The Left, the Right, and the Family View of Government

[jinalpa64]

The point is... you aren't improving. You are improving yourself when taxes come out of your paycheck without any action from you. You aren't improving when that money begins to flow up to the Washington and into the pockets of middle men and trickle out to the needy. You aren't even writing the check. Help someone in person. That's how you improve your life. That's how you improve their life. Don't be an anonymous. Personal Responsibility - it makes all us the best we can be.

[Millhouserock]

This guy has over simplified the country. This is a real joke. I was by no means raised in a "Father Knows Best" family. I grew up, traveled the country, studied the past and came to my own conclusion about which political wing to align myself with. If you study the past you'll learn not to trust the gov.

[jinalpa64]

Come to think of it... why shouldn't people collecting unemployment or welfare be forced to serve the community for a few hours a week? There is a thriving labor force of people who have nothing better to do. All that manpower. All that labor. Put them to work. They're already getting a paycheck. Make them earn it. Teach them that it is good to work. It's good to have a purpose. Have them build solar panels and wind turbines. There's a change I'll vote for.

[paganiniGOGO]

Fact: Everything you've achieved in life was due to luck.

You like to talk about hard work, well what causes someone to be hardworking?

The cause has to be either environmental or genetic, (unless you believe in souls, which is a different argument).

[paganiniGOGO]

If you had a good upbringing, good parents, good education, you're basically predetermined to be successful.

The only qualities that cannot be realized through a healthy environment would have to be determined by your genes - traits such as intelligence, (within 10 or so IQ points).

Either way, I hope we can agree that success is determined by luck.

That being said, don't you think the fortunate should help the unfortunate?

And if If you think competition is healthy, at least make it fair.

[number154]

Don't you have to be seeking work to receive unemployment? They wouldn't have time to look for new jobs. Essentially you're saying the government should create New Deal style public work projects to create jobs for the unemployed, not necessarily a bad idea, but not really the same thing as unemployment payments (and certainly not anything Republicans would vote for). Definitely much more "socialist" than the current healthcare proposals.

[dancray]

they paid into it. Just like you do. A little bit of your paycheck goes into helping you out if things go wrong. If you were to loose your job tomorrow, could you build a solar panel, or turbine. Maybe you should think a bit about what you are already getting from the kids who have already worked for you. Who is entitled then?

[jinalpa64]

Absolutely. That task I don't find nearly as distasteful. Our welfare system should encourage people to work, not sit on their butt or scam the system. I'm all for providing room and board. We do it for our prisoners. Single room apartments that they can lock themselves, with a cafeteria and no food stamps. It should NOT be comfortable. It should encourage them to find their own job and better themselves. Obama wants Americans to service their community - start with those on Welfare.

[paganiniGOGO]

"It should NOT be comfortable. It should encourage them to find their own job and better themselves."

You clearly know little about motivation. Making people miserable doesn't make them motivated. In fact, it's virtually common knowledge that happier people perform better.

[jinalpa64]

If you want to offer the gift of life, offer them a plane ticket. It's a desert. We have deserts in America. We just don't live in them.

[paganiniGOGO]

So the U.S. is going to accept hundreds of millions of immigrants with no job skills?

That would still take billions and billions of dollars.

[jinalpa64]

Why don't you get this? You are rewarding people for doing nothing. In fact they are doing less than nothing, because they are depending on you. They have a chance to help. They have a chance to make an effort, to contribute, to make a difference for themselves and others, like you. But, no. You tell them, "Please, sit on your butt and we will care for you." And not will you I help you, but I will berate my fellow countrymen with as much guilt as I can to get them to reward you too."

[paganiniGOGO]

You're right, we shouldn't be rewarding Sub Saharan African children (rewarding them with the gift of life) for doing nothing.

I suppose we should just let those lazy bastards starve to death after all.

[jinalpa64]

They have the freedom to get out of the desert. This is sand. Nothing grows in this. Nothing's ever going to grow in this. Move... to... where... the... food... is. You want help them? Send them U-Hauls - not food. Come to America! And no, I will never condone the taking of another person's life, liberty or property no matter the cause.

