Human Dignity and Happiness: The Moral Argument for the Right

[kaz]

He's right you know, no one feels empowered when all your options are just different flavors of poverty.

Yes, if government doesn't take care of us, then we'll all live in poverty. Your faith in humanity is endearing.

Interesting you think so little of people's ability to take care of themselves, yet it never occurred to you that government consists of ... people.

Never occurred to you, did it?

In our case the government consists of people who care little for protecting the economy from periodic ruin and then wanting to just throw money at the problem rather than addressing the structural defects that make individuals quit trying because it is unrewarding and unreliable in the long run.

LOL, it is government that makes "individuals quit trying because it is unrewarding and unreliable in the long run."

 

[occupied]

Yes, if government doesn't take care of us, then we'll all live in poverty. Your faith in humanity is endearing.

Interesting you think so little of people's ability to take care of themselves, yet it never occurred to you that government consists of ... people.

Never occurred to you, did it?

In our case the government consists of people who care little for protecting the economy from periodic ruin and then wanting to just throw money at the problem rather than addressing the structural defects that make individuals quit trying because it is unrewarding and unreliable in the long run.

LOL, it is government that makes "individuals quit trying because it is unrewarding and unreliable in the long run."

Not precisely, in our case far too many regulators got free market fever and simply quit doing their jobs. They allowed there to be tax advantages to outsourcing, never should have gone on a year much less decades, they allowed the minimum wage to steadily slip, they allowed shady banking practices to continue in the face of dire predictions of fraud, in other words, they allowed the free market to work against American citizens. I don't care what your political leanings are but Americans directly competing with foreign slaves for jobs had only one possible conclusion, no one can say differently.

 

[OKTexas]

I think the problem is that the left views humans as people with material needs that need to be met(subsidized birth control, food, housing, etc.) The right believes that humans need more than that. They need a sense of purpose and empowerment, something that no government can give you. We want to create the conditions for success, so all Americans can achieve their own pursuits and desires.

I see you haven't figured out the Alinski age of politics. Nothing the right says is true, they lie they are evil, they hate the country, they are only for the rich, they want the country trashed, they want everyone working at McDonalds, they want everyone's children uneducated and living in ghettos, they want all the good jobs sent overseas, they don't want anyone but the rich to have healthcare, and I could go on and on and on and on.

The point is if you take everything the left says in total it's really easy to see how absurd their bullshit line is, but the targets of the left seem to lack the ability to ever hear more than one or two of their assertions and can never look at the big picture, the manipulation of simple minded people is just too easy. Just look a jake the fake.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Human Dignity and Happiness: The Moral Argument for the Right

Given the hostility most conservatives exhibit toward gay and transgender Americans, low income, Hispanic, and female Americans, clearly there’s no ‘moral argument’ for the right.

In fact, most conservatives pursue an agenda anathema to ‘human dignity and happiness.’

 

[Hoosier4Liberty]

It's also important to note that conservatives would sooner cut off their testicles than protect a single American job against being outsourced or an American worker from being unfairly exploited by their employers, there is more to dignity than a lousy paycheck, no labor rights and a government that always sides with management no matter how shitty they are.

wrong....you can say that about RINOS and Dimwits.....but not real conservatives.....

...free trade agreements were a long-standing policy of leftists, including Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton (who led the push for America’s entry into NAFTA in 1993), and Barack Obama. Lighthizer also says that those considered to be America’s leading conservatives, including former Senator Jesse Helms (R-.N.C.), former Senator Robert Taft (R-Ohio), Alexander Hamilton (one of our nation’s Founding Fathers), and even former President Theodore Roosevelt, who wrote that “pernicious indulgence in the doctrine of free trade seems inevitably to produce fatty degeneration of the moral fiber.” In fact, the first vocal Republican in support of free trade was Dwight Eisenhower, who was vociferously opposed by conservatives, including supporters of Robert Taft and the then-nascent John Birch Society (Robert Welch‘s damning investigation, The Politician, discussed much of Eisenhower‘s leftist tendencies).

Real Conservatives Oppose NAFTA

and why is it the CONSERVATIVES are the only ones who want to block our borders from the hoards of incoming cheap illegal workers that take American jobs.....?

Trade is incredibly important for not only economic progress but also peace. The problem with "free trade" is not the degree in which trade is free but the degree in which it isn't.

Many people blame NAFTA but the imbalance with NAFTA is not that significant and considering Canada has a lot of oil it has worked out pretty well for the US.

What hasn't worked out as well is trade with China. We have seen a lot of benefits by trading with China but the cost of a trade imbalance builds up over time as the labor market is eroded. Not to mention the fact that the imbalance is maintained through debt which comes with it's own problems.

I honestly don't know too many people who care about trade that think our trade relationship with China can be considered "free trade."

