By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 02 March 2010
Edit Thread
ManusJustus said:
TheRealMafoo said:
Not sure how you derived the opposite from my post. Explain how what I said means I think anyones better?

If you think others don't have the ability to achieve what you achieved, then it makes sense to provide for them additional resources for there shortcomings. If you think they are just as good as you, but only lack the drive, then there are no amount of resources in the world that will give then what they need.

And by the way, undoing the injustice that is denying all people the right to vote, is not a liberal idea. It's a human rights idea, and one all Americans should agree with.

Concerning liberal thinking on economics:

Liberals want to help other people economically because of empathy, they see conditions that other people are in and want to improve them.  If your mother was sick and you gave her money to help her pay her hospital bills, that doesn't mean that you think you are better than your mother, it just means that you want to help.  The difference is liberals want to help everybody, and you can argue wether or not this is the 'best' option, but the motivation is good.  Also, its not entirely thinking of other people, liberals see a person who can't afford an education and want to pay taxes so that the government to give him money so he can get one, but they also want the government to pay for their education as well.  Liberals want everyone to help each other, and to be honest no one has accomplished anything on Earth without the help of others.

Concerning liberal thinking on rights:

Liberals have always been on the correct side of rights.  I mention things like women's suffrage and civil rights because its a no-brainer in today's society, but not too long liberals were arguing that these people deserved rights and conservative were fighting against them all the way.

Concerning exposure to differing ideas and military:

Soldiers live on a military base, and in combat areas only leave for missions.  On the other hand, a student studying abroad actually has to live in that society.  I shouldn't have to argue who would have the more exposure...

The problem I have with that line of thinking is generaly that liberals donate less to charity then conservatives whenever it's been studied.

When you compare by a percentage... Dick "He may actually be Satan" Cheney donates a WAY higher percentage of the money he makes then Al Gore... who donates so little to charity it's embarrising.

A LOT of the biggest liberal figureheads time and time again end up turning out to be some of the most stingy when it comes to giving, while people like Dick Cheney who people expect to eat puppies tend to donate gigantic amounts of money.

There are exceptions... like Bill Gates and Warren Buffet... but they generally are exceptions.

 

It's not a matter of "ONE GROUP CARES ABOUT OTHERS MORE".  That's just stupid.

 

The MAIN difference is that conservatives see charity as an individual act, and that it's every persons personal duty and responsibility to do right by the poor.

While Liberals think it's the governments job to do right by the poor and force everbody to do what the government deems is right by them.

It's likely why liberals are usually less giving when it comes to donating to charity... they see paying their taxes as part of "doing for others" while conservatives don't and think government money given to charity is mostly a waste. 

Exert of source.

http://www.arthurbrooks.net/whoreallycares/excerpt.html