We have a different view of reality. Here are my responses. I present them with the Socratic method in mind i.e. "cooperative argument", not arguing per se, but as debating in a civilized manner.
NAG: These aren't vague fears. Some of the far left platforms are really extreme and would put off too many of the population for them to be politically feasible even though they may contain some good elements in them. But here are my examples that I came up with on the fly.
NAG: Nominating judges that are too liberal and misinterpret the Constitution to the same degree that the far right does but in the other direction. Lived through those times in NYC when it was very violent and the perpetrators had more rights than the victims or the regular citizens.
koan: " it has been my understanding of judges that the best ones are the far left ones as they are the most intelligent. Intelligent people do not misinterpret the constitution, as they understand it. It is the unintelligent folks that misinterpret it. Just look at all the supreme court justices the Republicans nominated and the one's the Democrats nominated.
But as further proof that the most intelligent people are liberals I present the scientists. 51% of scientists call themselves liberals and 80% lean Democratic. Only 6% are Republican. You can see this same spread with regard to educated and uneducated people. The Trump supporters are much less educated than the Hillary supporters and the south much less than the north.
NAG:" Raising taxes too high. I saw some tax plans, can't remember if it was Nader or Sanders, but it was for taxing income above a certain relatively low point at 80%. Seemed too high for me. If I am working 80+ hours a week, I want to retain some of that income
koan:" The liberals make social decisions, including tax decisions, based on the modern understanding of what makes for the happiest and healthiest society as taught in most major universities e.g. Nordic Countries. The Republicans make decisions based on policies that favor the rich and never even consider modern social science.
NAG:" Free college for everybody. Number 1, it needs to be means tested. Those that can afford it should pay. But, number 2, not everybody is college material
koan:" Three things wrong with the above statement:1) one, research shows over and over that a society gets back more in increased productivity and reduced crime than it costs to educate people and the best democracy is one with an educated populace i.e. less mob rule-like now.
2) Everyone can improve themselves with education. Even people with marginal intellectual capabilities. The more education people get the better they will live their lives and help their society. PS I don't think it is possible for a society to put more into education than it will get back in an improved society and I think the Jews, Japanese, South Korans and Nordic counties have proven that.
3) James Flynn (see his TED talk on youtube), an experimental psychologist who just died at 93 makes the point we have increased 60 IQ points since our great grand parents lived 120 years ago and it was done through education. And more specifically because it allowed us to go from "concrete thinkers" to abstract thinkers e.g. Trump supporters are concrete thinkers and liberal scientists are abstract thinkers, more or less.
NAG: I am OK with single payer but the American public is not ready for it. But part of that comes with tort reform, which the far left doesn't seem to be in favor of.
koan: The american public is more than ready for it.Only the Republicans owned by their autocratic masters are against it.
Cheers!
As in life, I think balance if a good thing and people, and society, should strive for it in most cases. |