I agree. I support trade, but we need to get China to lower its tariffs so we can compete on a level ground.

 

[OKTexas]

Human Dignity and Happiness: The Moral Argument for the Right

Given the hostility most conservatives exhibit toward gay and transgender Americans, low income, Hispanic, and female Americans, clearly there’s no ‘moral argument’ for the right.

In fact, most conservatives pursue an agenda anathema to ‘human dignity and happiness.’

Saul would be so proud.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Libertarianism and far right reactionary politics do not empower the people

As for libertarians, letting people make their own choices over their own lives isn't empowering them. LOL. You're a hoot. Government care from cradle to grave, now THAT's empowerment, eh Jakey?

As for reactionaries, they are under your bed, in your closet. They went through your underwear drawer. They are watching you Jake, very, very closely...

That's what you say, Kaz. The far right is fraudulent.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I think the problem is that the left views humans as people with material needs that need to be met(subsidized birth control, food, housing, etc.) The right believes that humans need more than that. They need a sense of purpose and empowerment, something that no government can give you. We want to create the conditions for success, so all Americans can achieve their own pursuits and desires.

I see you haven't figured out the Alinski age of politics. Nothing the right says is true, they lie they are evil, they hate the country, they are only for the rich, they want the country trashed, they want everyone working at McDonalds, they want everyone's children uneducated and living in ghettos, they want all the good jobs sent overseas, they don't want anyone but the rich to have healthcare, and I could go on and on and on and on.

The point is if you take everything the left says in total it's really easy to see how absurd their bullshit line is, but the targets of the left seem to lack the ability to ever hear more that one or two of their assertions and can never look at the big picture, the manipulation of simple minded people is just too easy. Just look a jake the fake.

I suspect you are looking in the mirror when you say this.

That's all right, you are harmless.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Conservative opposition to privacy rights is a good example of the OP’s hypocrisy.

Where is the ‘dignity’ in compelling a woman to be violated by a medically unnecessary procedure solely motivated to manifest an unwarranted, undue burden to exercising her Constitutional rights.

 

[OKTexas]

I think the problem is that the left views humans as people with material needs that need to be met(subsidized birth control, food, housing, etc.) The right believes that humans need more than that. They need a sense of purpose and empowerment, something that no government can give you. We want to create the conditions for success, so all Americans can achieve their own pursuits and desires.

I see you haven't figured out the Alinski age of politics. Nothing the right says is true, they lie they are evil, they hate the country, they are only for the rich, they want the country trashed, they want everyone working at McDonalds, they want everyone's children uneducated and living in ghettos, they want all the good jobs sent overseas, they don't want anyone but the rich to have healthcare, and I could go on and on and on and on.

The point is if you take everything the left says in total it's really easy to see how absurd their bullshit line is, but the targets of the left seem to lack the ability to ever hear more that one or two of their assertions and can never look at the big picture, the manipulation of simple minded people is just too easy. Just look a jake the fake.

I suspect you are looking in the mirror when you say this.

That's all right, you are harmless.

And the simple minded chimes in, right on cue, good job fakey.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Conservative opposition to privacy rights is a good example of the OP’s hypocrisy.

Where is the ‘dignity’ in compelling a woman to be violated by a medically unnecessary procedure solely motivated to manifest an unwarranted, undue burden to exercising her Constitutional rights.

where is the 'dignity' of destroying an innocent helpless human life.....?

and where are the baby's so-called 'privacy rights'.....?

and where is the living baby's 'right to life'....?

where do you draw the line between life and death....? obviously for liberals the line is drawn wherever its 'convenient' for them...

 

[kaz]

In our case the government consists of people who care little for protecting the economy from periodic ruin and then wanting to just throw money at the problem rather than addressing the structural defects that make individuals quit trying because it is unrewarding and unreliable in the long run.

LOL, it is government that makes "individuals quit trying because it is unrewarding and unreliable in the long run."

Not precisely, in our case far too many regulators got free market fever and simply quit doing their jobs. They allowed there to be tax advantages to outsourcing, never should have gone on a year much less decades, they allowed the minimum wage to steadily slip, they allowed shady banking practices to continue in the face of dire predictions of fraud, in other words, they allowed the free market to work against American citizens. I don't care what your political leanings are but Americans directly competing with foreign slaves for jobs had only one possible conclusion, no one can say differently.

Too many regulators got free market fever. You live in a dream world. You're obviously not a business owner and you have not been in management or worked on Wall Street. I have done all those, and I still run my own business. The reality is power hungry regulators are regulating us to death. We have government strangled markets, and that is the problem.

You're a hoot though. Clinton had an overt policy of forcing banks to make sub-prime loans and the fed funded them. W came in and said wow, that's not going to end well. Then he continued the policy. Then a few years later the housing bubble burst. But you can't connect those two simple dots.

