can you be a libertarian and still agree to this progressive idea? of course!
I never suggested otherwise. Libertarians, not being a player in the left-right continuum, typically have some things in common with both the left and the right. Social liberalism paired with fiscal conservatism, like mine, for example, is quite common. I imagine you have some progressive ideas. So have I. Right here on this thread I've advocated using marriage to create family arrangements along the lines of multiple mutual adoptions. I've also supported assisted suicide. Can't get much more progressive than that. But that doesn't make me "a progressive." You thinking yourself a progressive just didn't resonate with me. You are, of course, entitled to your own self-label. I respect people's right to self-assign. I accept non-church-goers who call themselves "Christians" as Christians, much to Kate's annoyance. <g>
To take my mention of stem cells, which apparently you do agree is a progressive idea
Not really. I just picked "energy independence" as my rebuttal because I found it the least progressive of your examples. I think stem cells is quite middle of the road. Hardly anyone opposes stem cell technology, just a few die-hard social conservatives and even then only the use of human embryos. I imagine they're probably storing their babies' umbilical stem cells just like the progressives.
The other example you offered for your progressive label was green energy. Likewise, there's widespread support for that so I'd call it centrist. I remember when Bearcat Bob hung around. He was an advocate for that as was everyone else here, best I recall.
there is no claim to one tax policy being able to raise more taxes than the other
Claim? I think it's too obvious to be called merely a "claim." There is only so much money that poor people can give up. You can't take fifty percent of their income from them. It's not feasible. They'd die. Either that or you would have to give them back their money plus more in the form of poverty programs so that they did't die, so what's the point. You can, OTOH, take fifty percent from the well-to-do. They'll complain, but they can take it. So there's a natural limit on how much money you can raise taxing everyone's income at a flat rate. You have to go to a graduated/progressive tax to get more. Refute that "claim" if you can.
Okay, why don't you list 5 progressive specific policies and we can see where I stand. I'm serious.
Well, one sure wouldn't be the flat tax. Or replacing/supplementing the income tax with a federal sales tax.
I don't think I'm able to do that. Other than nationalized health care, I haven't had my antennae out for progressive proposals. I prefer to constrain my itch scenarios to a minimum, which means avoiding thinking about them until and unless they are in my face. <g> I'm not aware of any other progressive proposals in that category.
|
