Conservatism
- Thread starter HenrySwanson
- 1,574 comments
- 96,361 views
Keef
Premium
- 25,005
- Dayton, OH
- GTP_KeefRacer
- GTP Keef
Good call, fixed. But I'm leaving rubreddit. That's what I like to do in my free time.
For whatever reason this all kind of blew my mind. I've never thought about it like this. The core principle of conservatism, the logical basis for the entire concept, works against improving the future. Wow.
Last edited:
- 6,054
- Simcoeace
Yet ... they allied with Stalin to invade & pick apart Poland & Finland.
In the end, you have to be capable of appreciating that there is a distinction between totalitarian socialism/communism & democratic socialism. There is now enough evidence for the viability of a "mixed economy" to make that distinction.
Last edited:
- 6,054
- Simcoeace
There you go.
I will say that in Canada, for decades, the name of the conservative party was Progressive Conservative ... so there is that. Sort of underscores the difference between Canada & the US. At root the difference is related to the difference in the influence of religious fundamentalism in US politics. A belief system based on the literal truth of the Old Testament is going to have a hard time with the idea of progression. In fact, when the Canadian Progressive Conservative party was decimated in the election of 1993. it was largely because the "social conservative" wing of the party, with a significant religious fundamentalist component - sort of the Canadian Tea Party - split away to form a separate party. Sort of what I could envisage happening in the US now ... except Trump himself has no apparent religious conviction at all, while the GOP without religion would be a rump party. It's the American paradox ... or American Exceptionalism, if you prefer.
- 11,788
- Marin County
To be fair, I think a conservative would argue that they aren't against "improving the future" but rather that they are fundamentally cautious about drastic change. So to a progressive it feels like they are holding everyone back, but to them, they are trying to guard against unknown dangers.
That being said, it's pretty clear to me that conservatives in the USA have gone off the rails partisan and are now merely the "not-democrat" party and pretty much the entire governing principle of the GOP can be summed up with the words "bad faith". See Ken Paxton for further info.
That being said, it's pretty clear to me that conservatives in the USA have gone off the rails partisan and are now merely the "not-democrat" party and pretty much the entire governing principle of the GOP can be summed up with the words "bad faith". See Ken Paxton for further info.
- 3,712
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
That would be pragmatism, not conservatism. Even as a staunch leftist I do understand the importance of pragmatism in politics and activism. Lenin emphasized this on multiple occasions throughout his writings. Being progressive is not a race to see who can propose the farthest left agenda and do it as fast as possible. There's quite a big difference between supporting change but doing so cautiously and opposing it altogether. American conservatives do the latter, because like I said, it's a reactionary movement.
Last edited:
- 29,703
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
Do I look like a proctologist to you?
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,382
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
A study that looks at 18 countries over 50 years from LSE and King's College, finds a direct causal link between tax cut's for the rich and an increase in wealth inequality, with no measurable benefits to economic growth or employment levels.
Another study that shows trickle-down is a fantasy that just makes rich people richer, but goes past correlation, into a direct causal link.
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/107919/1/Hope_economic_consequences_of_major_tax_cuts_published.pdf
6. Conclusion This paper uses a two-stage process to estimate the causal effects of major tax cuts for the rich on economic outcomes. First, we identify instances of major reductions in tax progressivity by looking at substantial falls (greater than 2 standard deviations) in a new, comprehensive indicator of taxes on the rich that covers 18 OECD countries from 1965 to 2015. Second, we apply a nonparametric generalization of the difference-in-differences indicator that implements Mahalanobis matching in panel data analysis to estimate the causal effect of major tax cuts for the rich on income inequality, economic growth, and unemployment. We find that major tax cuts for the rich push up income inequality, as measured by the top 1% share of pre-tax national income. The size of the effect is substantial: on average, each major tax cut results in a rise of 0.8 percentage points in top 1% share of pre-tax national income. The effect holds in both the short and medium term. Turning our attention to economic performance, we find no significant effects of major tax cuts for the rich. More specifically, the trajectories of real GDP per capita and the unemployment rate are unaffected by significant reductions in taxes on the rich in both the short and medium term. Our results have important implications for current debates around the economic consequences of taxing the rich, as they provide causal evidence that supports the growing pool of evidence from correlational studies that cutting taxes on the rich increases top income shares, but has little effect on economic performance (Lee and Gordon, 2005; Piketty et al., 2014; Roine et al., 2009). They also align with the causal findings in Rubulino and Waldenstrom (2020), but provide stronger and more generalizable conclusions, as our approach allows us to move beyond looking at tax changes in only handful of selected countries.
Another study that shows trickle-down is a fantasy that just makes rich people richer, but goes past correlation, into a direct causal link.
http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/107919/1/Hope_economic_consequences_of_major_tax_cuts_published.pdf
6. Conclusion This paper uses a two-stage process to estimate the causal effects of major tax cuts for the rich on economic outcomes. First, we identify instances of major reductions in tax progressivity by looking at substantial falls (greater than 2 standard deviations) in a new, comprehensive indicator of taxes on the rich that covers 18 OECD countries from 1965 to 2015. Second, we apply a nonparametric generalization of the difference-in-differences indicator that implements Mahalanobis matching in panel data analysis to estimate the causal effect of major tax cuts for the rich on income inequality, economic growth, and unemployment. We find that major tax cuts for the rich push up income inequality, as measured by the top 1% share of pre-tax national income. The size of the effect is substantial: on average, each major tax cut results in a rise of 0.8 percentage points in top 1% share of pre-tax national income. The effect holds in both the short and medium term. Turning our attention to economic performance, we find no significant effects of major tax cuts for the rich. More specifically, the trajectories of real GDP per capita and the unemployment rate are unaffected by significant reductions in taxes on the rich in both the short and medium term. Our results have important implications for current debates around the economic consequences of taxing the rich, as they provide causal evidence that supports the growing pool of evidence from correlational studies that cutting taxes on the rich increases top income shares, but has little effect on economic performance (Lee and Gordon, 2005; Piketty et al., 2014; Roine et al., 2009). They also align with the causal findings in Rubulino and Waldenstrom (2020), but provide stronger and more generalizable conclusions, as our approach allows us to move beyond looking at tax changes in only handful of selected countries.
