• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Am I a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,648
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I acknowledge that there are people in this country who cannot contribute to society, either because of physical, mental, or emotional considerations. Am I a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

I also acknowledge that there probably is some welfare fraud in this country. That said, welfare fraud is managed at the State level, and in that sense, National politics is NOT involved. I find that those that vote Nationally based on what they perceive, as welfare-recipients-on-the-take, are misguided. Does that make me a Bleeding Heart Liberal?
 

Acadia

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2018
Messages
16,841
Reaction score
10,593
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Private
If you leave out the buzzy "bleeding heart liberal" canard, you've made some good points. National politics gets way too much focus and not enough is placed at the State level. My guess is that your post is a thinly-veiled swipe at Republicans who are not against welfare for those who qualify, whether permanently or temporarily.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I acknowledge that there are people in this country who cannot contribute to society, either because of physical, mental, or emotional considerations. Am I a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

I also acknowledge that there probably is some welfare fraud in this country. That said, welfare fraud is managed at the State level, and in that sense, National politics is NOT involved. I find that those that vote Nationally based on what they perceive, as welfare-recipients-on-the-take, are misguided. Does that make me a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

Sounds like it. I've found that with so many of these types of questions it really comes down to a simple question. What's the worst mistake? If you're going to error which way should you error?

What is worse? Feeding some people who might be able to feed themselves, or starving some people who definitely can't feed themselves? A liberal errors towards kindness conservative errors towards cruelty.

What is worse? Providing health care to a person who could probably afford their own, or letting someone die because they're too poor to pay for health care?

What is worse? Paying a bad teacher a little bit more money for no improvement in output, or not paying teachers enough and driving highly talented teachers out of the business?

What is worse? Allowing a bunch of refugees into your country and risking that a few of them are bad people, or blocking all refugees into your country and sending them back to a war-torn country where many of them will die.

What is worse? Giving a few African Americans and women who aren't qualified for a job or a school an opportunity to try, or letting racism and sexism keep qualified candidates away from opportunities they are most certainly qualified for.

What is worse? Moving towards renewable resources and getting off fossil fuels early only to find out Climate Change was a hoax, continuing to burn through fossil fuels for decades until it's too late to do anything about climate change?

If you believe in erroring towards kindness and believe it is better to help someone who doesn't need it versus letting someone who needs help struggle or dies then you are a liberal. If you believe that erroring towards cruelty, and making others fend for themselves to make sure nobody is swindling you then you are likely a conservative.
 

SDET

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2015
Messages
7,802
Reaction score
1,608
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I acknowledge that there are people in this country who cannot contribute to society, either because of physical, mental, or emotional considerations. Am I a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

I also acknowledge that there probably is some welfare fraud in this country. That said, welfare fraud is managed at the State level, and in that sense, National politics is NOT involved. I find that those that vote Nationally based on what they perceive, as welfare-recipients-on-the-take, are misguided. Does that make me a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

Even hard core right wingers acknowledge the same. They just put the job in the hands of the church, not the state.
 

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,648
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Even hard core right wingers acknowledge the same. They just put the job in the hands of the church, not the state.

My church holds a potluck once a month. Members bring extra food, and a lot of new people show up on those potluck days. Not sure how this helps them on the other 29 days of the month.
 

EMNofSeattle

No Shame!
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 20, 2014
Messages
27,366
Reaction score
8,372
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
My church holds a potluck once a month. Members bring extra food, and a lot of new people show up on those potluck days. Not sure how this helps them on the other 29 days of the month.

If the people weren’t so overtaxed they could give more money to churches, and in fact would because even if they didn’t believe it would be in their rational self interest to do so.

Also associating with churches gets you social connections to improve your life.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,352
Reaction score
2,436
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Sounds like it. I've found that with so many of these types of questions it really comes down to a simple question. What's the worst mistake? If you're going to error which way should you error?

What is worse? Feeding some people who might be able to feed themselves, or starving some people who definitely can't feed themselves? A liberal errors towards kindness conservative errors towards cruelty.

What is worse? Providing health care to a person who could probably afford their own, or letting someone die because they're too poor to pay for health care?

What is worse? Paying a bad teacher a little bit more money for no improvement in output, or not paying teachers enough and driving highly talented teachers out of the business?

What is worse? Allowing a bunch of refugees into your country and risking that a few of them are bad people, or blocking all refugees into your country and sending them back to a war-torn country where many of them will die.

What is worse? Giving a few African Americans and women who aren't qualified for a job or a school an opportunity to try, or letting racism and sexism keep qualified candidates away from opportunities they are most certainly qualified for.

