Conservative vs Liberal: Exploitation vs Innovation

[Quantum Windbag]

Is there a historical precedence for the business divide between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals look at business as "expansion through innovation". It's why they push education. It's why colleges and universities are mostly liberal. They see government as having a role in directing capital towards investment in education and research. They see America's lead in technology as a direct result in educational investment.

Conservatives seem to prefer "exploitation" of existing resources. Moving jobs to China to take advantage of China's 88 dollar a month minimum wage. Removing regulations regarding clean air and clean water. Removing benefits such as health care or retirement or education as a way to increase profits. Whether it's exploitation of resources or people. Conservatives don't really care where technology comes from. They see major opportunities in exploitation.

Has it always been that way?

Look at the North and the Deep South before the Civil War. It was the North that was considered "liberal". They pushed education and shied away from slavery and other types of human exploitation. If the south had 20% of the North's technology and innovation, they might have won the Civil War.

Ironically, two of the greatest inventions that came from the south were the cotton gin and the musket, both from white inventor, Eli Whitney. But the move famous scientist and innovator was certainly former slave George Washington Carver, a man who probably had the greatest impact economically after the civil war because of his discoveries in agriculture and his inventions.

I prefer innovation over exploitation. History shows innovation wins. But only if it can be kept from being hamstrung by those who prefer exploitation.

The musket came from the south?

Your liberal education failed again. Muskets were around before St Augustine was founded, and were made way back in the 1300s.

Another rdean fail.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is there a historical precedence for the business divide between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals look at business as "expansion through innovation". It's why they push eduction.

Thanks for showing me that. For some reason my spellcheck misses that word. I don't know why. At least you didn't disagree.

If you had a real education you might know that eduction is a real word. That is why intelligent people prefer to proofread themselves rather than rely on a spellchecker.

Eduction - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary

 

[Quantum Windbag]

And now we get back to Steve Jobs. Do you have a better example of a very profitable manufactured product in high demand that could be manufactured here but isn't?

One that is a favorite of liberals perhaps?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Thanks for showing me that. For some reason my spellcheck misses that word. I don't know why. At least you didn't disagree.

It didn't flag it, because it's a real word.

Educe | Define Educe at Dictionary.com
Eduction | Define Eduction at Dictionary.com

Oops, I guess I wasn't the first to point out the stupid idiot's stupid idiocy. Damn.

I wasn't even the second, but I still enjoyed it.

 

[rdean]

Is there a historical precedence for the business divide between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals look at business as "expansion through innovation". It's why they push education. It's why colleges and universities are mostly liberal. They see government as having a role in directing capital towards investment in education and research. They see America's lead in technology as a direct result in educational investment.

Conservatives seem to prefer "exploitation" of existing resources. Moving jobs to China to take advantage of China's 88 dollar a month minimum wage. Removing regulations regarding clean air and clean water. Removing benefits such as health care or retirement or education as a way to increase profits. Whether it's exploitation of resources or people. Conservatives don't really care where technology comes from. They see major opportunities in exploitation.

Has it always been that way?

Look at the North and the Deep South before the Civil War. It was the North that was considered "liberal". They pushed education and shied away from slavery and other types of human exploitation. If the south had 20% of the North's technology and innovation, they might have won the Civil War.

Ironically, two of the greatest inventions that came from the south were the cotton gin and the musket, both from white inventor, Eli Whitney. But the move famous scientist and innovator was certainly former slave George Washington Carver, a man who probably had the greatest impact economically after the civil war because of his discoveries in agriculture and his inventions.

I prefer innovation over exploitation. History shows innovation wins. But only if it can be kept from being hamstrung by those who prefer exploitation.

The musket came from the south?

Your liberal education failed again. Muskets were around before St Augustine was founded, and were made way back in the 1300s.

Another rdean fail.

Whitney is popularly credited with the invention of a musket that could be manufactured with interchangeable parts,

After spending most of 1799-1801 in cotton gin litigation, Whitney began promoting the idea of interchangeable parts, and even arranged a public demonstration of the concept in order to gain time. He did not deliver on the contract until 1809, he then spent the rest of his life publicizing the idea of interchangeability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_Whitney,_Jr.

You work so hard for a "gothca" moment. Must give you an orgasm. Yuck.

Still, Conservatives rely on exploitation and Liberals on innovation. No denying that.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is there a historical precedence for the business divide between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals look at business as "expansion through innovation". It's why they push education. It's why colleges and universities are mostly liberal. They see government as having a role in directing capital towards investment in education and research. They see America's lead in technology as a direct result in educational investment.