[paganiniGOGO]

Have I actually reduced your argument to this?

[jinalpa64]

If you force someone to donate, it's not a donation. As long as you're not actually taking their money, that's fine. You can pass moral judgment all you want. We each have the personal responsibility to take the best actions we can to help our fellow man, but we must each be allowed the freedom to make that choice for ourselves. Just remember, once you can justify the taking of someone's money, no matter how noble your cause, freedom and liberty are lost and we become slaves to the state.

[paganiniGOGO]

So you're saying if you had a choice between forcing millionaires to donate half their income and letting millions of people die you would chose the latter?

Again you say this is necessary for the sake of freedom and liberty of filthy rich and you ignore the freedom and liberty of the millions of people starving to death.

[jinalpa64]

"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And on the contrary the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer." B.Franklin

[gosmokesome]

no proof and stealing everyones money wont solve shit

[paganiniGOGO]

If the top 0.1% of Americans donated half their income, world hunger would be stopped.

Now, with half their income gone, they may have only a few hundred thousand dollars left, but that is way more than enough.

Honestly, how could you possibly justify spending more than a million dollars a year when thousands of people starve to death everyday?

Answer this question.

[paganiniGOGO]

Please answer my first question even before responding to this:

According to statistics, excessive amounts of money do not necessarily or even regularly bring more happiness, as really rich people are no happier than upper middle class.

[jinalpa64]

You're not talking about happiness. You're talking about taking what is not yours. Your life, your liberty and your property belong to you and no one else. No one has the right to take those things away from you. You may not have what others have, but you can rest safe in the knowledge that just as the government cannot take these things from others they cannot take them from you. Thrive. Be the best you can be. Strive to gather all you can, and do so knowing that what is yours is yours.

[paganiniGOGO]

I don't think you honestly believe what you're saying. I think you don't want to be troubled by the thought of thousands and thousands of people dying because of easily preventable diseases, hunger, while elites watch and do nothing - sometimes helping a little bit, sometimes worsening things.

[paganiniGOGO]

It is convenient to talk about liberty when you have it.

I don't think it applies to a sub saharan african child. No education, no food, no clean water, I'd like to see how you do under those conditions.

[jinalpa64]

Oh believe it. Preventable diseases: how about DDT in Africa. In America we sprayed DDT over the whole country, over playgrounds filled with children. We survived the mysterious clouds and Malaria was wiped out. But the Eco-friendly nut jobs said, that can't be healthy. They took it to court and got it banned from the world before it could be applied to Africa. How many millions die from Malaria today in Africa? And America? Get government out of the way.  It's safer for everyone.

[paganiniGOGO]

You seem to imply that millions have died as a result of the ban when there is no way to prove that and many people regard such claims as ridiculous.

The overuse of DDT led to increased resistance in mosquito so that in some parts of the world, like southern India and Sri Lanka, it has almost completely lost its effectiveness.

The general consensus was that DDT should be used in moderation.

I don't have enough expertise to judge whether an outright ban in many countries was the right decision.

[paganiniGOGO]

All that is irrelevant to what we were talking about.

As I said, the top 0.1% could donate half their incomes and that would save tens of millions of lives. I don't see any moral justification for ignoring that course of action.

[migkillertwo]

George Lakoff is one ignorant statist. It redefines tomfoolery to say that the state is what is keeping America from becoming a third-world nation

[befranklintoo]

how the mind creates meaning is a matter of who's meaning.

control of the mind is common for the normal to buy the new god theory to control peoples lives. Theses so called educate

things are like insects devouring one another in one form or the other. the job of government is not to live off the backs of the labor & family.

[softbluejazz]

Excellent lecture!

Great perception!

[STEEEVVYZ]

Critics charge that the public plan will be subsidized by the government. Here they have their facts wrong. Under every plan that's being discussed on Capitol Hill, subsidies go to individuals and families who need them in order to afford healthcare, not to a public plan. Individuals and families use the subsidies to shop for the best care they can find. They're free to choose the public plan, but that's only one option. They could take their subsidy and buy a private plan just as easily.

[Mastikator]

Government is in both cases parental projection? Yeah, I knew that one already.