What is worse? Moving towards renewable resources and getting off fossil fuels early only to find out Climate Change was a hoax, continuing to burn through fossil fuels for decades until it's too late to do anything about climate change?

If you believe in erroring towards kindness and believe it is better to help someone who doesn't need it versus letting someone who needs help struggle or dies then you are a liberal. If you believe that erroring towards cruelty, and making others fend for themselves to make sure nobody is swindling you then you are likely a conservative.

Trying to legislate outcomes is a fools errand. Picking winners and losers is fundamentally unfair.

Legislating equal opportunity is far more likely to be effective, accomplished, and fair.
 

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,648
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If the people weren’t so overtaxed they could give more money to churches, and in fact would because even if they didn’t believe it would be in their rational self interest to do so.

Also associating with churches gets you social connections to improve your life.

So are you saying that Mental Institutions, Physical Rehab Centers, Psychiatric facilities for the Emotionally Disturbed, etc should all be run by Churches?
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Even hard core right wingers acknowledge the same. They just put the job in the hands of the church, not the state.

Because hardcore right-wingers want to use charity from the church as a means to proselytize people and convert them to their religion. Liberals understand that kindness being used as a means to an end to manipulate others is not in fact kindness at all.
 

ttwtt78640

Sometimes wrong
DP Veteran
Joined
May 22, 2012
Messages
70,502
Reaction score
40,154
Location
Uhland, Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
I acknowledge that there are people in this country who cannot contribute to society, either because of physical, mental, or emotional considerations. Am I a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

I also acknowledge that there probably is some welfare fraud in this country. That said, welfare fraud is managed at the State level, and in that sense, National politics is NOT involved. I find that those that vote Nationally based on what they perceive, as welfare-recipients-on-the-take, are misguided. Does that make me a Bleeding Heart Liberal?

If national funding is involved then national politics is involved.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Trying to legislate outcomes is a fool's errand.
We're not. We legislating opportunities.

Picking winners and losers is fundamentally unfair.
We're not picking winners and losers. We're minimizing the suffering of losers, and minimizing the excesses of the winners because suffering people will grow desperate and become dangerous.

Liberalism is not the WWE it is the NFL draft and salary cap.

Legislating equal opportunity is far more likely to be effective, accomplished, and fair.
Well, then I would like to personally welcome you to the Democratic Party. Congratulations on becoming a bleeding heart liberal.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
If national funding is involved then national politics is involved.

If local funding is involved then local politics are involved. It's a lot easier for evil to overtake a small government than a big one.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
If the people weren’t so overtaxed they could give more money to churches, and in fact, would because even if they didn’t believe it would be in their rational self-interest to do so.
First, people shouldn't have to endure proselytization in order to receive aid.

Second, voluntary charity forces the kind to subsidize the cruelty of the evil. You're ignoring the reality that charity benefits us all not just those who receive it.

Also associating with churches gets you social connections to improve your life.
I can get those in school.
 

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,648
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Because hardcore right-wingers want to use charity from the church as a means to proselytize people and convert them to their religion. Liberals understand that kindness being used as a means to an end to manipulate others is not in fact kindness at all.

This is one problem. I also see it as a somewhat unfair system. Church giving is voluntary. So some may give a lot, but many give nothing. In this regard, the Atheists and non-church-goers will benefit financially.
 

Media_Truth

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 31, 2016
Messages
11,375
Reaction score
2,648
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
If national funding is involved then national politics is involved.

It's an easy remark to make, but the backup is much more difficult. I claim that fraud is handled by the state, and the structure of State Politics backs me up. Please provide your backup.
 

Joecool44

Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2018
Messages
222
Reaction score
70
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
It's an easy remark to make, but the backup is much more difficult. I claim that fraud is handled by the state, and the structure of State Politics backs me up. Please provide your backup.

In my state, welfare fraud is indeed handled by state employees but those state employees have 53% of their salaries paid for by SNAP (food stamp) funds.

Not sure if this is true of other states but I imagine it would be similar as states would not refuse federal dollars.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
This is one problem. I also see it as a somewhat unfair system. Church giving is voluntary. So some may give a lot, but many give nothing. In this regard, the Atheists and non-church-goers will benefit financially.

Correct, and let me just say as an Atheist myself I don't want that benefit.

But, it's worse than that. You see by putting the burden of covering things like welfare, education, health care... down to smaller levels like states, cities, or even churches you're ignoring one of the most fundamental concepts in Economics. That being Nash Equilibriums.