Data point 1: Government forced banks to make sub-prime loans and government funded them with endless virtually zero interest rates.

Data point 2: The housing bubble burst when sub prime loan holders started to default.

So, occupied, what is the cause and effect relationship between those points?

Uhhh....errrr....hmmmm. Bam, I know, I got it! To much free markets!

All I can say is keep on chugging! The kool-aid is great!

 

[editec]

It's also important to note that conservatives would sooner cut off their testicles than protect a single American job against being outsourced or an American worker from being unfairly exploited by their employers, there is more to dignity than a lousy paycheck, no labor rights and a government that always sides with management no matter how shitty they are.

wrong....you can say that about RINOS and Dimwits.....but not real conservatives.....

...free trade agreements were a long-standing policy of leftists, including Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton (who led the push for America’s entry into NAFTA in 1993), and Barack Obama. Lighthizer also says that those considered to be America’s leading conservatives, including former Senator Jesse Helms (R-.N.C.), former Senator Robert Taft (R-Ohio), Alexander Hamilton (one of our nation’s Founding Fathers), and even former President Theodore Roosevelt, who wrote that “pernicious indulgence in the doctrine of free trade seems inevitably to produce fatty degeneration of the moral fiber.” In fact, the first vocal Republican in support of free trade was Dwight Eisenhower, who was vociferously opposed by conservatives, including supporters of Robert Taft and the then-nascent John Birch Society (Robert Welch‘s damning investigation, The Politician, discussed much of Eisenhower‘s leftist tendencies).

Real Conservatives Oppose NAFTA

and why is it the CONSERVATIVES are the only ones who want to block our borders from the hoards of incoming cheap illegal workers that take American jobs.....?

That's not true, but that IS the narrative many CONS tell themselves..as you just did.

 

[Sunshine]

I can't stand it when liberals try to claim the moral high ground in the debates, and the conservatives are left without a response based on morality. It's so blatantly obvious based on GDP and economic growth data that free enterprise works. Free markets and limited government beat bureaucracy and central planning every day of the week. GDP growth from decades and decades confirms this beyond the tiniest shadow of a doubt. But liberals always talk about how free enterprise is "unfair" and "hurts the little man". We need our own moral argument, and it's pretty simple.

We as conservatives/libertarians believe that people need more than just relief provided by welfare(or the "compassion", as liberals call it). They need empowerment. Liberals always focus on relief, but the real measure of economic success is how many people become self-sufficient, self-reliant individuals. Studies show that people are happier when they feel they've earned their own success. Barack Obama can't give you happiness and fulfill your hopes and dreams. Only the individual can. That's what the right is all about. We're the party of free markets, individual initiative, and capitalism. Our policies ensure that every person has the opportunity to pursue their own happiness and achieve their own hopes and dreams. We need to go to every ghetto in America and preach our message. I believe that most people who are trapped in welfare don't sincerely want to be there for the rest of their lives. We need to focus on providing the opportunity to get out of welfare. Let's win one for free enterprise and opportunity, not bigger government.

Excellent post! There are some things I could ad, but they would just draw fire from the left wing bigots, so I shall refrain. It is a nice day today, and I prefer to start off with something uplifting, and your post is definitely that as I look back over my own life.

 

[kaz]

Libertarianism and far right reactionary politics do not empower the people

As for libertarians, letting people make their own choices over their own lives isn't empowering them. LOL. You're a hoot. Government care from cradle to grave, now THAT's empowerment, eh Jakey?

As for reactionaries, they are under your bed, in your closet. They went through your underwear drawer. They are watching you Jake, very, very closely...

That's what you say, Kaz. The far right is fraudulent.

We can do it for ourselves, we don't need government to take care of us! Free markets? What up? Crap, you caught us on that fraud Jake, of course we need government to take care of us. That's why we're so afraid of you. Following you wherever you go, trying to discredit you. You're onto us, and you won't stop calling us out. BTW, cool pajamas you have on. And don't worry about the noises in the attic, that isn't where we have our surveillance center based. I swear.

 

[Sunshine]

Liberals define compassion by how many they helped. Conservatives define compassion by how few need it.

The problem is that the type of help liberals give only creates the need for more help.

 

[Sunshine]

Human Dignity and Happiness: The Moral Argument for the Right

Given the hostility most conservatives exhibit toward gay and transgender Americans, low income, Hispanic, and female Americans, clearly there’s no ‘moral argument’ for the right.

In fact, most conservatives pursue an agenda anathema to ‘human dignity and happiness.’

I have decided you are a tranny. That's all you talk about. Your comment doesn't in any way shape form or fashion fit in this thread.