Last edited:
- 2,905
- United Kingdom
Makes sense, but I wonder why so much of the pushback against masks is from conservatives. I guess the rationale is it infringes on personal liberties, but that is an extremely small sacrifice to pay for a potentially lifesaving intervention.
Last edited:
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
To be clear, I don't know. I myself am conservative only to the extent of wearing both belt and suspenders. However, I suspect that many conservatives have a deep intuitive mistrust of government authority. I'm a good boy, take all my shots and follow the laws. When it is announced that state police will stop all highway travelers, seek to know their plans, and turn them back if the state does not deem it essential - that will arouse the umbrage of any true conservative IMHO. I know a conservative who will wear a mask in a paint booth or other clear industry safety situations, but needs to decide for himself in other less obvious situations, like this pandemic. Naturally, he consults mostly the data that supports his view, which is very frustrating for me.
Keef
Premium
- 25,005
- Dayton, OH
- GTP_KeefRacer
- GTP Keef
It's late and I honestly can't think up a response. It's exhausting trying to wrap my head around that. I'll admit to being a terrible student, my grades were average, I was late to class half the time, literally never went to the college library for a book, and didn't even finish the degree. But at least I'm not stupid.
UKMikey
Premium
- 18,038
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
It's okay. The facts totally care about conservatives' feelings and will definitely change if enough people disagree with them, as sure as the earth is a 4000 year old flat disc.
- 29,703
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
- 3,712
- Elizabeth, New Jersey, USA
Came across this quote, and it's as relevant as ever.
"If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.” - David Frum
"If conservatives become convinced that they can not win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy.” - David Frum
Danoff
Premium
- 33,955
- Mile High City
Apparently that comes from the book Trumpocracy, published in 2018.
- 29,703
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I can appreciate conservatism to a degree, but the sort of toxic conservatism that the current Republican Party fosters is ridiculous. I don't think it's illustrated any more perfectly than with the "cuckservative" and "RINO" pejoratives crafted by the based base to describe those moderates who may hold conservative views regarding economic and foreign policy (which I can appreciate) but tend somewhat more liberal when it comes to social issues such as equal treatment under law and holding law enforcement accountable.
...
So, people have been calling it a cult and I've thus far dithered somewhat, but when I think of cults, this is exactly the sort of thing I imagine.
I had to make sure, so I went to the NRCC website myself...
https://www.nrcc.org/
...and started scrolling. There's not much to the front page, and certainly not what's pictured above, so I began clicking through. "Get Involved" allows you to sign up for a recurring text message program. "Donate" seemed pretty obvious, and sure enough, it led to a secure (well, the word is in the URL, anyway) donation page...
https://secure.winred.com/nrcc/reta...62.621334365.1617826538-1568230042.1617826538
...and here's a screenshot:
By the way, $36,5000 is the maximum amount established by the FEC for individual contributions to national party committees.
...
So, people have been calling it a cult and I've thus far dithered somewhat, but when I think of cults, this is exactly the sort of thing I imagine.
I had to make sure, so I went to the NRCC website myself...
https://www.nrcc.org/
...and started scrolling. There's not much to the front page, and certainly not what's pictured above, so I began clicking through. "Get Involved" allows you to sign up for a recurring text message program. "Donate" seemed pretty obvious, and sure enough, it led to a secure (well, the word is in the URL, anyway) donation page...
https://secure.winred.com/nrcc/reta...62.621334365.1617826538-1568230042.1617826538
...and here's a screenshot:
Insane.
By the way, $36,500
Last edited:
- 29,703
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
I'm picturing slow-motion footage of Trump dancing, doing his ISL from a podium and staring at an eclipse, with Sarah McLachlan narrating, "For the cost of a cup of coffee, you can ensure a scared, loveless, aspiring dictator wedges his way back into government."
Last edited:
- 3,885
- St.Pete, FL
- NotThePrez
- NotThePrez
Keef
Premium
- 25,005
- Dayton, OH
- GTP_KeefRacer
- GTP Keef
I don't think that's ever going to fly in court. Dude is about to get screwed. I doubt any reasonable person would read those and think they were approving recurring donations - the checkmark isn't lined up with the donation text, the rambling paragraph is larger bolded font, the donation sentence doesn't seem to have any context it is referring to, and it's not even a complete sentence with punctuation for cripe's sake. There's no way this passes the "reasonable person" test.
UKMikey
Premium
- 18,038
- Grea'er Laandan
- UKMikeyA
- UKMikeyA
I suspect they'll find a way to blame Obama somehow.
Last edited:
Similar threads
Latest Posts
-
-
-
GBRC "Grumpy British Racing Club" Home of clean racing.- Latest: lunchbox147
-