You see the same states who are focused on paying for welfare, education, infrastructure, health care... are also in competition for jobs and for wealthy citizens. They need wealth citizens and corporations to help them generate the wealth necessary to pay for these things. But the smaller the scale you're working with the more you increase the likelihood that a selfish person can escape the burden. If a city wants to build a new school, for example, wealthy citizens without children or children going to private schools might move to the next town over to avoid the property taxes for that school. They could move 15 miles down the road, and still be able to commute to their old job, still see all their friends and family, but avoid the tax. This makes it very hard for towns to raise the tax revenue they need to pay for things like this without losing the high earners they need to collect taxes from.

At the state level, this is a bit easier. Someone deciding to up and move to a different state is much more difficult. The distance alone could separate you from friends and families. A business may not be able to convince high-quality employees to move with them. But as we've seen from new businesses like Amazon, for instance, they can demand huge tax deals in order to put their headquarters in a specific city or state. So long as their goods can be shipped across state lines without issue there is no reason for them to pick one state over the other and can put their headquarters where ever they think they'll get the best deal.

That is why ultimately most taxes need to be collected at the federal level. They can be re-distributed back down to the states, but they must be collected federally because it is only at the federal level that we have a meaningful ability to punish businesses who try and leave the country and ship goods back in. It's also significantly harder for an American citizen to up and moves their business to an entirely new country. The distance and unfamiliarity alone is a problem, not to mention there's no guarantee that the new country you move to won't have other laws you don't like.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,352
Reaction score
2,436
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
We're not. We legislating opportunities.


We're not picking winners and losers. We're minimizing the suffering of losers, and minimizing the excesses of the winners because suffering people will grow desperate and become dangerous.

Liberalism is not the WWE it is the NFL draft and salary cap.


Well, then I would like to personally welcome you to the Democratic Party. Congratulations on becoming a bleeding heart liberal.

Thank you for demonstrating you are picking winners and losers. In violation of the constitution no less.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Thank you for demonstrating you are picking winners and losers.
Thank you for demonstrating your inability to grasp the English language.

In violation of the constitution no less.
And then doing it again.

Only two excuses for you to post what you just posted. #1. Blind Ignorance #2 Willful Ignorance. I'll let you decide which applies to you, but one of them definitely does.
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,352
Reaction score
2,436
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Thank you for demonstrating your inability to grasp the English language.


And then doing it again.

Only two excuses for you to post what you just posted. #1. Blind Ignorance #2 Willful Ignorance. I'll let you decide which applies to you, but one of them definitely does.

When you take resources from one (sans permission) and give it to another you are picking winners and losers.

It is both wrong and evil. First theft of land, then theft of labor, and now theft of votes....Real nice democrat party there.

Have fun starting a go fund me and leave the rest of us alone.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
When you take resources from one (sans permission) and give it to another you are picking winners and losers.
First, we do have permission. Second, improving parity is not the same as picking winners and losers. Most major professional sports leagues have some form of a salary cap that ensures the winners from the past can't use their winnings to establish an unending reign of dominance for the future. That does not mean that winners are chosen, it simply means that each year the bad teams have an opportunity to come back, and the good teams have a more difficult time maintaining their dominance.

It is both wrong and evil. First theft of land, then theft of labor, and now theft of votes....Real nice democrat party there.
What exactly do you hope to gain with your continued willful ignorance? Why is listening and opening your mind so unacceptable to you?
 

akyron

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 17, 2004
Messages
10,352
Reaction score
2,436
Location
Texas
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
First, we do have permission. Second, improving parity is not the same as picking winners and losers. Most major professional sports leagues have some form of a salary cap that ensures the winners from the past can't use their winnings to establish an unending reign of dominance for the future. That does not mean that winners are chosen, it simply means that each year the bad teams have an opportunity to come back, and the good teams have a more difficult time maintaining their dominance.


What exactly do you hope to gain with your continued willful ignorance? Why is listening and opening your mind so unacceptable to you?

Permission from yourself to rob someone else does not count.

Parity of opportunity is fine . That is not what you advocate.

Never appears to work in court so they say.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Thank you for demonstrating you are picking winners and losers. In violation of the constitution no less.

https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-1/24-power-to-tax-and-spend.html

Please read the Constitution before you try and tell others they are in violation of it.

SECTION 8. Clause 1. The Congress shall have the Power to lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts, and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts, and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,535
Reaction score
5,561
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Permission from yourself to rob someone else does not count.
By choosing to live in the United States you are granting permission to it's elected leaders to lay and collect taxes.

Parity of opportunity is fine . That is not what you advocate.
Yes, it is. It is exactly what I am advocating you are just willfully choosing to be obtuse.
 
Top Bottom