financeguy
ONE love, blood, life
But the way some conservatives here present their opinion, intentionally or not, comes off very wrong to us. Your comment, for instance, in our recent immigration discussion, insinuating my viewpoint on the topic was simply because of liberal middle-class guilt and fear that I'd "offend a brown person somewhere". That's simplistic, blatantly untrue, and the whole "brown person" remark, um...wow. Couldn't have found a better way to phrase that? Really?
TBH, Europeans tend to have a different outlook on this. Quite frankly, most Europeans (can I say "native Europeans" or is that racist?) wish to keep their countries primarily, well, European. Look at the French vote recently, for example - and I am not defending or advocating for the Front Nationale, but we have to be realstic as to what the popular support for them means. I accept America is different because of its history and that. But, at a time of high unemployment in the West in general, surely it is sensible to return to the old precept that charity, after all, begins at home? Actually, I would be prepared to make the argument that permissive immigration systems encourage racism, rather than the opposite.
Its interesting that Japan, still to this day, in spite of all their troubles, one of the most highly developed and advanced economies on the planet, has a very, very restrictive immigration system - and they never make any apologies for it either, and neither should they in my view. In fact, to be bluntly honest, they find the American and European idea of letting in large numbers of foreigners to do the jobs their natives can already do, absurd and laughable.
The whole thing a while back about people on welfare scamming off the system. Nobody denied that that happens, but some here also pointed out instances where that was not true and why such programs exist to begin with. But it seemed to go in one ear and out the other.
I only vaguely recall that debate, but as for unemployment assistance and the like, I certainly don't have a problem with the state providing this - indeed, I have availed of it myself. But what I and most conservatives resent is the way the system grants welfare to those who treat welfare as basically a lifestyle choice. That was, I assume, the only point I was trying to make.
And then the anti-gay sentiment among some right-wingers here throughout the years, well, that's never going to get support, because there's nothing about it worth supporting to begin with.
In my seven years here, I can only recall a single poster who put up blatant homophobic comments, and that person was banned. Indeed, I was one of the people that reported that person's posts. I personally am in favour of gay marriage on libertarian grounds, but I do not accept, indeed, cannot accept that people who are against gay marriage are prima facie homophobes, simply on the basis of the fact that they disagree with gay marriage. Actually, the American left's tactics on the issue, I find, quite franky, abominable at times, the way they are so eager to slur people who come to the issue with different conclusions to them with the 'homophobe' epithet.
But I would point to his continued ties to Wall Street and corporate interests as the reason why that is, and that doesn't strike me as socialist, that strikes me as very much capitalist. He hasn't gone after the super rich and corporations as much as he should, and that's a big part of why we're having the economic problems we're having. Corporations have way, WAY more power now than they should be having, and the super rich are whining because, oh, my god, they might have to pay a bit more in taxes and they can't get their 10th home or yacht or something, the horror!
Agreed here 100%.