The left and the right are divided into the way they see the world and how they choose to respond to the problems presented to them. They follow their beliefs in how things should be constructed and how lives should be led. The philosophy of government is one of many examples of where liberal and conservative ideology call for the government to perform different tasks and operate differently.
Left-The major difference between liberals and conservatives is the size of government. The left is quite happy with an ever increasing government. The size of government corresponds to the many things in which liberals ask the government to provide for its citizens. The result is a government rich with entitlements. These entitlements usually are called for as a proper right of the citizen and a guaranteed part of life. Whereas a conservative might see the private sector as a better distributor of services, liberals tend to rely on the government. For liberals the social problems of the society are to be corrected by the government. This may lead to programs being instituted to seek to eliminate those problems, welfare, racial inequity, etc. The result is that many problems are not solved or regulation is implemented to such a degree that it has a discouraging effect.
Right-Whereas liberals have no problem with an ever-inflating government, conservatives tend to want government as small as possible. This stems from the realization that government cannot solve every problem and should not attempt to do so in many cases. For conservatives would be happier with less control from Washington D.C. and more control being given to the states. Liberty is a main issue with conservatives, the idea of freedom and being left alone. The problem with the government growing they begin to have a bigger say over how you live your life. The right is happier letting markets solve the problem instead of the government in control. The private sector can work more efficiently then the bogged-down bureaucracies of the federal government. The right also believes that taxes can be lowered along with reduced spending instead of a large government that seek to punishes successful individuals with high taxes.
How do you want you government? You will have a clear choice this election.
Showing posts with label right. Show all posts
Showing posts with label right. Show all posts
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Friday, December 14, 2007
The Economics of the Left and Right
I ripped this post from a website I came across and I thought it would be interesting to share. For those who want a distinction between how the left and right view economics, here is one man's classifies that difference.
- The right sees large deadweight losses associated with taxation and, therefore, is worried about the growth of government as a share in the economy. The left sees smaller elasticities of supply and demand and, therefore, is less worried about the distortionary effect of taxes.
- The right sees externalities as an occasional market failure that calls for government intervention, but sees this as relatively rare exception to the general rule that markets lead to efficient allocations. The left sees externalities as more pervasive.
- The right sees competition as a pervasive feature of the economy and market power as typically limited both in magnitude and duration. The left sees large corporations with substantial degrees of monopoly power that need to be checked by active antitrust policy.
- The right sees people as largely rational, doing the best the can given the constraints they face. The left sees people making systematic errors and believe that it is the government role’s to protect people from their own mistakes.
- The right sees government as a terribly inefficient mechanism for allocating resources, subject to special-interest politics at best and rampant corruption at worst. The left sees government as the main institution that can counterbalance the effects of the all-too-powerful marketplace.
- There is one last issue that divides the right and the left—perhaps the most important one. That concerns the issue of income distribution. Is the market-based distribution of income fair or unfair, and if unfair, what should the government do about it? That is such a big topic that I will devote the entire next lecture to it.
You can find the original posting of this at http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2007/12/how-do-right-and-left-differ.html
Greg Mankiw's Blog
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Blowback Happens Regardless by J.J. Jackson
Author: J.J. Jackson
When in doubt, get a catch phrase. For some opposed to certain policies, such as helping people in the Middle East throw off dictators, they have one that is a simple term; blowback. It’s become a term of derision hurled against those that they disagree with in order to justify why the United States should adopt a blanket policy of isolationist non-interventionism in world affairs and avoid any debate.
But what really is the concept of blowback? It’s actually a one word statement of a longer common principle we are all familiar with; every action has an equal and opposite reaction. “Blowback” is simply the consequences of one’s actions. And despite the way it is often used by simple minds to try and justify their simple opinions, creating blowback is not carte blanche bad. It is simply the product of action.
You do A and B results. That is “blowback”. And it varies in degrees.
Let’s say I decide in the spring to plant tomatoes instead of potatoes. But come harvest I want some nice crisp french fries. Well, then I’ll have to go to the store and spend money on potatoes someone else grew. Blowback.
