work at Kragen, he'd be picking out a 60" plasma for his 700 sq.ft. domicile.

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Moses
Simple. Personal accountability and responsibility.

Put that in terms of a governmental response.

Do nothing? Let them all fend for themselves?

Do nothing for her but help her kids? (how?)

Help her and the kids by sending her to rehab on your dollar, then trying to train her to work and care for them when she gets out?

This is where the rubber meets the road.

[RANDY P]

Originally posted by Superman
Moses, the Kragens fart cannot afford his own retirement. Certainly not the medical part. Or at least, if he's one of those folks who don't get a (medical insurance) seat when the music stops playing then he might need some help. As long as he gets what he needs, we libs are happy. Don't know where the elite assumption comes from. Well, yes I do I guess.

Which puts us back to the subject of welfare and other programs like medicaid. They already exist - he'll never be out on the street unless he out and out refuses to do anything.

Not retiring comfortably will be punishment for not planning.

Who knows? I'd tend to think of a older man working basic jobs as independently wealthy and needing something to do - like the joke about the CEO who wants to spend the rest of his days as a Wal Mart greeter..

rjp

[Moses]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
I almost asked this same question Moses, but I am sure Steve doesn't want to take that road to its end so I didn't. BUT....since YOU brought it up

This kind of thinking leads to the conclusion that perhaps if those people are just destined to fail and will never provide any contribution to society......maybe we should just get rid of them. Restrict their rights to procreate and produce more genetically inferior kids who will never amount to anything either. Hrm...or maybe send those genetically inferior people to the gas chambers so that they will no longer weigh down the rest of us...where have I heard that before?? Can't quite place it...

Man, that's a leap!

I don't want to do anything about the non-contributors. Hell, I applaud their independence and celebrate their freedom. It is not necessary for a person to achieve anything at all in order for their life to have meaning. It's their life and it has meaning to them. Why do we feel so much angst when people make life choices that make us uncomfortable?

[stevepaa]

Originally posted by Nathans_Dad
This kind of thinking leads to the conclusion that perhaps if those people are just destined to fail and will never provide any contribution to society......maybe we should just get rid of them. Restrict their rights to procreate and produce more genetically inferior kids who will never amount to anything either.

Rick, Only leads that way if you want to go there. I would never suggest that. I have no test for one's outcome in life. I think again I have not been clear enough. The immediate genetics of your family may have nothing to do with your outcome. Maybe no one as far back as you can recall was a football star but all of a sudden there you are.

I sometimes look at those Poker world series matches with this view. Sometimes probability surprises everyone.

Moses, Why we struggle to fix their lives really defines us as a whole. The idea of personal accountability and responsibility works for most people, not for all.

Rodeo, I don't agree with your suggestion of our need for intervention. Your case is too limiting. His kids may be fine by their own hands. And I don't jump to the conclusion that he blew it. But I don't pity him either.

[RANDY P]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Put that in terms of a governmental response.

Do nothing? Let them all fend for themselves?

Do nothing for her but help her kids? (how?)

Help her and the kids by sending her to rehab on your dollar, then trying to train her to work and care for them when she gets out?

This is where the rubber meets the road.

Little something called foster parenting.

Around here, being locked up for drug use - you have to pay for your own rehab (which is hugely expensive) or stay locked up. Being locked up, the kids will become custody of the state and be put up for adoption or a foster home. There's government intervention for you. Doubtful you will get them back.

As far as I know, there's no free get out of jail while we watch your kids and give you a job card.

All the doors of opportunity are slammed in your face. You have never ending court and lawyer costs, "fees" for participating in outbound rehab, the cost of the rehab itself, work release, parole officers, it's nasty. You will always have an entry level job thanks to all the limitations you now have. Oh, and the stigma. You'll never be trusted for any job with a double digit per hour pay rate.

You're a felon and custody of the state when that happens to you. It's permanent. The felons do anything to get out, but eventually screw it up again. Simply costs too much to participate in the rehab and work release programs. Forget about having your own business.

Addicts are a nasty bunch. Always have an excuse and an apology, and it never, ever changes. They deserve it.

[stevepaa]

Originally posted by Moses
The Kragen guy will get Medicare like everyone else. If he cannot work till he qualifies, he'll get Medicaid. He'll also get a check from Social Security. No brass ring for the guy at Kragen, but like I said, if he had chosen to swing a framing hammer instead of work at Kragen, he'd be picking out a 60" plasma for his 700 sq.ft. domicile.

This presumes he could have made that choice. Maybe he made all the best choices he could have.

I am not looking to give him riches. But in the end of our lives there should be basic medical, food and shelter for all. Most will have accomplished this on their own, but a small number will not. And if we provide it with the attitude that "Look buddy, you screwed up, but we will provide the necessities for you", well I just think we are devaluing him.