Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

How can Korea function?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Rather_Dashing

Joined: 07 Sep 2004

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:59 am Post subject:

matthewwoodford wrote:

So because Quebec has an inefficient administration you conclude health and safety regulations are red tape that helps nobody? I'd like to see you try working in a factory with no safety regulations.

How can you possibly interpret what I said as supporting no regulations? My point was that too many regulations choke the economy and help nobody, and are a pain in the ass to enforce and know about. You know how many permits a park must undergo in Quebec every year? Close your eyes and take a gues. Now.

The answer? 53. Yep, that's fifty-three. And I can assure you that at least 50 of those are unnecessary.

Quote:

You seem to be missing the point completely. Private medicine and education is wonderful if you can afford it. The point of liberal social programs is to provide it to people who can't afford it. If you haven't grasped that, you haven't grasped the issues involved at all.

I didn't dispute that. What I am disputing is the definition of who can afford it. Those who cannot afford it should be able to receive it for free or at a subsidized cost.

matthewwoodford

Joined: 01 Oct 2003
Location: Location, location, location.

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:47 pm Post subject:

So you support social programs then.

kangnamdragon

Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Kangnam, Seoul, Korea

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:54 pm Post subject:

matthewwoodford wrote:

kangnamdragon wrote:

matthewwoodford wrote:

funplanet wrote:

simple, my friend...

liberals understand that their so-called social programs create dependency whilst eliminating personal responsibility

liberals are willing to pay more taxes to fund the programs that keep their constituencies coming back for more, therefore voting them back in office time after time....

it's about gaining power through dependency

What are you, Rush Limbaugh?!

Sure, damn those liberals for their old age pension schemes, welfare, and health and safety regulations...Never mind how many people had to fight for how long to get these things.

At least Rush makes money out of what he does. What do you get out of trying to put the clock back?

Progress is not always good.

I never said it was. I do maintain that social programs like old age pensions are a good thing.

Of course, if you disagree then I'd say that leaves you with two options: either you tell grandma to take personal responsibility or you take care of her personally.

Old age pensions are good, but the elderly would have had a lot more money if they had invested it in private accounts rather than giving it to the government.

kangnamdragon

Joined: 17 Jan 2003
Location: Kangnam, Seoul, Korea

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 3:56 pm Post subject:

kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote:

Quote:

Rush Limbaugh doesn't oppose welfare. He opposes welfare for people who are able to work - big difference.

Being "able to work" and having "work available" are two different things.

Fortunately America is a country where one can create his or her own job. If work is not "available" one can make it available. It is not the governments job to make jobs. It is the governments job to provide the opportunity for jobs to be created....lower taxes and less regulation would help.

Rather_Dashing

Joined: 07 Sep 2004

Posted: Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:05 pm Post subject:

matthewwoodford wrote:

So you support social programs then.

Of course. If it works, and it's efficient, I'm all for it. Job trainning makes more sense than letting people depend on welfare all their lives. Stuff like that. Teach a man to fish vs. give a man a fish...

Cool

Quote:

Old age pensions are good, but the elderly would have had a lot more money if they had invested it in private accounts rather than giving it to the government.

True. But at the same time, we need a cushion for all the idiots out there.

David76

Joined: 15 Jun 2003
Location: U.S.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 6:17 am Post subject:

Quote:
American liberals can understand this, but "helping the economy" usually seems to be another term for further increasing corporate profits.

Quote:

No, it's not at all the same. Furthermore, there is nothing wrong with profit, getting profit, or the pursuit of profit; I will not entertain any of this hogwash that getting profit is wrong.

Not neseccarily all the same and I did not write that it was, but that seems to be the way the term is usually used in the U.S. Are you not familiar with the way corporations operate? They exist only to make profit, that is their only purpose for existing. They pursue profit at the expense of everything else. So, if profit is the most important thing you can think of, then this would not be wrong in your mind.

Quote:
If the so-called "conservatives" really believed in personal responsibility, they would oppose the war on drugs. Getting rid of that and reducing the accompanying massive prison population would reduce taxes.

Quote:

This is not a liberal argument, either - this is a libertarian one. Regardless, if they got rid of laws against rape and murder, there would be less people in prisons too. It's called "social responsibility". It's also pretty stupid to legalize drugs and have a public healthcare system: the moral hazard problems become ridiculously high.

You are missing the point here -- rape and murder involve coersion and as such should not be allowed. Now that is a libertarian argument. Whoa! You are now interested in social responsibility? Sounds pretty liberal! And, what exactly do you mean by "moral hazard problems"?
I am not at all convinced that it is pretty stupid to legalize drugs (in addition to tobacco, alcohol, and caffeine which are already legal) and have a public healthcare system.

Quote:
Using the military for national defense instead of empire building would also be a great way to lower taxes.