[GBS990]

Why Fora has this road apple on is beyond explaination.

Who determines what is fair (hint - not you).

I PAY TAXES TO NOT LIVE IN A 3RD WORLD COUNTRY? This guy is on drugs. We had the lowest tax rate for many years and prospered, now we have high taxes and are falling behind. There is a direct correlation.

[DeletedDelusion]

No, that is living on debt....

It was just a question of time till it all went bust.

Google "US corporations pay taxes abroad"

It is true the US has very high taxes, but they could be lower if everybody pay them, especially huge corporations who profit the most of a stable society of well educated citizens, and a well maintained infrastructure...

[GBS990]

The problem with taxing 'corporations' is that they pass the taxes onto the consumer, in the form of higher prices for an item. It may make a person feel good that 'the other guy' is getting taxed, but in reality we all pay the corporate tax. Shrink government - it is the only answer.

[DeletedDelusion]

Of course the taxes are getting passed onto the consumer, the more you consumate (profit from the fruits of society) the more you pay.

Sounds fair to me.

What exactly do you mean by shrinking the government?

[alien13ufo]

higher taxes compared to when?

[easymike]

When did we get higher taxes all of a sudden? The economy went to pot with lower taxes. What does that prove GBS990 ?

[GBS990]

It isn't sudden, mike, the economy did not go to pot with lower taxes.

Is that your dad?

[easymike]

Clinton lowered taxes. Bush lowered taxes more. The economy went to pot. When were taxes raised? What are you talking about GBS990?

[chaserehn]

I don't think this guy knows his ass from a hole in the ground. Government has only one job. That would be to protect our right to life liberty and property.

[hozehd]

yay taxes and welfare. barfo. They should rename this snippit "Liberal explains how conservatives raise raise men and how liberals raise slaves and criminals. " Or maybe "The free market touched me where I pee." Its like a made for cable life time channel tv special.

[cat22203]

great video, great speaker!

[F3dB3aR]

Democratic governance is good....is a cultural product of free-thinking people.

When you all come to your senses, you'll thank God for America.

God Bless America!!!

[666norton420]

"When you all come to your senses"

have fun waiting....

;d

[thpt]

This was all pertinent prior to the right's merging with religion. When religion becomes your guide, and your party is the 'only' religious/moral party, then anything the party does is moral, and correcy by religious standards.

[oldhacks]

I eat up fora

[truthadvocate]

We do NOT have fairness & freedom for everybody in a democracy. That is a collosal delusion. Those who are productive are forced into slavery. Government agents violate the rights of civilians.

We're not a third world country because of taxes??? Wrong. Go to a third world country. Tax the hell out of all the poor people, & see how far that gets you. A government monopoly that taxes it's people is a destructive, corrupt, parasite.

We don't need a Mommy government or a Daddy government.

[IrishClaudius]

No you got your anti political correctness wires crossed it the Nanny State that the 'non' political (extremely conservative) lobbyists want. The Big Bad Dad who beats obedience into you is what they DO like. Now where did I leave that switch..

[F3dB3aR]

Liberarianism is anarchism hidden behind the euphemisms of freedom.

A mature understanding of the proper role of government is best understood in progressivism.

[milfrie]

I detest liberalism (progressivism) and all types of collectivism. I would rather take my life than have my life harnessed for another person or groups ends. That is evil to me. How much harm has been done in the name of various groups?

[Saktoth]

The entirety of your lifestyle relies on the society you live in though, without it you'd be hunting and eating berries. So, it has to be a balance, doesnt it?

[moshe88]

Balance between what? We don't force people to work certain jobs that provide us with luxuries or necessities that we couldn't otherwise attain ourselves. They do so willingly and, more often than not, happily for one or another form of gain. Even people who work in charitable jobs where they earn little to no money will say that they are becoming 'spiritually wealthier' or 'growing as a person' as a result of the work they are doing. That's another type of gain/profit.

[yamuboy]

Ah, the every action is selfish argument. Yes, a lot of actions, including charity are selfish, but that doesn't prove the Randian argument that selfishness is a virtue...

