Author Topic: What is it with this 'Liberal' thing? (Read 6915 times)

Kieran · « **Reply #75 on:** November 17, 2003, 11:36:16 AM »

It can be, if it happens with a referendum.

AKcurly · « **Reply #76 on:** November 17, 2003, 12:13:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
seatbelt... helmet laws... gun control... all intrusive government action. smoking? why on earth does government tell privat bussines if they can smoke in their own buildings?

Because private citizens are sometimes forced (by circumstances) to enter the building.

curly... you say you want to throw out all the government we have and form a whole new party.... one that will make us safe from the foreign threat... one guy did all that in the

Lazs, do you read? Or is that whimsical smile just gas? I said NOTHING about wanting to throw anyone out. Indeed, I said I wasn't smart enough to make decisions like that.

If you allow government to run health care then if won't matter if you pay for it or not... the best health care will no longer be available to anyone.

Lazs, you know nothing about health care or its quality. You know nothing about the issues. Get back on your cycle and smoke your dope; move along.

curly

DmdNexus · « **Reply #77 on:** November 17, 2003, 12:18:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Kieran
It can be, if it happens with a referendum.

Not talking about the people voting in a referendum....

I'm talking about a REPUBLICAN Legislatures and a REPUBLICAN goveroner making a law banning smoking in public places... Do you think that never happened?

Or how about a REPUBLICAN congress banning smoking on all domestic flights....

I guess they are all a bunch of tie-dye liberals.

Or may be, they see the harm that smoking does?

and the AMA must be liberal too... and the REPUBLICAN appointed surgeon generals during the Reagan and Bush admins.. they were pot smoking, free sex liberals - right?

After all it's ok to have a 3 year old breathing in the noxous plumes of cigarrette smoke billowing up from the group of CONSERVATIVES sitting at the next table...at least at that table... we all know they are American loving patriots.

ravells · « **Reply #78 on:** November 17, 2003, 12:21:05 PM »

Referendum vote on smoking in public places ! Excellent idea.

Except in my experience reformed smokers tend to be utter zealots, so I can see how they won the vote....they just waited until the smoking lobby popped out for a quick studmuffin and then held the vote when they were gone.

~~Ravs~~

Kieran · « **Reply #79 on:** November 17, 2003, 12:24:28 PM »

Nexus, just because someone calls themselves a republican doesn't mean they are a conservative. Same thing applies to democrats/liberals.

Schwarzenegger calls himself a republican, but he talks like a liberal.

airguard · « **Reply #80 on:** November 17, 2003, 01:02:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKcurly
We don't have too much government. Perhaps what we have is misguided or perhaps money is ill spent, but folks, we have serious problems.

Today isn't like the 40s-50s-early 60s. We have situations where a small number of folks can create havoc.

1. One individual can disrupt network activities world wide.

2. A small group of individuals can easily terrorize a large country with lax border controls. The things that one can do ...

a) dynamite dams above cities,
b) botulism in the water supply,
c) infect one of Allah's chosen with pneumonic plague (or a virulent form of smallpox or ebola or whatever) and turn him loose in LA/NYC/DC/.
d) borrow some plutonium from Iran and set off a small nuke in London/NYC/Paris/Berlin/where ever
e) park a truck load of fertilizer in front of somone's house
and etc.

3. Corrupt police departments in all cities, all states and all countries as near as I can tell.

4. Corrupt political systems where political actions are controlled by special interest groups.

5. Inadequate controls on companies who have become so rich by the sale of their products/services, they are completely lacking in morality. They have lost sight of their original vision and will literally do anything to maintain the status quo.

6. And so on. Hell, the list is endless

The problem isn't that we have too much government. It's that our government is struggling to be effective.

I honestly believe the American political process will resolve all of the above. The cost will probably include throwing out all current political parties and find some new and acceptable solutions.

I suspect the changes will be so radical that many will label it revolutionary.

You rugged individualists are so full of it, well it boggles my mind. Here we have guys who have struggled through life, conquering all of the nice little problems that occur.

