This a question for some of the conservatives in this forum. I mean it sincerely, please don't take it as sarcasm. I am wondering what your ideas are about the direction America should be taking. I am interested in the ideas and ask this question with respect. Hopefully I can get some good answers before it degenerates into the usual pissing contest/slap fest. Thanks
As someone who is generally conceived as conservative, I shall list several things off as regards American policies: 1. An extreme reduction in the income tax, perhaps even its abolishment. 2. Either a strong deduction in labour laws, or a tariff geared towards "levelling the playing field" so that American companies cannot skirt American laws to go overseas and essentially destroy the capacity for American companies to be profitable. 3. A securing of the (Mexican) border, including, if need be, lethal enforcement of our border's security. 4. The criminalization of abortion. 5. The liberalization of gun laws to allow citizens to defend themselves, specifically women, from criminals. 6. The complete abolishment of all forms of affirmative action. 7. A strong restriction in voting rights to allow for a more workable democratic model based on merit. 8. Term limits for federal judges. 9. A return to the gold or/or silver standard for money. 10. Large-scale implementation of the ability to call for recall elections for particularly corrupt and/or incompetant politicians.
Well, I'm Independant with a slight leaning towards the right (except when it comes to religious biases and restrictions to personal freedoms) and I'm all for Prince James' wants except for the criminalization of abortion. In rating his beliefs with mine, 1 being no way in hell, 5 having no opinion on, and 10 being a yes with no if's, and's, or but's, they are: 1) 8 or 9 (I'd prefer a higher consumer tax) 2) 6 or 7 (that problem is part of capitalism but only ends up making the powerful become more powerful and hurts the average citizen) 3) 8 or 9 (illegal immigration IS lowering the standards of our country) 4) 1 (leave religion out of this) 5) 10 (most definitely. I hate the ridiculous gun laws here in CA. Most gun laws are fine to protect ourselves from citizens, but not from the government) 6) 10 (a person should be judged off their ability, not skin color) 7) 5 (seems to restrict our freedom, would need more info on this) 8) 6 (without term limits, it makes the judges too powerful and restricts us with outdated personal biases once they get too old) 9) 5 10) 9 (there's absolutely no reason for this not to already be in place) - N
In a way, having a high income is like consuming alot, since generally a high income can be traced to the sweat of alot people below your income level, most of whom work just as hard (if not harder) than you. "The market" is not intelligent enough to recognize this.
Prince James I am actually in agreement with most of what you say above. I do have a question about abortion, however. What do you think would happen if abortion would suddenly become illegal? Also what do you see as a viable alternative to abortion? There are already too many kids to be adopted, and just letting people breed without any reesponsibility or assets to raise these kids what happens than?
it'd be just like anything very-much-wanted that got illegal. prohibition, fat rats living off a drug empire, and punks in back allies with bike spokes. while alcohol did get legal, and drugs really shouldn't, abortion doesn't need to be made illegal to benefit society. making it illegal would harm more than it solved. i agree with everyone here on the gun laws, funny how people cleverly ignore the statistics that show guns can save more lives than they take (as much as I hate relying on statistics, i go with this).
That seems reasonable, but what the main problem, at least as I see it, is that alot of these issues take personal responsibility to work. That includes drugs as well. Unfortunately, for any of these problems to be truly resolved it will take a long hard fall by a lot of people. In the short term it would cause a lot of deaths and money, but I feel it would be quite beneficial in the long run. Besides a little chaos might be fun for a while!
A conservative utopia looks like the Marianas Islands, indentured servitude with minimal pay, horrible working conditions, long hours, forced prostitution, secret abortions, and political kickbacks, all with a cheery facade and a "made in America" label. Imagine if Germany had won WWII, that's what it would be like.
bconn29: Aside from some protests by pro-choice/abortion groups, I do not think significantly much. There may be a few cases of illegal abortions and other such things, but all in all, I believe that the threat of the law will keep people in line and force them to look towards other alternatives. Before the wide-scale legalization of abortion and, in fact, within aclimate of criminalization in many states, abortion was not something one simply went and had. ONe dealt with it unwanted pregnancies in other ways, such having another family member raise it, doing as best one can, or putting them up for adoption. Moreover, in general, we live in a world where birth control is far more effective than it was pre-abortion, with likely improvements of this in future years, as well as having a larger degree of prosperity. A truly middle-class, or even better-off working class person, rarely has a legitimate finnancial excuse for not keeping their children. People who are also not in a position where children are economically viable, also might just have to think twice about screwing around a lot, or atleast doing so "unsafely", as it were. But yes, an increase in adoption may be problematic, unless we devise ways that increase people's desire to adopt children for one reason or another. weed_eater_guy: How so?
So is it being suggested that people go to jail for abortions? Does it seem that laws will force people to take responsibility for their actions? This is one of the reasons why I started this thread, these issues that seem so intellectually black and white, end up being alot more complicated when applied to people. This actually goes along with what spider posted, too much conservativism can easily lead to a system in which some people can keep taking from the pot all the while justifying it by beleiving they are the best and brightest(even if it is untrue). This system would work nicely for them because they can conveniently blame the people underneath them for not pulling their weight.
bconn29: Yes. I would like to see people go to jail for abortions after the law is past. Obviously, no one who had an abortion in the past ought to be charged with anything, as they were fully legally protected by that behaviour, no matter how really unlawful it ought to be. In what way do you mean "taking from the pot"?