Quote:

Nobody is building any empires right now.

I suppose it might be a matter of semantics, but the U.S. government is certainly trying to enlarge its empire!

Quote:
It seems the bulk of "conservatives" in the U.S. these days no longer believe in limited government, which makes their opposition to social programs look hollow.

Quote:

This is a load of crap. They have always believed in limited government. Having a military and having anti-drug laws doesn't mean they don't believe in limited government.

Really?! Just how does it not seem that way? Re-read what I wrote. I did not suggest getting rid of the U.S. military, but simply to make it suitable for national defence instead of empire building. The existence of a massive military-industrial complex and the war on drugs are huge violations of the idea of limited governement. Whith these glaring exceptions, how can government be truly limited?

Quote:

And oh, social programs... remember the 52 cent rule I went into detail above (you DID read it, right?). Every dollar the government spends, the economy sees 52 cents. Private spending is much more efficient. If you think taxes should be higher, nothing is stopping you from writing a check to a charity. Charities are far more efficient than governments when it comes to helping communities.

Yes, I did read it. It's a good point, but the conclusions you draw from it have not been justified. Again, you are missing the point. I do not think taxes should be higher. I think harmful and unAmerican programs should be eliminated, thus freeing up money for beneficial programs and probably letting people pay less in taxes at the same time.
Where do charities get their money from?

Quote:
It's not that they oppose social programs on the principle of limited government, but because they want to wage class warfare, and/or due to fears and biases such as racism.

Quote:

They oppose social programs because the vast majority do not work, or they don't believe people should be rewarded for doing nothing. The accusation of class warfare is something that conservatives invented! Conservatives do not pit old versus young, black versus white, lower class vs upper class, etc.

Why not try to reform the social programs so they do work better instead of trying to destroy them, making the U.S. more like a third world nation in the process?
Conservatives do not pit people against each other? Of course they do! The way they get as much support from the American people as they do is by playing a game of divide and conquer.

Quote:

The accusation of racism just shows how far left you've gone. You yourself know that it's not true.

To say nothing of how far right you are. What do you mean "gone"? Are you assuming I was once like you? I do know this about the accusation of racism?! How?!

Quote:

He is not authentic. An authentic conservative would be someone like William Buckley or Rush Limbaugh.

Justin Raimondo not an authentic conservative? Is that why he seems so reasonable and intellignet? Wink

Just how is he not an authentic conservative?

Last edited by David76 on Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:30 am; edited 1 time in total

Yu_Bum_suk

Joined: 25 Dec 2004

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:55 am Post subject:

Justin again? He just keeps popping up everywhere! How delighted he'd be to see himself getting so much attention on an ESL teachers forum of all places. Anyways, I'm interested if anyone has a response to this: would you pay 1% more in Korean taxes if it meant not having to deal with the indignity of the blind and amputees stumbling through your subway car begging or a bent-over 80yo having to push a cardboard cart around all day in freezing temperatures?

David76

Joined: 15 Jun 2003
Location: U.S.

Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:31 am Post subject:

Quote:

Anyways, I'm interested if anyone has a response to this: would you pay 1% more in Korean taxes if it meant not having to deal with the indignity of the blind and amputees stumbling through your subway car begging or a bent-over 80yo having to push a cardboard cart around all day in freezing temperatures?

I don't have to deal with that! But if I did, it would depend on just how the money was used. Would it be used to exterminate them or to support them (the way your question is phrased makes me wonder a bit)? If the money were used to support them, I think I could go for that.

Seems like a pretty grim scene you are depicting. Is this part of your daily life in South Korea?

Last edited by David76 on Sat Feb 05, 2005 6:21 am; edited 1 time in total

Daechidong Waygookin

Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Location: No Longer on Dave's. Ive quit.

Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 4:07 pm Post subject:

Rather_Dashing wrote:

matthewwoodford wrote:

So because Quebec has an inefficient administration you conclude health and safety regulations are red tape that helps nobody? I'd like to see you try working in a factory with no safety regulations.

Quote:

I didn't dispute that. What I am disputing is the definition of who can afford it. Those who cannot afford it should be able to receive it for free or at a subsidized cost.

The park example is a good one. Theres a reason why America and many Canadian cities are just sterile plastic sones of strip malls, and gas stations witha dead downtown and stupid suburbs. Life back home is overregulated, over zoned, etc. Give me a chaotic city that LIVES over a sterile American city any time. Now, there are exceptions to the rule, and there are some nice American cities but those are few and far between.

Universalis

Joined: 17 Nov 2003
Location: Seoul

Posted: Fri Feb 04, 2005 6:19 pm Post subject:

I encourage my friends on the left to not bother debating politics with the dumb-ass wingnuts on the right. You're better off spending your time banging your head against a wall. Brian

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3
Page 3 of 3

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe