Republicans Have No Solutions

It's also important for your kid to be a "have", which they have earned simply by being related to you. A level playing field for future generations is dangerous, because strangers might win.

 

Sounds good to me, perhaps each State should be asked to have a vote on secession?

 

Life IS a constant struggle. Having a child/children should be viewed as a responsibility to those who have them, not to government or the society collectively. In a free society the greatest freedom is the freedom of the individuals to make choices. The choices we make result in our success or failure and as long as neither one results in harming, intentionally or unintentionally, another or others the rewards of our successes and losses of our failures should be left to the individual to deal with. Society, NOT government should be the only source from which our individual failures are lessened. That is how societies are built to exist more peacefully. There has never been a level playing field and never will there be. What I leave my children has nothing to do with their earning it but simply due to the fact that I brought them into the world without their prior consent and therefore feel a responsibility to them. Strangers win each and every day, so what?

Republicans may NOT have any solutions, but then again there are no rationally founded single solutions to most any complex human issue that doesn't wield undesirable consequences in the present, and even more so in the future. As population grows larger so will the issues those who seek to govern will use to acquire power over the people by pitting groups of society against one another.

 

That leaves children responsible for making sure they have great parents.

Same old same old. As always, it's extremely obvious to you that conservatism is the only rational way to look at the world, just as it is extremely obvious to me that it isn't.

The only thing that's really changing is that my way of thinking is slowly being purged from America.

 

No, children are in no way responsible for their parentage.

If, by conservatism, you mean dealing with reality in a rational way yes.

Then maybe there's hope after all.

 

You can't have it both ways.

 

What are you trying to say?

 

[SIZE=12pt]Individual seems like a perfect example of the ‘faith’ based political thinking mentioned above which prefers belief to rational thought and so is able to hold onto ideas that they cannot seem to defend from criticism in any sensible or reasonable way. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]Just look at the argument he presents above they are basically the same he’s been presenting here for at least two years and in the whole of that time he’s been unable to defend they from the criticisms levelled at them. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]How can any rational and questioning individual keep hold of ideas they know they cannot defend? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]He knows we have discussed these things before and he knows he can’t defend them, but still he post them over and over…I hope that for once he will not just run away but at least try to debate rationally but from past experience I’m not holding my breath. [/SIZE]

 

Indie

And more of a struggle for some than others – but you cannot choose to be born into advantage or disadvantage - to those that will have to suffer great struggles or those that will have a life of ease.

But a child can’t choose its parents, it can’t choose to have responsible parents, it can’t choose to have parents that might have the resources to help it in the difficult process of growing up.

BUT for what seems like the millionth time – an individual baby hasn’t the freedom to choose to whom they are born.

Why keep repeating this when you know it doesn’t stand up to even the slightest scrutiny? You know my counter argument and you know you have no rational comeback.

To repeat - The greatest effect on a person’s life is where and to whom they are born. This can give someone advantages or disadvantages that can affect their whole lives and their possibility of them having success or failure, long before they have the independence to take certain actions themselves.

[1]Which society - you’ve told me many times that there are lots of societies although even though I keep asking you refuse to tell me why?

[2]The next question is why shouldn’t a government be concerned with the welfare of the people it governs? Yes we know that is your viewpoint but can you put up a rational argument rather than that’s just what you think?

[3]An individual cannot be personally responsible for the nature of their birth and many things are beyond the direct control of an individual, and therefore people cannot take direct responsibility for them.

But the degree of tilt can be high or low, you can have a society with high levels of inequality or low levels of inequality.

As explained many times your ideas seem designed to increase levels of inequality - greatly advantaging wealth to the detriment of everyone else.

I asked you - seeing that no one can choose to whom they are born is it justified for a person born into advantage to retain exclusive rights to advantages they didn’t earn rather than share them with others who through no blame of their own are disadvantaged

Your answer so far has been yes although you seem unable to present any rational argument as to why other than that’s what you think.

 

Yeah I don't really see the democratic party as a real 'left' both are too right wing for my liking. I feel much of the time the democrats just try to pose as being more left to get support of more left leaning people, while still representing flawed right wing ideologies/policies and what not.

 

Balbus, if there is (according to you) no real left in american politics at all anymore why do you prefer to see (and talk about) politics in left and right?

This makes no sense to me neither. I am I missing something? Sarcasm perhaps?

 

A good example of that (#131) are the many Democrats who support the corporatist policies in the Trans-Pacific Partnership; for instance, allowing foreign investors to successfully sue any local government in the US that requires labeling of GMO food. It appalls me that Obama is pushing hard for this and now has the cooperation of the Republican congress.

 

Asmo

I’m not sure what you mean, but let me see if I can give you some semblance of an answer.

I’m not saying that there is NO left wing politics in the US today; I’m saying that it isn’t an influencing factor in mainstream US politic today.

And why shouldn’t I talk of left and right?

 

Asmo

I don’t want to answer for Karen but it seems to me she is making a similar point to my own which is that the personal responsibly argument doesn’t stand up to examination.

Personal responsibly can be a factor but a very great deal of what happens to people is outside their personal control – such as to whom they are born.

A child cannot be responsible for been born to good or bad parents or into advantage or disadvantage, which is going to have the major impact on their life.

But Indie seems to want to have it both ways claiming life’s outcomes are all down to personal responsibly while admitting they are not.

It a contradiction that highlights the flaws in his thinking

 

Yeah, I didn't have time this morning to explain all that in detail.

 

OK, makes sense. So that first quote of you in my post was sarcasm?

 

I have started a new thread about news of the 114th Congress which starts in January. Soon we will see what Republicans consider to be solutions to our country's great problems.

 

Indie is a perfect example of the unthinking, unquestioning, dogmatically driven right wing supporter .

The ideas he promotes are so clearly flawed and are incredibly easy to show and explain why they are flawed but he and people like him just stick their fingers in their ears and go ‘la, la, la’ or like indie has in every debate where his ideas are challenged - run away.

And this is why right wing solutions seem designed to make things worse rather than better – they are driven by ideology not a an actual desire to help which would mean opening their eyes to the real world and changing their ideas to adapt to it, but that would mean having to admit their ideas are flawed which they just don’t seem able to do.