That's pretty extreme. I guess if it is illegal they would have to, but is increasing an already overburdened prison system really the answer, and futhermore do you think this would actually stop anything? There are tons of crimes committed all the time to which a jail sentence is no deterrent. I think that there are more factors to stopping abortion than just locking people away. This also begs another question, what about unwanted child due to rape? "Taking rom the pot" as in the economy and ownership. By this I mean if people are allowed to take advantage of the system to benefit themselves by any means available to them, what effect does that have on the resoources and oppurtunities available to a large population?
bconn29: As regards the punishment issue: I would like to see an ellemination of long-term prisons to be replaced by a system of short-term jails (for holding) and corporal punishment. Minor felonies would result in 20 lashes of a whip, or strikes with a cane, in a public venue, naked, with second offenses gaining 40 lashes, and 3rd ones to death, whilst moderate felonies would start at 40, and major felonies (murder, treason, rape, arson, et cetera) would be to death to start with. In essence, a modified variation of the Singaporean corporal punishment system. I see this as attacking the two things which keep people in line the most: Shame and pain. Moreover, it would save billions each ear in the running, maintence, and building of prisons, plus the salaries of the prison guards, and the money expended on each criminal. A win-win scenario, as it were. Of course, we ought to look for ways to make abortion less necessary in the eyes of the people who get it, but we can do that whilst criminalizing it, also. But as to rape, since our justice system is based on the principle that only crimes committed by oneself are deserving of punishment, unless one was an active party in the crime (accomplice), aka, "the sins of the father are not for the child to endure", to allow abortion in cases of rape is to violate a core principle of justice. No child asks to be given life via rape, nor were they in anyway involved. They are innocent of all wrong doing and cannot be murdered, no matter how horribly the lady might suffer. How does conservatism support this? Conservatism generally upholds Capitalism, which isn't focused on "screwing the system", but providing goods and services in exchange for money or other goods and services. Companies can only exist so long as they provide something the public wants and their prices are reasonable, and as a natural growth of capitalism the wealth tends to get passed around.
I think the answer to the prison system is harsher sentencing. Instead of all this life-sentence with parole crap we should just execute murderers and violent rapists. The more prisoners we can execute for crimes, the fewer we have to deal with. Many/most violent criminals cannot be "rehabilitated." They are just a waste of space. Execution is morally justifiable, also: if you take a life, don't expect to keep your own. Execution would be a much better deterant too.
Many good ideas here. A couple not mentioned yet: Flat Tax: This would free up a huge capacity presently being used to comply with and avoid the income tax not to mention the many government employees needed to enforce it. It would also be much more fair. Under our present system the super rich can afford to pay lawyers and accountants to skirt income tax. It would also decrease corruption since by getting rid of loopholes, it would end the necessity to bribe politicians to create them. Tort Reform Our present system of "jackpot justice" benefits no one but lawyers. Caps should be placed on judgements especially on intangibles and punitive damages. Loser pays sounds like a good idea. Also, Prince Jame's idea of flogging might be appropriate for lawyers who bring frivilous lawsuits (and their clients). I've also long thought that if "punitive" damages must be imposed, why should the client and lawyer get that money? Since it is not in compensation for any wrong, it's more like a fine and should go to the government. This would serve to decrease the motivation to bring lawsuits and decrease the deficit. Balanced Budget Ammendment My main beef with the Bush administration is runaway spending. Clearly neither Democrats nor Republicans can be trusted to balance the budget unless absolutely required to. Religious Freedom Do what's needed to return the establishment clause to it's original intent: No official chuch of American that all must join. Period. It was never intended to outlaw prayer in school, ban Christmas trees, or to outlaw the pledge of allegence! Multiculturalism Get rid of it. All cultures are not equal so stop pretending that they are. We are a melting pot unified by our culture and our language. If we allow ourselves to be Balkenized, we will collapse like the tower of Babel. Immigration Decrease it to a sane level that can be assimilated into our culture. This means securing our border and not mandating accomodations for non-english speakers. Previous generations had to learn English (like my grandparents), so should present and future generations.
A few posts I missed: Onefinity: Elaborate, please? In what way is the market not "smart enough" to recognize this? Also, you do realize that these workers get paid for their services, yes? That it is a trade of services for money and all work under their free volition in the First World. Moreover, since these people are providing a valuable social service of job-creation, should we really inhibit them by taxing away the money that would lend itself towards greater development and prosperity? spidergoat: Upon what foundation do you rest these assertions? You also realize that the Nazis were not full conservatives, yes? But even so, the Nazis treated their German citizen workers wonderfully, with good pay, vacation time, et cetera. It was a continuation of the Bismarkian policies of appeasing the masses so they weren't seduced by the scourge of Communism. Hapsburg: Foundation for this assertion? Onefinity: Why?
