Lounge of Tomorrow

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)
-   Daily Grind (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=18)
-   -   The random political thoughts thread (Part Deux) (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=3249)

Alex 11-21-2008 11:11 AM

No, even when corrected for income the disparity continues. It is generally attributed to the fact that conservatives are much more likely to belong to churches which are frequently very involved in charitable endeavors and soliciting their members.

Ghoulish Delight 11-21-2008 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alex (Post 255022)
No, even when corrected for income the disparity continues. It is generally attributed to the fact that conservatives are much more likely to belong to churches which are frequently very involved in charitable endeavors and soliciting their members.

I was just about to post that as my guess. What do I win?

Alex 11-21-2008 11:51 AM

The obligation to tithe your income to me.

Ghoulish Delight 11-21-2008 11:54 AM

Hmm, the Church of Alex. There's a mindboggling concept.

Alex 11-21-2008 11:55 AM

I promise to you I'll never lie about the afterlife. Happiness is to be found in this lifetime and is to be achieved by making me rich.

sleepyjeff 11-21-2008 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman (Post 255020)
Which I attribute to the fact (well, heheh, my assumed fact) that conservatives are, almost by definition, generally far more wealthy than liberals.

Actually, there are studies that show even when adjusted for income, they still give more(in other words, ask two people who have the same income how much they give to charity and the conservative one, more likely the not, would have given more).....and not just money; they donate more blood, they donate more time volunteering, and they are more likely to give directions to a stranger on the street.


But does any of that matter......even if conservatives were the stingy, heartless sub-humans many try to paint them the fact of the matter is forcing another person to labor for another is slavery.

Alex 11-21-2008 12:05 PM

That is true. But forcing them to give money is not and that is where the analogy fails.

Ghoulish Delight 11-21-2008 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sleepyjeff (Post 255040)

But does any of that matter......even if conservatives were the stingy, heartless sub-humans many try to paint them the fact of the matter is forcing another person to labor for another is slavery.

Sorry, but you still haven't convinced me that's happening. No one is forcing anyone to do anything. The government says, "We will anyone who helps mow this lady's lawn money for doing so." And people willingly accept that compensation. No one goes to jail if they say no. No one is forced to do anything. People choose to and are compensated. Tada. Failed analogy.

Alex 11-21-2008 12:13 PM

The force here is taking the money (at risk of imprisonment) from person A to pay Person B to provide Service C to Person Q.

It is definitely a form of "violence" by the society against the individual. It just isn't analogous to slavery.

sleepyjeff 11-21-2008 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JWBear (Post 255005)


I think that many people that object to tax money going to help the disadvantaged just plain don't give a rat's ass about their fellow humans. They're selfish and self centered.

Do you really believe this?

Just because someone doesn't want the government to do something doesn't mean they don't want it done.

I don't want the Government to build a 3rd gate in Anaheim....but I want it done.

I don't want the Government to produce more episodes of LOST.....but I do want to see more episodes.

I don't want the Government to build interstate high speed rail......but I want it built.

I don't want the Government to cure cancer.......but I want it cured.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.