Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: mark silvers who wrote (2393)	7/29/1999 12:08:00 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

I agree that few Democrats are truly socialist, although some are. It depends on how one cuts the thing: if being gung- ho for an expansion of the welfare state is socialist, then liberals are socialists, and since most Democrats are liberals, it is the socialist party. If a commitment to central planning and a strong move toward income equalization makes a socialist, then there is hardly a socialist to be found outside of academia, and few there, as I have tried to describe... ....Economics is a social science. That may mean that it is not as "hard" as, say, physics, but it does mean that it progressively establishes certain facts and theories with a high level of confidence in their truth, and that even if some will need revising, much is known. Therefore, I do not think it is correct to suppose that everything is up for grabs... ...Without generalization, there is neither speech nor thought. Labels must be used with care, to be sure, but they are unavoidable.... ...The question is multiple, in any case, and cannot be resolved in one sitting. Tell me, though, what you think the primary good of the Democratic Party's ideology is, when you have the time...

To: mark silvers who wrote (2393)	7/29/1999 2:55:00 PM
From: truedog	Respond to of 769670

to: mark silvers from: truedog The main problem I have with this post of yours is,who are the people the dems consider "not able to achieve"? If we were only talking about disabled,elderly, children,etc. I would probably agree that you have a point. The problem is, hand outs by the dems are made available to the lazy, self made ignorant, and criminal types along with those that may be deserving. If they would limit their public dole to those that really,REALLY deserve it then it would not be so bad. I have to agree with other conservatives though. If the tax burden was not so restrictive, private organizations and citizens would be able to do a much better job of serving the needy and avoid the 70% drain of funds by government red tape. TD