Subject:  Re: Outside looking in |
Author:
Mom Z
| [ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 12:44:04 02/22/05 Tue
In reply to:
Baxter
's message, "Outside looking in" on 17:44:13 02/16/05 Wed
I have been eavesdropping on your forum off and on for some time now. I find it very interesting how your circle understands the world. Or better yet, does not understand the world. Forgive my being forward but it would seem to me that those of you who are of a more liberal bent, (environmentally, politically and socially) are quite naive to the way the world works. You simply think that anyone in pursuit of profit is evil. Therefore anyone who helps business in the pursuit of profit, too, is evil. (add Darth Vader theme music)
Welcome Baxter! As you can tell, those of us posting are all family, but this forum is not limited to us. Other viewpoints are welcomed. There are seven of my children and I and we cover the spectrum from liberal to conservative politics and from liberal to ultra-conservative religion. So joust with us and enjoy!
I was a conservative in my politics for many years. I'm 70 and I've lived through many "crises" in this country. I'd hardly say I'm naive, though I have been, I admit. I don't think anyone making a profit is evil. But I do think that corporations have no heart - therefore, only making money matters to the corporations and those who run them. The middle income population and the lower income classes are being squeezed - companies wanting more hours for less pay and fewer benefits for more cost to the workers.
This would lead us to President Bush, a man who understands that most good things that occur in the world are not motivated by good intentions alone but by the profit motive. More good has been done by a few profit seeking corporations (Johnson & Johnson, GE, Tyson foods) than all of the good intentions of liberals combined.
I'd have to say you are being naive if you think President Bush cares about anybody but his big business buddies and oil. Maybe some corporations have done some good things. Good for them! They got where they are through the workers, not because they are caring entities.
Not to be too religious, but we are (or should be) our brother's keeper. Injustice does need to be dealt with - wasn't that the supposed reason for going to war in Iraq? I agree that the government is a terrible business operator. And I agree that there are too many laws on the books. But there also has to be some sense of taking care of people who can't take care of themselves, for whatever reason.
It seems that the liberal has the belief that every injustice in the world must be stamped out. This leads us down a path of harming whole so as not to offend the few. Leberals do not with to fix injustice by taking personal responsibility or getting involved in the daily doing of right.
On the contrary, most of the liberals I know do take responsibility for their ideas and beliefs. They work with the elderly, the handicapped, the mentally disabled, the poor and, yes, the down-trodden. Back when Reagan was president, I was all for the government cutting aid programs and believing that private enterprise (i.e., corporations) would take up the slack. Didn't happen. Big business and big corporations did not take up the slack and we have mentally challenged people turned out on the street, trying to survive in a world they don't understand. We have the poor getting poorer, and I'm here to tell you that if it wasn't for my kids, I'd be on the welfare rolls right now. Not everyone has kids to provide for them as mine have for me.
No, that would take to much effort. We need the government, an orginazation that has yet to run one program efficiently or with fiscal responsibility, an orginazation that has yet to complete an objective to the benefit of its citizens (with the exception of winning wars). The government then gives the liberal the illusion that they have done something good to make the world a better place. How do they do this? By extracting wealth from those who work for it to give it to those who do not as though the problem of the poor is simply not having enough money. That is rediculous. The problems of the poor are based in the consequenses of laziness and uneducated decisions (speaking within the boarders of America). In many other countries the problem of poverty is very real. In most of those countries there is not freedom to acheive and be what you want. These are countries in which liberal, socialistic principles work at there best, removing the profit motive therefore relegating its people to poverty.
Unless you have worked in the fields of social work, you cannot know the problems those who are poor face. To say that they are poor because they are lazy is a gross over-generalization. It is true that the poverty in this country is not as dire as it is in other countries, but does that mean that it isn't of any consequence? You sound to me as if you have been raised in an upper-middle class environment and have never gotten "down and dirty" with the homeless, etc. Lucky you.
Ok, so my point is, you seem to not understand that W. if bringing good to both IRAQ and the US by bringing freedom to people. Where freedom is, good abounds. Where liberals reign, the people perish.
I agree that where freedom is good abounds. But to say that where liberals reign, people perish. Again, a gross over-generalization. I am confused, however. You seem to be saying that government should not be in the business of taking care of people but George W.'s government is so good because we went to war to help people in Iraq? And what else has G. W. done to help the people of this country. Don't tell me the tax breaks or refunds because we are spending a billion dollars a day on this war in Iraq and somewhere, someday, that cost is coming out of our - your's and my - pockets. Also don't get on the Social Security kick, because it's a big mountain out of a molehill. And I think G.W. is making such a fuss over SS to deflect attention from the war and the criticism during the election that he wasn't taking an interest in the economy. History will someday prove that G.W. is as big a con man as Nixon was; at least Nixon didn't leave us with half the world hating us as they do now.
Sorry if I seem to be getting on your case. As Mike said, we of the "left-leaning" persuasion don't change our minds easily. But then neither does he, so he can't complain too much. Glad you decided to post; keep it up. Other opinions are always welcome - and maybe we can change your mind. (just kidding)
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
] |
|
Feedback: 
Re: Outside looking in
Re: Outside looking in
Re: Outside looking in
Re: Outside looking in