Maybe you decide to rob a bank to try and make a quick couple bucks and get shot by the cops in the process. Blowback.
My neighbor decides he wants to park his truck illegally on the no parking side of the street outside of his house and the cops show up to give him a ticket. Blowback.
He then gets upset and decides to complain about people actually parking legally on the side of the street where parking is allowed and makes a butthole of himself and ticks off his neighbors. Blowback yet again.
A man shoots a woman in broad daylight in front of twenty people and no one comes forward to finger the perpetrator. When the neighborhood becomes riddled with crime because no one has any courage, that’s blowback too.
What if some brave man actually comes forward and agrees to testify against the criminal only to have his life threatened by the members of a local gang to which the criminal belongs? Yep, you guessed it – blowback.
The gang members succeed in shooting him dead? Very unfortunate blowback.
Try to eliminate unconstitutional spending on social programs like Welfare and don’t get enough votes from those wedded to such socialist policies to be re-elected? Blowback raises its ugly head yet again.
When the founding fathers decided to declare independence from Great Britian and the result was thousand of dead Americans during two wars that followed what was that? Uh, huh. Blowback.
Decide that paying tribute to Muslim pirates who were enslaving American citizens and get even more piracy and more Americans forced into slavery as a result of the appeasement? Yep, blowback strikes again.
Declare war on NAZI Germany who is waging a war of aggression, slaughtering millions of Jews in ovens and gas chambers, have American men and women die in the ensuing war and draw the ire of several nations for fighting against them and such an atrocity? There’s that blowback thingy again.
Promise to help a group out if only they would rise up and start to overthrow their dictatorial leader only to not show up and make good on your promise and have them hate you now too? Ouch. Blowback!
Now, what do we see from all these real world examples? Well, we see clearly that sometimes this phenomena called blowback is a bad thing that actually can come from doing the right thing just as it can come from doing the wrong thing. That is not something people looking for a nice, short, one size fits all catch phrase like to have to be exposed to however. To them decrying “blowback” is a simple way to defend their position regardless of whether or not it is sound.
“Blowback” is bad. And according to their theory, being bad it must be avoided. But the problem is that it ultimately cannot be avoided. It’s a catch 22. Sort of damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
I generally tend to find that those who decry “blowback” as a reason against action in everything from local to foreign affairs are people that just don’t want to deal with consequences and making moral judgments. Even though by taking such a tactic they are still having to deal with consequences and are making moral judgments. To quote a famous lyrical line, “if you chose not to decide you still have made a choice.” And you are probably no better prepared to deal with the inevitable blowback that decision results in I’m sad to say.
As we see in the example above where the locals refuse to finger a criminal, confront evil and chose inaction for fear of “blowback”, they still get blowback just the same.
On an international scale, fear of blowback is often perpetrated by those that have an “I’ve got mine now go fend for damn yourself” mentality who forget our own history of asking for and receiving help from the likes of France during our own revolution.
But history is not important. Remember, they’ve got theirs. No go away! Don’t ask them for help. Shoo!
Blowback happens. Much like excrement I’m sad to say. It’s a fact. Whether you chose to act or opt instead for inaction you get blowback of one form or another. Whether you chose to act or opt instead for inaction, I have bad news for you, someone is not going to like you. Maybe that dislike is justified or maybe it is irrational. But that doesn’t matter.
Decrying “blowback” as a reason not to act is silly. Especially knowing this. Choosing not to act and intervene on behalf of someone in a given situation against evil is still a choice. A very, very bad choice. And all you have done by making such a bad choice is possibly created two enemies instead of one; the evil which probably already hates you and the people that would have been willing to be your friend, even if tentatively, had you helped them. At best you’ve created only one new enemy. Which is one more than you had previously.
All actions we take result in another action which result in another action which in turn result in another action whether we chose to remain neutral, stand by side A or ally with side B. Decrying “blowback” and quaking before the possibility of the ifs and buts that might come as the result of ones actions is really nothing more than justifying cowardice. And it can be paralyzing for some.
