Hi

katiegrrl0 said:
Call it what you will. How do you see the terms as being different?
Click to expand...
They're often misrepresented as the same. The Libertarians of today were/are the liberals of yester-year. Leftists are simply another form of statists. They prefer the nanny state to the police state of the Rightist.
 
King of Guns said:
They're often misrepresented as the same. The Libertarians of today were/are the liberals of yester-year. Leftists are simply another form of statists. They prefer the nanny state to the police state of the Rightist.
Click to expand...
I would have to understand what you mean by nanny state. The term is not always the same in everyone's mind. I think far to often nanny state is confused with the terms Socialist and Communist especially in the US. So if you would shed a bit of light on that I would be more than happy to explain my positions on the topic. Thank you.
 
A good example of nanny statism would be England. Or the banning of smoking in bars/private restaurants. In short any thing where the government restricts an individual/collective freedom because 'it's for your own good'.
 
I do not think that government should be involved in the private rights of others. If a business would like to allow smoking so be it. There should be no policy such as that to control the decisions of the individuals rights. I also do not agree with the laws that require safety belts. That is up to the person. If the government would like to make all of it's facilities non smoking that is fine. But when you tell a person that they can't smoke on the sidewalk that is wrong. I think that if you want to go to a bar and don't smoke and that bar allows smoking you should have to bite the bullet or go elsewhere.
I am of the belief that the worker should work. I am not fond of the welfare state. If you do not work and are capable in some capacity of doing so you should. If you don't there is no subsidy. Thee is no hand out such as welfare. The state or nation should provide job services that are useful in matching a person with employment. There are industries that fail and people need to be retrained and given the opportunity to move on and continue working.
There should be a state or national day care system to allow mums that would like to work that chance. Why should having children be a hardship? I think that National Health Care is something that every nation provides. Not just for a select few like elderly, veterans or disabled. It would keep costs down help keep the state healthy. A healthy state is a state that works and the more people at work the better it is for all of us.
I don't think unemployment should last any longer than a month. I believe that when out of work people are far to selective and willing to sit on their hands and wait because the money keeps rolling in.
All workers should be unionized giving them the best bargaining position so that the CEO are not making 10000 X an hour what they are making. The difficulties with many economies is that the top end is getting far to heavy for the lower level employees to support. I see the US as systematically wiping out the middle class. That class is what made the US what it once was. I hope that gives you some idea of what I am about.
Leftist is usually what I would be thought to be. But not necessarily in you definition.
 
Some things are leftist in your statement, primarily the national day car, but for the most part you're almost as Libertarian as myself.
 
I don't know about other states, but here in Alaska, the requirements to collect unemployment are pretty strict and the unemployment worker has steps that they must meet in order to grant someone their money. It is not as easy as everyone thinks to collect, and it often isn't as much as the person was making in their jobs, so why anyone would stay on unemployment is a puzzle to me. The only ones I could see doing it up here is construction workers, since construction outside basically shuts down here after November and they can't break ground without heating the soil until April or this year, it may be May. They collect unemployment for the allowed 26 weeks. There are also the fishermen who can only work certain times of the year.
The people my friends work with do not want to stay on unemployment and my one friend takes the extra steps and will help them find a job if she knows of any in their field. There may be the a few who like to collect their checks because it is easier on them, but they don't really don't get that much, it isn't living on easy street as some would have us believe.
 
I've never been accused of that before. National day care make sense. If the mum can find a safe place for her child she can become productive in the workplace. If it is inexpensive to have the childcare this would happen more often. This would enlarge the work force.
 
Rana said:
I don't know about other states, but here in Alaska, the requirements to collect unemployment are pretty strict and the unemployment worker has steps that they must meet in order to grant someone their money. It is not as easy as everyone thinks to collect, and it often isn't as much as the person was making in their jobs, so why anyone would stay on unemployment is a puzzle to me. The only ones I could see doing it up here is construction workers, since construction outside basically shuts down here after November and they can't break ground without heating the soil until April or this year, it may be May. They collect unemployment for the allowed 26 weeks. There are also the fishermen who can only work certain times of the year.
The people my friends work with do not want to stay on unemployment and my one friend takes the extra steps and will help them find a job if she knows of any in their field. There may be the a few who like to collect their checks because it is easier on them, but they don't really don't get that much, it isn't living on easy street as some would have us believe.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that it is easy street. I just believe that those that do not want to work will take advantage of that giveaway. Those that desire to work will find employment. Those are not the people that I am talking about.
I think if you have an occupation that is seasonal you should get a different job in the off season. I don't think that they should receive unemployment. The term those that don't work don't eat works for me. Taking from someone who is doing their part by working is not fair to them. Their labours are already paying for the top ends huge salaries. They are already producing for the non-productive upper management.
 
King of Guns said:
They're often misrepresented as the same. The Libertarians of today were/are the liberals of yester-year. Leftists are simply another form of statists. They prefer the nanny state to the police state of the Rightist.
Click to expand...

Governments are elected to provide services. Whether it's as basic as defense or includes everything from transportation to medical care the more complex society and the more busy people's lives become many prefer to pay for the services. Who would want to have to get together with the neighbors and try to convince them all to chip in to pave the street?

Now that so many mothers are working who wants to scout around for a day care so people petition their governments to provide day care just as schools are provided. It's not a case of the people not being able to do things themselves. It's a case of making life easier.

When it comes to taxes young couples will use day care and schools and the roads to get to and from work while the retired couple will use the medical system. Everyone pays and uses the necessary services.
 
apple0154 said:
Governments are elected to provide services. Whether it's as basic as defense or includes everything from transportation to medical care the more complex society and the more busy people's lives become many prefer to pay for the services. Who would want to have to get together with the neighbors and try to convince them all to chip in to pave the street?

Now that so many mothers are working who wants to scout around for a day care so people petition their governments to provide day care just as schools are provided. It's not a case of the people not being able to do things themselves. It's a case of making life easier.

When it comes to taxes young couples will use day care and schools and the roads to get to and from work while the retired couple will use the medical system. Everyone pays and uses the necessary services.
Click to expand...

Within any system we pay taxes of a sort for services that we do not use at the time. We can pay taxes for the police to protect us but do we require that all the time. No. so the taxes may be going to protect others. I see child care or day care as a necessity to allow some people to work. Day care is very expensive and sometimes because of the costs that person can't work as they would make little or nothing. If the state provided this service at a reasonable rate it would allow a person to provide income for a family. It might even allow a mother who has no other choice but the welfare system to get off welfare and add to society instead of needing society to give her something. It would be the same for a dad who has to stay home to watch children, The access would be a benefit to all.
 
apple0154 said:
Who would want to have to get together with the neighbors and try to convince them all to chip in to pave the street?
Click to expand...

That's how streets get paved out where I live, people in our area usually vote with me though and the street remains unpaved.
 
katiegrrl0 said:
Your streets aren't paved. My streets aren't plowed.
Click to expand...

Ours get plowed. But that is again an agreement between neighbors. Of course it really is in a city as well if you have representative government.

Roads and commodes, it is one of the valid functions of government, even when it is government "of the people"...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top