[Mastikator]

This lifestyle is unsustainable, it's currently funded through borrowing, and then borrowing some more. It's nothing but a Ponzi scam.

Empires fall all the time because they are unsustainable. They are unsustainable because the pervert the process of production and are justified on self-contradicting mysticism.

If we keep this up we WILL soon be hunting and eating berries.

[F3dB3aR]

I agree with Saktoth....the fact that we are even having this discussion within this forum is a testament to the fact that if it wasn't for people coming together to bring about a better life, instead of fightin' for scraps of meat somewhere out in the wilderness, we wouldn't be where we are today as a nation.

I understand you take issue with the abuses of collective action, who doesn't , but you are mistaken to think that life would be better had we not formed communities and survived!

[yamuboy]

Huh? I doubt people in England, Sweden, etc are routinely placed in a chamber where their souls are harvested for the benefits of the poor...The argument above is a complete strawman. I can't think of any political system, apart from fascism, Stalinism, Maoism and Iranian style Islamic authoritarianism that considers citizens the property of the state. Progressives are very watered down, hippiesh, do gooders who, I assure you, won't send you to a gulag.

[Mastikator]

"I doubt people in England, Sweden, etc are routinely placed in a chamber where their souls are harvested for the benefits of the poor"

You're right. It's for the benefit of the rich under disguise of benefit of the poor.

I can tell you from experience that yes, we do have that in Sweden. Don't kid yourself into thinking you don't have it in USA, yamuboy.

[yamuboy]

Also, suppose that one party to the exchange is a utility, publicly owned under (what you tend to call) collectivist economic arrangements. For example, the water company agrees to maintain the supply to a given individual for another year in return for a sum of money. Here, it seems almost ridiculous to suppose that the exchange need be any less free or mutually beneficial than it would be if the company were privately owned.

[milfrie]

well, I never said I idolized Rand I just like that quote.

Second, I agree with Thomas Sowell that we shouldn't listen to intellectuals on most matters.

Third, I am NOT my brother's keeper. I am repsonsible for myself, anyone I take responsibility for (a minor, for example), my family, etc.. No one has a right to tell anyone they should live for anyone else or the community. The exchange should be entirely mutually beneficial and voluntary.

[yamuboy]

You've probably been in a relationship, so you ought to know that no exchange is completely voluntary or free from coercion. Talking about exchange, doesn't the private ownership of anything involve theft and coercion? For instance, the goods you use could be based on an unequal exchange between a sweatshop laborer and a relatively well to do suburban person..Is the exchange based on historic exploitation mutually beneficial? Free market does not = freedom. Small government != no coercion.

[666norton420]

you may not be your brothers keeper, but you are still but a child in this family, you are not on your own.

society is what has given you your life, this 21st century marvel of advancement(of course both good and bad), now you wish to dismiss it?

i hear that kind of argument from creationists who think science and scientists are evil.... and tell everyone they can on the internet. :s

the irony swells in your head until it becomes loathing...

;d

[DeletedDelusion]

"Small government, small government....."

Why is everybody so keen on being ruled by pygmies? ;)

Seriously, what does it even mean?

[jinalpa64]

Smaller government doesn't mean pygmies. Government passes lots of laws. The more they pass, the bigger the government. They pass these laws with the intent to do good, but they have unintended consequences. Right now you can sell car insurance across State lines, but not health insurance. This was intended to help local insurance providers because they couldn't compete with bigger out-of-state companies. Smaller government means less laws. Remove these obstructions and prices will drop.

[DeletedDelusion]

Ah, you ment to much bureaucracy.

Wow, you really seem to have the worst from both worlds, single payer and private, I think how the laws are finally drafted out at the end makes the difference...

In Switzerland we have private health care but with government regulations as well, companies are not restricted by state borders, but they can't exclude people from basic coverage for example, here the costs are rising as well....

[thane17]

Its frightening how lost some people are...

[milfrie]

Ayn Rand quotes:

I swear by my life, and love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.

[yamuboy]

Zizek on Rand: "Rand fits into the line of over-conformist authors who undermine the ruling ideological edifice by their very excessive identification with it." And, "her fascination with male figures displaying absolute, unswayable determination of their Will, seems to offer the best imaginable confirmation of Sylvia Plath's famous line, "...every woman adores a Fascist."

