Bowsite.com

Let's judge positions in 3 areas;

Economics

Politics

Social/Culture

For me on economics, I am a free marketer. Competitive markets work best and I only justify government intervention when market failure occurs. Failure defined as results harmful to the majority or those incapable to offset the market failure. Rigorous cost/benefit analysis required to prove the intervention would lead to a better result. Yes, we can argue what that is.

Politically for me, just like with markets I like competition. I have been unaffiliated for most of my voting life. If Republicans lose in November, it will be because they ignored their constituency. Competition to some extent, in theory anyway, forces them to listen.

Socially, other than being pro-life on both ends, I take a much more Libertarian approach. I think the government should stay out of civil unions between humans, Don't want to pay to incarcerate weed users etc. If one's actions are not detrimental to society at large, stay away Sam. Yes, that leaves a lot of room for debate.

Am I a BS Conservative, or something else? Where do you stand? Who has the courage to answer for all eternity to see?

You are always great about criticizing others. This challenge was laid out specifically with you in mind.

Tells us where you stand. I bet you can't. You can Google for answers, and link information with the best of them. That's the extent of your thinking though. Others think for you because you are incapable of doing so.

Accept the challenge. Let's see how far apart we are.

FYI, my algorithm shows you using the word "conservative" 75% more than any other poster on the community forum, again thanks for confirming you are a BS conservative.

I bet we both believe in free trade, and it is synonymous with free markets. We do not have free trade though. Lots of non-tariff barriers and practices like currency manipulations signal government involvement. I am always amazed at rural communities who think they are conservative, even as they cash their subsidy checks.

Small government on the social side also IMO means civil unions are free of government oversight except for recognition. I allow for government regulation/prevention of abortions because a role for government is to protect life. I like your well thought out response, but freedom to me means minimizing government. I do think parts of ADA have been beneficial to society.

If we only had one party, that would end up being disastrous. I would rather see multiple parties with coalitions amongst parties. Yes, I know that is not our system.

Thanks again.

I knew you could do it.

Lol!

With that said when it comes to Economics I am conservative. I do a lot of work in the renewable energy market but I don’t agree with the tax credits they get. I have my reasons why I stay with the company I work for. The number one reason is my hunting and time off to be able to hunt as much as I want. When Bush was president the company I worked for built a huge number of Natural Gas peaker power plants under Bush’s energy plan.

I am ok with helping people out through welfare. However it should be limited on amount of time. I understand the food, medical and housing needs but any extracurricular activities are not needed when it’s on the tax payers dime.

When it comes to social issues I tend to stray from conservative views on some issues. Granted I think abortion is wrong but I put it pretty low on the list of concerns of mine. When it comes to gays or transgenders I really don’t care. I don’t want any special treatment given to them. It’s tgere body there choice.

I think we need to stop all illegal aliens from entering our country. If they have been here for ten years and there caught they get the boot. Being a US citizen should have its perks. Not just handed out to anyone that over stays a visa or crosses our borders.

Economics I'm for durable, gradual progress. I'm not a big believer in "trickle down" theory, though I can see the potential. I do think some level of government meddling is needed to prevent businesses running amok - not that the government is going to do that super efficiently or effectively, it's just the only real tool "we" have to help in that area. I like to believe it's possible to manage debt and not operate with the belief that we can spend uncontrollably. I like to believe economic practice can be tied to quality of life and environmental protection in a positive way for both people, the future world and industry.

Politics Feels like this goes into socio-cultural to me... Though I do find myself reflecting on two points often, one was a book I'd read from the library like 15 years ago, after hearing about it on a very conservative show that used to be on talk radio here with this guy Jay Sevrin, former Newt Gingrich campaign manager or something. Any way, it was great, and basically pointed out one glitch in the evolution of american politics is that you have the same things, in different clothes: Both parties want control, one through government, the other business. Always thought that concept was interesting and felt real subjectively to me. They both want big control via big devices.

While it's pretty dang entrenched, I feel like a huge downslide in our political system, has been the unbelievable influx of money and influence via PAC's. I'd like to see lobbying groups tossed from the arena. The lawmakers we elect and the staffs they enlist which we fund, should be investigating issues on their own and making decisions which are best for the nation and their constituents - the group with the most money should not alter the function of the lawmaker who is supposed to be bringing issues from the people they represent forward. Not a fan of that, at all.

Social/Culture I trend humanist, and I feel we ought to work to help people as a priority. We should do things which support the physical, emotional and spiritual (not religious specifically, though that would fall under this umbrella in my mind) well being of our fellow humans. Live the golden rule. If you are a human, you should be treated with dignity and respect unless thoroughly proven that you have lost those ideals. I'm very open and accepting to all groups.

I do get frustrated though when people go really far towards ideological extremes. Left, or right. I also don't get the desire to politicize everything.

I'm less concerned with appeasing a group, than with seeing humanity prosper.

It's late, I'm not thinking well on this... Hopefully it makes some level of sense...

We said the same thing really. Trade just increases arket competition.

Economics, I’m a 90% free market guy. The 10% that I’m not is a nod towards some government programs that I think are beneficial (the military, federal lands, some forms of welfare) and I’m okay with some market inefficiencies.

Socially, I’m mostly Libertarian. I could care less with who you wanna marry or what you wanna call yourself. As long as you aren’t infringing on the rights of others, do what you want. The part of me that is not Libertarian is okay with some forms of welfare and Federal aid. I used to be much more conservative in this regard, particular with regards to welfare. Living in New Orleans changed me on that front.

Politically, I turned 18 in 1997, and voted for a Republican in every Presidential election up until 2016 when I voted Libertarian. I am now a registered Libertarian.

Take a look at the Political Compass, which not only delineates Left vs Right but also Authoritarian vs Libertarian.

The rich have skirted their tax responsibility for too long. They should be taxed at a higher rate rather than more tax breaks for them. The very term “trickle down” is an insult.

Politically. Get the corporate money out. Period

Socially. Pro choice. Leave the lgbtq community alone. Gay marriage? Sure. Legalize pot, tax it.

The top 20% pay 80% of the tax burden.

"They should be taxed at a higher rate rather than more tax breaks for them."

Percentage wise, how much of MY income do you want f***k stick?

The economy is rolling because of employers and the barriers they previously faced. Allow them to turn a profit they believe they deserve at their own risk.

I don't know one beggar who pays not a cent of tax who has employees that fuels the economy other than welfare by proxy.

The Rock

Do you know how much money was brought back after corporate taxes were cut from 35 to 21?

Why do we want to penalize the winners? I am a public servant like you. We do not create jobs. Really, I am convinced it is just jealous.

Then explain how the top 20% are paying 80% of the tax burden. "Corporations raking in record profits shouldn’t be given tax breaks until they provide actual living wages. There is absolutely no reason why a full time employee if Walmart should need food stamps."

Define "living" wage. So someone with minimal or zero skills should be able to purchase a $200K house? Equal opportunity does not mean equal outcome.

Again, just how much of MY income do you want?