What have I seen all of us worry about? Divorce, alcoholism, drug addiction(other than alcohol), deaths?

And now that you've conquered your demons, you want to pretend that you did it by strength of character. Bull! If you had any character, the problem wouldn't have happened in the first place!

You acquired character only after you hit rock bottom and someone gave you a helping hand.

curly

I call that a very good post TY mate

yeah if you use a helmet you can save society a whole lot of money.
If you dont smoke you for sure save society a bugger much of money.

If you stay of of addiction like alcohol/drugs you would also save youre fellow inhabitants a ****load of money.

but if you get into a problem as above /damaged/addicted/sick( etc... you need sombody to help you,.. And i doubt youre neighbour that you trust so much will .... ?

Maybe not the right word "want to" but do they really have time to do it ?

Hooligan · « **Reply #81 on:** November 17, 2003, 01:10:27 PM »

Airguard:

So you are saying: First we are going to tax you and pay for all your health care. But we are going to outlaw smoking and riding without a motorcycle helmet because you may impose costs that are too high. Maybe this sounds good to you... Until you live in British Columbia and need heart surgery at age 55. Sorry, they're not gonna waste the rationed medical care on you when they have others that need it more.

How about you save society a crapload of money by letting smokers and motorcyclists worry about their own healthcare costs?

Hooligan

lazs2 · « **Reply #82 on:** November 17, 2003, 01:37:16 PM »

sorry curly... won't wash.. you claim that these are extraordinary times and that we need big intrusive government to protect us... i am merely pointing out that the reasons you give have been given before... as for healthcare... who made you the expert? I read the pro and con views when we had the hillary debacle and i sure didn't see any clear cut experts then.... maybe I missed you treatsie on the subject?

Oh... I don't ride motorcycles or smoke dope.

your point about people being forced to go into private buildings and being expossed to second hand smoke was as lame as any I've seen so far on this BB too... Why would anyone be "forced" to go into a bar or resteraunt? to use the phone? the bathroom? I think their tender lungs could stand that short of an exposure to the evil weed don't u?

lazs

airguard · « **Reply #83 on:** November 17, 2003, 01:49:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hooligan
Airguard:

So you are saying: First we are going to tax you and pay for all your health care. But we are going to outlaw smoking and riding without a motorcycle helmet because you may impose costs that are too high. Maybe this sounds good to you... Until you live in British Columbia and need heart surgery at age 55. Sorry, they're not gonna waste the rationed medical care on you when they have others that need it more.

How about you save society a crapload of money by letting smokers and motorcyclists worry about their own healthcare costs?
Hooligan

(DID YOU EVER BOTHER TO READ MY POST ? )

It was about the diffrences between countries nothing more !!

I am 39 and a smoker ( sadly)
They wont turn me down if i get sick, if that is what you say.
Im just as good as anone and need the care as a none smoker (if I get sick).

I think youre talking about people that dont care about society, but they also get the same healthcare in Norway.
If their stupid enough to drive without a helmet and crash their head, they get help. ( and no need for a little note saying you paid youre incuranse)

I dont care how things in USA is going on my point was that countries is diffrent, and i guess you lost that point ?

Then again smokers like me is dying spieses, so is people driving wihout helmets/etc..

DmdNexus · « **Reply #84 on:** November 17, 2003, 01:57:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
I think their tender lungs could stand that short of an exposure to the evil weed don't u?
lazs

The arguements that I've heard against smoking in public places is more so for the workers that are there all the time - not just the occational patron... like waitress and airline flight attendants....

If they are non-smokers... what choice do they have to work in a healthy environment?

Or do people not have the right to be safe where they work?

There's been a lot of bi-partisan debate on this issue and agreement that non-smoking laws are for the benefit of the common good. Not sure what you neo-cons are trying to argue here.... many of these laws have been passed by REPUBLICAN legislatures....and by public referendum...

If the people want smoke free public environments... they got them. That to me is democracy... the smokers are free to smoke all they want in their cars, and in their homes, away from public locations.