That just about sums her up eh...

[paganiniGOGO]

that's a horrible quote,

here's a better quote:

"every man is guilty of all the good he did not do."

Voltaire.

[milfrie]

who owns you? Who has a higher claim on your life? You or others? I believe it is good to help your fellow man, but I believe that is a choice.

[666norton420]

while i agree with that statement, i often feel that not choosing that option is incorrect.

we don't live in caves anymore, in charge and owning our own lives.

everything we have is due to others, not matter what you make yourself, you could've only done with the effort and hard work of others.

to think that we then have no obligation to society, for all that society has provided for us, is to be ignorant at best.

your life is yours, to a point; the rest is ours!

MWUUA HA HA HA!!

;d

[paganiniGOGO]

If you think it is ethical to buy a 300 000 dollar car when that money could save lives in a thirld world country - then you should not have a choice to do so because the humans whose lives you could have saved did not have a choice to be impecunious peasants.

If we had a culture that was not based on superficial material values then all people would gladly make that choice for themselves.

People like Rand live in a dream world that lacks a level of elementary morality.

[jinalpa64]

And what decisions did you make in life in order to have 300,000 available to spend on a car? We all have decisions to make. Those impecunious peasants have decisions too. If there's no food in their home town... move. Go to where the food is. Come to America. We are leading by example. Make good decisions here, you'll have money. 

Of course the impression now is, if you have money, the government can take it away. What's yours is yours... but only if you think like a liberal.

[libralssuck]

good stuff

[paganiniGOGO]

'If there's no food in their home town... move.'

I don't think I should even bother responding to that.

I rest my case.

[jinalpa64]

Exactly. Why expect people to think or act for themselves. Sit back. Do nothing. Suck on the tax dollars of other people's hard earned money. What happens when you've sucked all of the money out of the wealthy? They either become middle class or leave the country. What is there to aspire to or become? A Bureaucrat? Our representatives in Washington have no better DNA than we do. They were elected. They are not gods. They are not superior, not smarter. They are the ones causing this.

[chris3443]

If you think it is ethical to steal 300 000 dollars when that money should have gone to the person whose efforts deserve the money -- then you should not have a choice to do so because the humans whose lives you could have not stolen from did not have a choice to have their wealth taken from them by force.

If we had a culture that was not based on theft and superficial morals, then most people would gladly work hard and enjoy the fruits of their labours. People like Rand ROCK!

[gosmokesome]

THIEF!

[milfrie]

Interesting I was liberal up until my early thirties. I had a strict father and a very nurturing, new age mom. As a libertarian I look at issues and always favor a smaller government since I look to historical examples of the past relationships of gov. and people.

[yamuboy]

How small should the government be? Or are you one of those market romantics? Is the "free market idea" a rationally defensible belief given that human economic exchanges cannot fundamentally be reduced to a two person contract as outlined by Rothbard in his newspaper example? What underlies your definition of freedom? Can cooperation indeed be achieved without coercion? Can everything be commoditized and privatized?

Libertarianism simply can't answer those questions...

[andid]

Never thought about politics this way...thanks for the vid fora.

[Scoforever]

Government must stop interfering in our lives. Become a libertarian!

[Kravis63]

"life in the statue of nature is nasty, brutish, and short"- Thomas Hobbes.

Personally I like having paved roads, police, fire fighters, a space program.

Certain aspects of Libertarian I agree, but using it as a complete political system is as failed an idea as Communism .

[moshe88]

You're thinking of anarchism. Libertarians advocate for an absolute minimum government, one which provides only those services that a neutral and unbiased government can provide.

[milfrie]

a libertarian doesn't shun ALL types of government, but that is an argument often used to dismiss it.

[666norton420]

government should be rather big....

but only with the "good parts".

i know that's a "i want my cake and to eat it too" kinda of sentiment, but if you want to speak of ideologies....

;d

[Scoforever]

First of all libertarians think government roads are ok. We think police and the military are the most important parts of government. Fire stations should be local and not provided by a federal government and the space program is doing fine in the private sector.