Shred XLIX: And then the North Koreans attacked

Given who I am and my situation in life, I should be a staunch economically conservative Republican, but for some crazy reason, maybe the rebellious music that I have always listened to, I am more of a socially liberal Democrat.  I extract no personal benefits from that political position, and yet it is the one that I have always leaned towards.  Must be my self-depreciating ways.

Not really.  Libertarians are too radical for my tastes.

I am a librarian

I voted Libertarian in the 1992 election (Harry Browne), my first vote I ever cast.  I was drawn in by the "common sense" appeal of Libertarianism.  Since then, though, I've noticed some fairly suspect views that seem to be by-products of Libertarianism, one of which is essentially social and economic Darwinism.  Less government to hinder our basic freedoms, true, but also less safety nets for the less fortunate citizen, something I've always believed was just a basic human right - love thy neighbor and all that jazz.  I guess I'm just a believer in the welfare state, and I don't mind being taxed out the ass if it helps someone else.  That's a big "if", mind you.

I'll shut up about politics now.

aginor wrote: I am a librarian

ture

rushfan4 wrote: HolyMoly wrote: I voted Libertarian in the 1992 election (Harry Browne), my first vote I ever cast.  I was drawn in by the "common sense" appeal of Libertarianism.  Since then, though, I've noticed some fairly suspect views that seem to be by-products of Libertarianism, one of which is essentially social and economic Darwinism.  Less government to hinder our basic freedoms, true, but also less safety nets for the less fortunate citizen, something I've always believed was just a basic human right - love thy neighbor and all that jazz.  I guess I'm just a believer in the welfare state, and I don't mind being taxed out the ass if it helps someone else.  That's a big "if", mind you. I'll shut up about politics now. I think many Americans feel the same way regarding the "safety nets for the less fortunate citizens".  The catch is whether that safety net should be the government, that person's family and friends, or some charity or church.  I also think that the problem that many Americans have with this are those bad apples that take advantage of the safety net out of laziness or because they can instead of because they have no other choice.  The more bad apples that you perceive that there are the less likely you are to have any desire to support these safety nets.

Yes, those bad apples are a pain in the ass.  Welfare can provide an incentive not to work.  My rosy pie in the sky model presumes that there are enough "good apples" to make the occasional leakage acceptable.  But again, as Run-DMC once said, it's tricky.

HolyMoly wrote: A Person wrote: I'd rather catch a few bad apples than lose a good one if you know what I mean. I'd rather just go bananas.

That would be just peachy.

What's your beef?

Stop spam ming these puns, guys

A Person wrote: HolyMoly wrote: A Person wrote: I'd rather catch a few bad apples than lose a good one if you know what I mean. I'd rather just go bananas. That would be just peachy.

you are both small tandgerine like for me , (or Steve is more Pinapple like and spiky/edgey)