Conservatives seem to prefer "exploitation" of existing resources. Moving jobs to China to take advantage of China's 88 dollar a month minimum wage. Removing regulations regarding clean air and clean water. Removing benefits such as health care or retirement or education as a way to increase profits. Whether it's exploitation of resources or people. Conservatives don't really care where technology comes from. They see major opportunities in exploitation.

Has it always been that way?

Look at the North and the Deep South before the Civil War. It was the North that was considered "liberal". They pushed education and shied away from slavery and other types of human exploitation. If the south had 20% of the North's technology and innovation, they might have won the Civil War.

Ironically, two of the greatest inventions that came from the south were the cotton gin and the musket, both from white inventor, Eli Whitney. But the move famous scientist and innovator was certainly former slave George Washington Carver, a man who probably had the greatest impact economically after the civil war because of his discoveries in agriculture and his inventions.

I prefer innovation over exploitation. History shows innovation wins. But only if it can be kept from being hamstrung by those who prefer exploitation.

The musket came from the south?

Your liberal education failed again. Muskets were around before St Augustine was founded, and were made way back in the 1300s.

Another rdean fail.

Whitney is popularly credited with the invention of a musket that could be manufactured with interchangeable parts,

After spending most of 1799-1801 in cotton gin litigation, Whitney began promoting the idea of interchangeable parts, and even arranged a public demonstration of the concept in order to gain time. He did not deliver on the contract until 1809, he then spent the rest of his life publicizing the idea of interchangeability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_Whitney,_Jr.

You work so hard for a "gothca" moment. Must give you an orgasm. Yuck.

Still, Conservatives rely on exploitation and Liberals on innovation. No denying that.

Why don't you just admit you were wrong?

What you said was that the south invented the musket, not that Eli Whitney developed one that was easier to manufacture. The interesting thing about whitney's musket is he stole the idea from a Frenchman by the name of Jean-Baptiste Vaquette de Gribeauval.

Though Whitney is popularly credited with the invention of a musket that could be manufactured with interchangeable parts, the idea predated him. The idea is credited to Jean Baptiste Vaquette de Gribeauval, a French artillerist, and credits for finally perfecting the "armory system," or American system of manufacturing, is given by historian Merritt Roe Smith to Captain John H. Hall and by historian Diana Muir writing in Reflections in Bullough's Pond to Simeon North. In From the American System to Mass Production, historian David A. Hounshell described how de Gribeauval's idea propagated from France to the colonies via two routes: from Honoré Blanc through his friend Thomas Jefferson, and via Major Louis de Tousard, another French artillerist who was instrumental in establishing West Point, teaching the young officer corps of the Continental Army, and establishing the armories at Springfield and Harpers Ferry.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eli_Whitney,_Jr.

Another detail worth mentioning is that Whitney, despite your attempts to link him the the South, was born and raised in Massachusetts. As an adult he lived in Connecticut. He was a Democrat though, so he probably did support slavery, if that makes you feel better.

I don't have to work at all to have gotcha moments with you, you hand them out every time you post.

 

[rdean]

Is there a historical precedence for the business divide between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals look at business as "expansion through innovation". It's why they push education. It's why colleges and universities are mostly liberal. They see government as having a role in directing capital towards investment in education and research. They see America's lead in technology as a direct result in educational investment.

Conservatives seem to prefer "exploitation" of existing resources. Moving jobs to China to take advantage of China's 88 dollar a month minimum wage. Removing regulations regarding clean air and clean water. Removing benefits such as health care or retirement or education as a way to increase profits. Whether it's exploitation of resources or people. Conservatives don't really care where technology comes from. They see major opportunities in exploitation.

Has it always been that way?

Look at the North and the Deep South before the Civil War. It was the North that was considered "liberal". They pushed education and shied away from slavery and other types of human exploitation. If the south had 20% of the North's technology and innovation, they might have won the Civil War.

Ironically, two of the greatest inventions that came from the south were the cotton gin and the musket, both from white inventor, Eli Whitney. But the move famous scientist and innovator was certainly former slave George Washington Carver, a man who probably had the greatest impact economically after the civil war because of his discoveries in agriculture and his inventions.

I prefer innovation over exploitation. History shows innovation wins. But only if it can be kept from being hamstrung by those who prefer exploitation.

The musket came from the south?