 

[Sunshine]

Conservative opposition to privacy rights is a good example of the OP’s hypocrisy.

Where is the ‘dignity’ in compelling a woman to be violated by a medically unnecessary procedure solely motivated to manifest an unwarranted, undue burden to exercising her Constitutional rights.

This thread is not about abortion.

 

[occupied]

LOL, it is government that makes "individuals quit trying because it is unrewarding and unreliable in the long run."

Not precisely, in our case far too many regulators got free market fever and simply quit doing their jobs. They allowed there to be tax advantages to outsourcing, never should have gone on a year much less decades, they allowed the minimum wage to steadily slip, they allowed shady banking practices to continue in the face of dire predictions of fraud, in other words, they allowed the free market to work against American citizens. I don't care what your political leanings are but Americans directly competing with foreign slaves for jobs had only one possible conclusion, no one can say differently.

Too many regulators got free market fever. You live in a dream world. You're obviously not a business owner and you have not been in management or worked on Wall Street. I have done all those, and I still run my own business. The reality is power hungry regulators are regulating us to death. We have government strangled markets, and that is the problem.

You're a hoot though. Clinton had an overt policy of forcing banks to make sub-prime loans and the fed funded them. W came in and said wow, that's not going to end well. Then he continued the policy. Then a few years later the housing bubble burst. But you can't connect those two simple dots.

Data point 1: Government forced banks to make sub-prime loans and government funded them with endless virtually zero interest rates.

Data point 2: The housing bubble burst when sub prime loan holders started to default.

So, occupied, what is the cause and effect relationship between those points?

Uhhh....errrr....hmmmm. Bam, I know, I got it! To much free markets!

All I can say is keep on chugging! The kool-aid is great!

You are not the first one to try to tell me that the crash was all the government's fault but it just doesn't fly. If all those horrible poor people who could no longer afford their homes was the only problem then there probably would not been much of a crash. No it was the huge wave of real estate speculators walking away from their expensive five-year mortgages that hurt the worst, couple that with the Mortgages being leveraged for many times their value and AIG not having enough reserves to pay off losses and you have the perfect storm of lax oversight and drunken bets on shaky investments. Come on you worked on Wall Street (you said) you ought to know this stuff by now.

 

[kaz]

Not precisely, in our case far too many regulators got free market fever and simply quit doing their jobs. They allowed there to be tax advantages to outsourcing, never should have gone on a year much less decades, they allowed the minimum wage to steadily slip, they allowed shady banking practices to continue in the face of dire predictions of fraud, in other words, they allowed the free market to work against American citizens. I don't care what your political leanings are but Americans directly competing with foreign slaves for jobs had only one possible conclusion, no one can say differently.

Too many regulators got free market fever. You live in a dream world. You're obviously not a business owner and you have not been in management or worked on Wall Street. I have done all those, and I still run my own business. The reality is power hungry regulators are regulating us to death. We have government strangled markets, and that is the problem.

You're a hoot though. Clinton had an overt policy of forcing banks to make sub-prime loans and the fed funded them. W came in and said wow, that's not going to end well. Then he continued the policy. Then a few years later the housing bubble burst. But you can't connect those two simple dots.

Data point 1: Government forced banks to make sub-prime loans and government funded them with endless virtually zero interest rates.

Data point 2: The housing bubble burst when sub prime loan holders started to default.

So, occupied, what is the cause and effect relationship between those points?

Uhhh....errrr....hmmmm. Bam, I know, I got it! To much free markets!

All I can say is keep on chugging! The kool-aid is great!

You are not the first one to try to tell me that the crash was all the government's fault but it just doesn't fly. If all those horrible poor people who could no longer afford their homes was the only problem then there probably would not been much of a crash. No it was the huge wave of real estate speculators walking away from their expensive five-year mortgages that hurt the worst, couple that with the Mortgages being leveraged for many times their value and AIG not having enough reserves to pay off losses and you have the perfect storm of lax oversight and drunken bets on shaky investments. Come on you worked on Wall Street (you said) you ought to know this stuff by now.

Winston Churchill: I can explain it to you, I cannot comprehend it for you. You're never going to blame a politician for the consequence of their actions. It is what it is.

Even though you don't know anything about economics, finance or business, if you have a critical mind then you can apply the smell test.

1) My facts, it isn't even a view. All banks followed government policy (to make sub-prime loans) and used virtually zero interest Fed loans to do it. And my view that therefore it's on the politicians who used force on the banks and funded it.

2) Your view that every bank simultaneously decided to make irresponsible loans and collapse at the same time and even though sub-prime loans were government policy and they were using endless, virtually free government cash to do it, all the players in the entire marketplace simultaneously failed on their own.

Yeah, your "theory" reeks to high heaven.