i think you just showed something....not taking responsibility for ones self.......and wanting to shrug your freedom to chose you own way!
what did Wolff say...man makes good money....but does not want to pay 200 /300 a month for insurance.
i pay $305 dollars a month for my insurance....its something i accept, and know i must do........others can follow my example.
So let him die? What if this was your son, or uncle, or brother. You gonna tell him to his face, sorry you're gonna die..?
So let him die? What if this was your son, or uncle, or brother. You gonna tell him to his face, sorry you're gonna die..?
A complete inability to relate to those who are less fortunate.
..... OR we believe that the best way to help people isn't always through government assistance, especially at the federal level.
My personal experience is that the far right and far left have equal empathy, but I could've easily lied and said the far left has no empathy.For **** sake.. to further your argument you simply discredit what I have to say because its personal experience. So are we only suppose to talk about Straight up facts on this website? There's no room for personal experience? You don't have to take my word for it. Get out of your house and socialize with some people. It's not like what I said is any Big Secret that only I possess knowledge of.
Conservatives and libertarians want economic policies that are good for the economy. If you wanna spin that into a lack of empathy, I can't stop you.Do you deny that conservatives take a lone wolf attitude and liberals take a we're all in this together attitude? Libertarianism vs Communism?
Exclusively? Phfft! No. Not by a long shot.Could that be because those who have the financial means to be "generous" with their money are by in large, Republicans?
Surely you jest...I'm a leftist now? Eh, I thinks there are about, oh, a couple dozen dozen people here who are scratching their heads on that one...
Individual freedom is mmm...mmm... good.
I do abhor hypocrisy though...
You cry against government control but only because you view it as competition. You cry against totalitarian governments and despotism but would only replace it with a privatized tyranny.
You'd applaud while millions suffer at the hands, the greedy hands of the few, but would be first to call on the evil, heavy-handed government to protect your fortune for you.
It's worse than hypocritical, its cowardice.
You mean those tax write off charitable donations where they simply sign a check and say here, I'm a good person?
So let him die? What if this was your son, or uncle, or brother. You gonna tell him to his face, sorry you're gonna die..?
I think you just proved my point.. lack of empathy.
From Merriam Webster:
em·pa·thy noun \ˈem-pə-thē\
: the feeling that you understand and share another person's experiences and emotions : the ability to share someone else's feelings
If someone chooses not to buy insurance, that is his choice. Empathy means you understand his choice. So in the example of the man who didn't buy insurance, respecting his freedom of choice is actually the very definition of empathy.
How do you get respecting a choice from the definition you posted regarding empathy? I see no correlation whatsoever. Respecting one's choice is valid, absolutely, but there's no level of understanding *why* they made the choice, or *what* they're feeling. Respecting is intellectual, not emotional. One can disagree with a person and still intellectually respect their conclusion.
A complete inability to relate to those who are less fortunate.
I posted the definition of empathy because we discussed it at the beginning of this thread.
If someone tells me that they choose not to do "x", I don't question if it it's a choice someone has the right to make. I also understand the feelings of grown ups who think they have a right to make their own decisions.
I assume the OP meant sympathy, not empathy, since sympathy is a different emotion and has different results.
:shrug: if by "empathy" you mean "enabling".
In the meantime, conservatives are more likely to give their money to charity, more likely to give blood, and more likely to volunteer at soup kitchens and the like. The liberal response to this is typically that once you control for religiosity and income, conservatives and liberals are actually equally generous - an interesting argument, that once you strip out the main cause of conservatives' empathy, they only tie liberals. Regardless, it would certainly seem to disprove the thesis that somehow conservatives are significantly less likely to care about their fellow man.
A complete inability to relate to those who are less fortunate.
I don't think they lack empathy. Some of the nicest people I know are some of the most hardcore Tea Party members with the most far rightwing politics.
I think the divide takes place with individualism vs collectivism and group mentalities.
It seems like the far right is very empathetic and supportive of people in their immediate circles or people that share a lot of their characteristics. They don't seem to be very empathetic for people outside of their immediate circles or people that are different.
I think it's interesting that you'll have overnight shifts in views when something changes though. Someone will think gays should never be married and once their son comes out gay...they do a 180. Someone will state that anyone that takes unemployment insurance is a moocher but the minute they need it the program is a life saver and is one of the "good" safety nets.
i have been here for a few months
can you point out one post where a conservative, or right winger said we dont need safety nets at all?
i havent seen one
now i have posted that the unemployment benefits "should" expire at six months
but that isnt the same thing...is it?
but nothing like painting with a real broad brush
A complete inability to relate to those who are less fortunate.
I responded to the content of YOUR post, that's why I quoted it.
I don't "applaud while millions suffer" nor do I believe anyone who isn't at least channeling a leftist believes it would be at "the greedy hands of a few" anyway. Nor do I have a fortune to protect. And even more hilarious, up until this moment I don't think I've ever even posted the word "totalitarian".
Sorry, you missed your target by several miles.
From Merriam Webster:
em·pa·thy noun \ˈem-pə-thē\
: the feeling that you understand and share another person's experiences and emotions : the ability to share someone else's feelings
If someone chooses not to buy insurance, that is his choice. Empathy means you understand his choice. So in the example of the man who didn't buy insurance, respecting his freedom of choice is actually the very definition of empathy.
irrelevant to libertarian principles.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?