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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RMF who wrote (974594)	10/23/2016 2:19:55 AM
From: koan	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572098

That sounds good, but there is a dilemma of false Equivalency. What can anyone conceive would be a viable political philosophy to counter the Democratic philosophy? And here is how I envision the birth of that dilemma. Much of social science, is exactly that, science. And generally speaking, science is something that is either true, or not true. The Democrats recognize and employ social science when running our society when they are in power. What contrast the Democrats to the Republicans, is that the Republicans do not employ social science. They rely on some sort of primitive dogma that is not even real in many if not most cases e.g. supply side economics, just say no, Horatio Alger nonsense, and not understanding that the best way to increase productivity, reduce crime and generally enhance the welfare of any society comes from a progressive tax system and educating the populace. So what is missing from the Democrats that could be the foundation of another viable political party? I am not saying a one party system is good, I'm just pointing out the dilemma at hand. << DON'T want a one party nation. I liked it when he had 2 parties with mature adults with varying opinions in EACH.