Your liberal education failed again. Muskets were around before St Augustine was founded, and were made way back in the 1300s.

Another rdean fail.

Fuck muskets, who gives a shit about them? That wasn't even the point.

 

[rdean]

Liberalism is parasitism. It's expansion through exploitation of the productive.

It's the liberals who are the productive. Where do you think automation and equipment design come from? Not from the right. Surely you know that.

I'm sure you have some proof, right?

I'm just curious. Why would you think that conservatives would be good at engineering or science. They don't believe in evolution or climate change. They don't believe in many aspects of plate tectonics or geology or astronomy. They down education. It's those nasty liberal colleges and universities that gave us so much of the technology and inventions we have today. Not Bible college.

Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media: Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion - Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

 

[rdean]

C'mon rdean. That's silly.

I've known some very creative and innovative conservatives.

Not me. I've been to conferences in Chicago, LA, and Las Vegas on Medical Technology, Automation and Manufacturing. I even gave a seminar at the Rosemont Horizon on introducing 3d technology into manufacturing and sometimes you go out to dinner or to have some drinks with those guys and I have never met a Republican Engineer. They must exist. PEW research says 6% of scientists are Republican so they have to be out there.

I want to meet one so I can ask what they think of "magical creation" and "God put light in transit which is why we can SEE the stars". I want to know what they think about Iraq. I want to know what they think about sending millions of jobs to China. I want to know why they think about building up a communist country over ours. I really want to know.

I knew a document manager who was hard core Republican, but he drank like a fish and he ended up getting fired. He kept coming to work drunk.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Is there a historical precedence for the business divide between liberals and conservatives?

Liberals look at business as "expansion through innovation". It's why they push education. It's why colleges and universities are mostly liberal. They see government as having a role in directing capital towards investment in education and research. They see America's lead in technology as a direct result in educational investment.

Conservatives seem to prefer "exploitation" of existing resources. Moving jobs to China to take advantage of China's 88 dollar a month minimum wage. Removing regulations regarding clean air and clean water. Removing benefits such as health care or retirement or education as a way to increase profits. Whether it's exploitation of resources or people. Conservatives don't really care where technology comes from. They see major opportunities in exploitation.

Has it always been that way?

Look at the North and the Deep South before the Civil War. It was the North that was considered "liberal". They pushed education and shied away from slavery and other types of human exploitation. If the south had 20% of the North's technology and innovation, they might have won the Civil War.

Ironically, two of the greatest inventions that came from the south were the cotton gin and the musket, both from white inventor, Eli Whitney. But the move famous scientist and innovator was certainly former slave George Washington Carver, a man who probably had the greatest impact economically after the civil war because of his discoveries in agriculture and his inventions.

I prefer innovation over exploitation. History shows innovation wins. But only if it can be kept from being hamstrung by those who prefer exploitation.

The musket came from the south?

Your liberal education failed again. Muskets were around before St Augustine was founded, and were made way back in the 1300s.

Another rdean fail.

Fuck muskets, who gives a shit about them? That wasn't even the point.

Quite right.

The point was about education and liberals, and how they keep changing facts around to disguise the fact that they are all idiots.

 

[asterism]

It's the liberals who are the productive. Where do you think automation and equipment design come from? Not from the right. Surely you know that.

I'm sure you have some proof, right?

I'm just curious. Why would you think that conservatives would be good at engineering or science. They don't believe in evolution or climate change.

That's the funny thing about Math, it's impartial to "beliefs." Nice try.

They don't believe in many aspects of plate tectonics or geology or astronomy.

Oh where are you getting this from?

They down education.

???

It's those nasty liberal colleges and universities that gave us so much of the technology and inventions we have today. Not Bible college.

Ah. You're equating "conservative" with "evangelist." That's the fault in your logic right there. I'm a conservative and I didn't attend a Bible college. None of the conservatives in my astronomy group did either.

Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media: Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion - Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

"Results for the scientist survey are based on 2,533 online interviews conducted from May 1 to June 14, 2009 with members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International."

Built in bias there. Most scientists are not members of the AAAS. Most academic scientists are. Science isn't just in colleges and universities, nor is most of the innovation.

Which college lab invented e-commerce? Online auctions? Electronic trading? Packet switching? The computer mouse? The personal computer?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I'm sure you have some proof, right?

I'm just curious. Why would you think that conservatives would be good at engineering or science. They don't believe in evolution or climate change.

That's the funny thing about Math, it's impartial to "beliefs." Nice try.