Next thing you neo-cons will whining about is the ban of C4 explosives on international flights!

ravells · « **Reply #85 on:** November 17, 2003, 02:15:24 PM »

This from the 'shorter' political quiz site.

Guess I think of myself as a 'Left-Liberal'.

Libertarian
Libertarians are self-governors in both personal and economic matters. They believe government's only purpose is to protect people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility, and tolerate economic and social diversity.

Left-Liberal
Left-Liberals prefer self-government in personal matters and central decision-making on economics. They want government to serve the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Leftists tolerate social diversity, but work for economic equality.

Conservative
Right-conservatives prefer self-government on economic issues, but want official standards in personal matters. They want the government to defend the community from threats to its moral fiber.

Authoritarian
Authoritarians want government to advance society and individuals through expert central planning. They often doubt whether self-government is practical. Left-authoritarians are also called socialists, while fascists are right-authoritarians.

AKcurly · « **Reply #86 on:** November 17, 2003, 02:34:30 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
sorry curly... won't wash.. you claim that these are extraordinary times and that we need big intrusive government to protect us... i am merely pointing out that the reasons you give have been given before... as for healthcare... who made you the expert?

Yes, these are extraordinary times. I don't see where I said we need "big intrusive government" to protect us. Maybe we don't agree about big?

We do need governments with the authority to try new things. Maybe medical care in Canada won't work. I imagine they'll figure it out. Maybe the redistribution of wealth in Sweden won't work. I imagine they'll figure it out. Maybe decriminalization of drugs in Holland won't work. I imagine they'll figure it out.

Prohibition of alcohol sure didn't work. How did we change it? Counted noses.

Evidently, the majority of the citizens think we need to keep smoking out of public places, eh? If not, we'll count noses and change it.

your point about people being forced to go into private buildings and being expossed to second hand smoke was as lame as any I've seen so far on this BB too...

Lazs, you've limped so long, you wouldn't recognize lame if it bit you.

Suppose I'm John Q. Citizen and I walk into a public bar. I sit down at the bar, take out my sock puppet and order a beer. Now, the jerk next to me starts smoking. Godalmighty, my sock puppet may be damaged by second hand smoke.

Or, perhaps I'm Bill Gates and I go into a public place and I insist the minions with me attend. Do the minions say "but Mr. Gates, there are health threatening activities in the public place!" Nah, not if the minions want to keep their jobs. But, I digress and have repeated myself.

Why would anyone be "forced" to go into a bar or resteraunt? to use the phone? the bathroom? I think their tender lungs could stand that short of an exposure to the evil weed don't u?

As to why, read the above. People are constantly forced by circumstances to do things they *REALLY* don't want to do just because their boss/spouse/friend wants to do it.

If you don't like the smoking ban or helmet laws, why get out there and find a candidate for office (or better, run yourself) and support him.

The majority of the public likes helmet laws and smoking ban.

curly

lazs2 · « **Reply #87 on:** November 17, 2003, 02:39:24 PM »

nexus... I have no problem with anti smoking laws in public owned buildings.

in private owned... it would be up to the owner. if people didn't come to his establishment because it allowed smoking then he would self govern... as for his help... if they smoked they could work for him... if not... they could work for the guy next door. Chances are... there would be lots more smoke free work than smoke filled work.

oh... rav.. i am more libertarian than anything else.
lazs

ravells · « **Reply #88 on:** November 17, 2003, 02:46:39 PM »

You said.

-----
oh... rav.. i am more libertarian than anything else.
-----

I am begining to think so too! You are also the most consistent.
The only thing is that it leads to weird results...

Ravs

lazs2 · « **Reply #89 on:** November 17, 2003, 02:59:07 PM »

what weird results would those be? Most results are predictable if you use logic.. liberals want to force the result based on some vague "feeling" not logic or fact.

While I have seen many liberal ideas result in very "weird" and harmful results.... I have never seen ones based on logic and fact do so.
lazs