Can you be socially progressive and fiscally conservative?

Discussion in 'The Red Room' started by mburtonk, Mar 23, 2017.

  1. mburtonk

    mburtonk mburtonkulous

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    10,508
    Location:
    Minnesnowta
    Ratings:
    +7,626
  2. Diacanu

    Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    101,076
    Ratings:
    +81,580
    Without reading the article, I'd say no.

    I used to think so.
    But, you live long enough, and see the lies and hypocrisy of the 1% fuck over the poor and middle-class over and over again, you realize "I'm socially liberal, but fiscally conservative", it's a naive delusion spouted by (mostly male) hipster 20-somethings.
    Which was the age I fell for it for a little while.

    It only works on paper for ideal robot people.
    Once human greed factors in, you're fucked.
    And we are.
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • GFY GFY x 1
  3. Shirogayne

    Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    42,324
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ratings:
    +55,956
    I used to think so, but I've found the two really go hand in hand. I don't agree with 70 percent tax rates on the super rich, but yeah, it does cost money to keep those federal programs around to help the poor and keep them from rioting in the streets in desperation.
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  4. TheBurgerKing

    TheBurgerKing The Monarch of Flavor

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2009
    Messages:
    3,987
    Location:
    In a Baneblade
    Ratings:
    +2,618
    I disagree, the article in the OP equates "social progress" with handouts. At what point does personal responsibility play a part in people's lives? The hypothetical surgeon spent the better part of a decade learning a craft that few either want to do or are capable of doing, and I think someone who puts that level of effort in life should earn more.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • popcorn popcorn x 1
  5. Forbin

    Forbin Do you feel fluffy, punk?

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    43,616
    Location:
    All in your head
    Ratings:
    +30,535
    I thought I was, mostly :shrug:.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  6. Ancalagon

    Ancalagon Scalawag Administrator Formerly Important

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    51,346
    Location:
    Downtown
    Ratings:
    +57,469
    It takes 15 years to become a Heineken Brewmaster. Should she make more than the surgeon?
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Disagree Disagree x 1
  7. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    :rolleyes: Yeah, only the government can get things done and only government hand outs will solve problems.:dayton: What a jackass. To answer the OP, yes you can.
    • popcorn popcorn x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  8. Ebeneezer Goode

    Ebeneezer Goode Gobshite

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    19,110
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    Ratings:
    +8,226
    The article makes a few incorrect assumptions.

    For starters, small government isn't the same as stripping away social programs. Most state-based social programs are about tossing money at a problem in the hope that'll fix things, which is a bit like watching a bitter divorcee burn through cash on a pile of Jimmy Choo's in the hope that'll make her feel better. The 80's in the UK were an era of remarkable social progression - at the start being gay was an open invitation for a kicking, as was being brown skinned, but the dawn of 1990 that had changed considerably, and I'm not sure anyone is going to say Thatcher chucked money at socially progessive programs.

    What changed was the nature of the media, and the messages being put out. Did more than any bloody government program to change mindsets.

    Money isn't the only tool in the box, but for the state it is certainly the easiest one to score points with and the simplest metric to show how lovely they are regardless of actual results.

    And the 70% tax thing... It's not the amount of cash that's actually the issue. If I make 3 million in a year, I'll have worked bloody hard for it, and for someone to go say "you can live of 30% of that" misses the point. I earned it. What, exactly, have they done to have a chunk of what I've earned. Now if I made 3 million a year, I'd probably spend over 70% of it in helping the homeless and on MacMillan nurses. I don't need that much, but equally it is a reward for my effort, so for some apparatchik to lay claim on it is pretty offensive.

    A wealthy serf is still a serf.

    And governments do not have a good record of using money responsibly. Roll back a few decades, would the author be pleased to know that 70% of his income is helping fund injecting black people with diseases? How about shifting entire populations of islands so they can drop nukes? Roll back a decade or so and bombing the shit of Iraq?

    So, yeah, when I see someone state that all those extra taxes will go on social programs I just laugh.
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Winner Winner x 2
  9. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    /Thread
  10. mburtonk

    mburtonk mburtonkulous

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    10,508
    Location:
    Minnesnowta
    Ratings:
    +7,626
    Okay, let's take the government out of the equation.
    Can you
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2017
  11. Lanzman

    Lanzman Vast, Cool and Unsympathetic Formerly Important

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2004
    Messages:
    35,140
    Location:
    Someplace high and cold
    Ratings:
    +36,592
    Yes, because I am.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. Ebeneezer Goode

    Ebeneezer Goode Gobshite

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    19,110
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    Ratings:
    +8,226
    And replace it with... what exactly? The article is predicated on government taxes funding social programs.

    And another thought, it equates economic conservatism with small government which is also incorrect. Economic conservatism !== minarchy. They're two separate ideologies which have overlapping proponents.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. Mrs. Albert

    Mrs. Albert demented estrogen monster

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2005
    Messages:
    23,679
    Ratings:
    +11,589
    Does the brewmaster routinely work 100+ hours a week and hold people's lives in her hands every day? I'm sorry, but surgeons are seriously the one group of people that actually deserve an insanely high paycheck, imo. It takes a very specific, rare type of person to do this job and do it well without cracking under the pressure. I don't begrudge them their luxuries. Dermatologists make nearly as much, don't have the high malpractice insurance costs, and generally work a cushy 40-50 hour week. Cut into those lucky bastards' paychecks, but dear god leave the surgeons' $ alone. We need them.
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    You know what, let's keep the government in it. It costs absolutely nothing to vote. I can vote to amend a state constitution to allow gay marriage and also vote to get rid of some bullshit tax, which is something I actually did. Nobody is arguing for zero government.
  15. mburtonk

    mburtonk mburtonkulous

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    10,508
    Location:
    Minnesnowta
    Ratings:
    +7,626
    Got cut off there.