Oh where are you getting this from?



???

It's those nasty liberal colleges and universities that gave us so much of the technology and inventions we have today. Not Bible college.

Ah. You're equating "conservative" with "evangelist." That's the fault in your logic right there. I'm a conservative and I didn't attend a Bible college. None of the conservatives in my astronomy group did either.

Public Praises Science; Scientists Fault Public, Media: Section 4: Scientists, Politics and Religion - Pew Research Center for the People & the Press

"Results for the scientist survey are based on 2,533 online interviews conducted from May 1 to June 14, 2009 with members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International."

Built in bias there. Most scientists are not members of the AAAS. Most academic scientists are. Science isn't just in colleges and universities, nor is most of the innovation.

Which college lab invented e-commerce? Online auctions? Electronic trading? Packet switching? The computer mouse? The personal computer?

Welcome to the rdean head banging club.

 

[asterism]

C'mon rdean. That's silly.

I've known some very creative and innovative conservatives.

Not me. I've been to conferences in Chicago, LA, and Las Vegas on Medical Technology, Automation and Manufacturing. I even gave a seminar at the Rosemont Horizon on introducing 3d technology into manufacturing and sometimes you go out to dinner or to have some drinks with those guys and I have never met a Republican Engineer. They must exist.

Something tells me you don't exactly give the impression that fosters hanging out with Republicans. At any rate, your limited exposure is not relevant.

PEW research says 6% of scientists are Republican so they have to be out there.

False. Read your own link.

I want to meet one so I can ask what they think of "magical creation" and "God put light in transit which is why we can SEE the stars". I want to know what they think about Iraq. I want to know what they think about sending millions of jobs to China. I want to know why they think about building up a communist country over ours. I really want to know.

http://www.usace.army.mil/about/Pages/Locations.aspx

Find a branch near you.

I knew a document manager who was hard core Republican, but he drank like a fish and he ended up getting fired. He kept coming to work drunk.

Relevance?

 

[asterism]

I'm just curious. Why would you think that conservatives would be good at engineering or science. They don't believe in evolution or climate change. They don't believe in many aspects of plate tectonics or geology or astronomy. They down education. It's those nasty liberal colleges and universities that gave us so much of the technology and inventions we have today. Not Bible college.

What about designing a seawall requires an affirmative belief in any of those things? What about measuring the impact DDT has on the spread of Malaria requires a belief in any of those things?

 

[rdean]

Liberalism is parasitism. It's expansion through exploitation of the productive.

It's the liberals who are the productive. Where do you think automation and equipment design come from? Not from the right. Surely you know that.

I'm sure you have some proof, right?

Do you have proof that more than 6% of scientist are Republican and more than 9% conservative?

The question is, "Why don't scientists identify themselves as conservative? What is it about that philosophy they don't agree with"?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

It's the liberals who are the productive. Where do you think automation and equipment design come from? Not from the right. Surely you know that.

I'm sure you have some proof, right?

Do you have proof that more than 6% of scientist are Republican and more than 9% conservative?

The question is, "Why don't scientists identify themselves as conservative? What is it about that philosophy they don't agree with"?

No, as I told you the first time I looked at those numbers, and asterism just repeated, the members of the AAAS that identify themselves as scientists are primarily liberals and Democrats. Maybe if you got past your fascination with the numbers you might take the time to discover that the AAAS is not a group of scientists as much as it is a PAC for education.

Take a look at their requirements for membership.

AAAS - Membership Offers...

Oops, they don't have any. The only thing they want from their members is a membership fee, not academic qualifications.

 

[Bern80]

It's the liberals who are the productive. Where do you think automation and equipment design come from? Not from the right. Surely you know that.

I'm sure you have some proof, right?

Do you have proof that more than 6% of scientist are Republican and more than 9% conservative?

The question is, "Why don't scientists identify themselves as conservative? What is it about that philosophy they don't agree with"?

The more accurate question would be do they identify themselves as anything at all. Another false presumption on your part that if they don't identify themselves as Republican/conservative they must be Democrat/liberal.

 

[asterism]

It's the liberals who are the productive. Where do you think automation and equipment design come from? Not from the right. Surely you know that.

I'm sure you have some proof, right?

Do you have proof that more than 6% of scientist are Republican and more than 9% conservative?

The question is, "Why don't scientists identify themselves as conservative? What is it about that philosophy they don't agree with"?

So it looks like you don't have proof.