    What I mean is, many people are for smaller government/less spending, with the idea that "personal responsibility" will allow everyone to take the money they've kept and give that to the poor/hungry/etc. [EDIT: See also http://wordforge.net/index.php?posts/2944723/]. If you get your wish, is it "fiscally conservative" to spend your hard-earned money on helping out other people, or is it better to keep that money for yourself? Would such a situation lead to a tragedy of the commons?
    Last edited: Mar 23, 2017
    • popcorn popcorn x 1
  16. Shirogayne

    Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    42,324
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ratings:
    +55,956
    On a tangent to this, a FB friend of mine sited the Meals on Wheels fiasco as an example of conservatism in action....his post was basically "See? They got funding cut so they got fifty times the usual amount of donations, so the cuts were good and people will step up!"

    :garamet:
  17. mburtonk

    mburtonk mburtonkulous

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    10,508
    Location:
    Minnesnowta
    Ratings:
    +7,626
    It's almost like people got sick of a bunch of different organizations asking us for handouts all the time and decided to outsource the process...oh wait.
  18. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    At least in your situation, we have a choice, under the current system, I don't have a choice. My taxes go out in the ether and who knows where it goes? If I have extra money from cutting certain taxes, I can direct it to specific trusted charities. Also, it costs nothing for me to donate old clothes rather than trashing them, which I always do when the time comes. It also costs nothing to separate my trash so there's less pollution.
  19. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    Aaaand?
  20. steve2^4

    steve2^4 Aged Meat

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    15,797
    Location:
    Dead and Loving It
    Ratings:
    +13,861
    I agree with the article as far as their definitions go:

    If you want to be socially progressive, you have to support initiatives that foster social progress, like education equality, women’s health resources, criminal justice reform, universal healthcare, workplace equality, and so on. These initiatives either cost taxpayer money, require governmentally enforced regulation, or both. If you believe in smaller government and want to pay less in taxes, how do you propose social progress be made? Because if there’s no social progress funding, there’s no social progress. Passive support is no support at all.

    You can be socially conservative and fiscally conservative, but if you’re fiscally conservative, you can only be either socially conservative or a person who doesn’t give a shit. And not giving a shit is not progressive.
    How you define "socially progressive" and "fiscally conservative" determines if you can be both.
    • Agree Agree x 2
  21. Shirogayne

    Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    42,324
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ratings:
    +55,956
    And it says nothing good about people who think the first place to cut funding are for sick, elderly people who just want to eat.
    • Agree Agree x 3
  22. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    I'm sorry, but I don't like this jerkoff telling me what I need to support and telling me what I should think.
    • GFY GFY x 1
  23. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    That may be true, but your friend's point still stands, people did step up. Perhaps cutting Meals on Wheels was a bad idea, maybe they should cut funding for Planned Parenthood instead?:corn:
  24. Diacanu

    Diacanu Comicmike. Writer

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2004
    Messages:
    101,076
    Ratings:
    +81,580
    Hurry up and die, old people!! Hurry the fuck up and dieeee!!! :mad:

    *Gets old*

    Where's my Medicare!?!?! :cry:
  25. Shirogayne

    Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    42,324
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ratings:
    +55,956
    Good point.

    Back when I considered myself more conservative, I was still pro-choice and wanted more job placement programs for low income families. Because people are right that many who live off the dole for generations don't ever get off for a variety of reasons beyond just being lazy.

    I was also for greener energy, nut just not at the expense of our economy. The technology will come down in price: solar panels already have in my state. Also, guess which state produces most of the wind power for the country?

    It's not California. ;)

    Bit conservatism for the sake of "Fuck you, I got mine" yeah, no.
    • Agree Agree x 1
  26. Quincunx

    Quincunx anti-anti-establishment Staff Member Administrator

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    20,211
    Location:
    Chicago, U.S.A.
    Ratings:
    +24,060
    And it proves it has nothing to do with saving money when the stuff they want to cut so desperately amounts to 0.01% of the budget.
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
  27. Shirogayne

    Shirogayne Gay™ Formerly Important

    Joined:
    May 17, 2005
    Messages:
    42,324
    Location:
    San Diego
    Ratings:
    +55,956
    Cool, more welfare babies and back alley abortions for all!
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Dumb Dumb x 1
  28. steve2^4

    steve2^4 Aged Meat

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2004
    Messages:
    15,797
    Location:
    Dead and Loving It
    Ratings:
    +13,861
    So, your definition of socially progressive is donating old clothes and separating your trash?
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • popcorn popcorn x 1
  29. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    They have plenty of money, they'll be fine without handouts. Besides, it's illegal for the money to go towards abortions, yet they preform abortions somehow.:mystery:
    • Facepalm Facepalm x 2
    • Fantasy World Fantasy World x 1
  30. Steal Your Face

    Steal Your Face Anti-Federalist

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    47,415
    Ratings:
    +31,473
    No dipshit, it's an example of helping the poor by spending little money and very little to no government involvement.
    • Fantasy World Fantasy World x 2