Choosing not to decide or choosing to not do what is right on purpose can have just as dire of consequences as making poor choices and decisions. Making reasoned choices is important and good. Being paralyzed by fear is bad.
Make no mistake, I am not suggesting the United States run around the world lending our military to every pet cause. I’ve talked about making reasoned choices in how we act and not every situation requires that we do. But each situation does require independent thought. And if in the end action is a sound choice it should be taken.
In the end, the best thing is to simply do the right thing. The best thing to do is stand by people who want to at least try for liberty and some semblance of freedom. Just remember that they, like you, are probably not perfect. They will make mistakes in that pursuit and you probably will not agree with everything they themselves want to do in their quest.
But it’s best to give them a chance if you think they are honest and sincere in their desire. Because the blowback is coming whether you like it or not; whether you act or not. That’s called reality.
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/blowback-happens-regardless-261981.html
About the Author:J.J. Jackson is the owner of American Conservative Daily Blog . He is also the lead designer for The Right Things - Conservative Political T-shirts . His weekly articles and exclusive content can be found at Liberty Reborn .
When in doubt, get a catch phrase. For some opposed to certain policies, such as helping people in the Middle East throw off dictators, they have one that is a simple term; blowback. It’s become a term of derision hurled against those that they disagree with in order to justify why the United States should adopt a blanket policy of isolationist non-interventionism in world affairs and avoid any debate.
But what really is the concept of blowback? It’s actually a one word statement of a longer common principle we are all familiar with; every action has an equal and opposite reaction. “Blowback” is simply the consequences of one’s actions. And despite the way it is often used by simple minds to try and justify their simple opinions, creating blowback is not carte blanche bad. It is simply the product of action.
You do A and B results. That is “blowback”. And it varies in degrees.
Let’s say I decide in the spring to plant tomatoes instead of potatoes. But come harvest I want some nice crisp french fries. Well, then I’ll have to go to the store and spend money on potatoes someone else grew. Blowback.
Maybe you decide to rob a bank to try and make a quick couple bucks and get shot by the cops in the process. Blowback.
My neighbor decides he wants to park his truck illegally on the no parking side of the street outside of his house and the cops show up to give him a ticket. Blowback.
He then gets upset and decides to complain about people actually parking legally on the side of the street where parking is allowed and makes a butthole of himself and ticks off his neighbors. Blowback yet again.
A man shoots a woman in broad daylight in front of twenty people and no one comes forward to finger the perpetrator. When the neighborhood becomes riddled with crime because no one has any courage, that’s blowback too.
What if some brave man actually comes forward and agrees to testify against the criminal only to have his life threatened by the members of a local gang to which the criminal belongs? Yep, you guessed it – blowback.
The gang members succeed in shooting him dead? Very unfortunate blowback.
Try to eliminate unconstitutional spending on social programs like Welfare and don’t get enough votes from those wedded to such socialist policies to be re-elected? Blowback raises its ugly head yet again.
When the founding fathers decided to declare independence from Great Britian and the result was thousand of dead Americans during two wars that followed what was that? Uh, huh. Blowback.
Decide that paying tribute to Muslim pirates who were enslaving American citizens and get even more piracy and more Americans forced into slavery as a result of the appeasement? Yep, blowback strikes again.
Declare war on NAZI Germany who is waging a war of aggression, slaughtering millions of Jews in ovens and gas chambers, have American men and women die in the ensuing war and draw the ire of several nations for fighting against them and such an atrocity? There’s that blowback thingy again.
Promise to help a group out if only they would rise up and start to overthrow their dictatorial leader only to not show up and make good on your promise and have them hate you now too? Ouch. Blowback!
Now, what do we see from all these real world examples? Well, we see clearly that sometimes this phenomena called blowback is a bad thing that actually can come from doing the right thing just as it can come from doing the wrong thing. That is not something people looking for a nice, short, one size fits all catch phrase like to have to be exposed to however. To them decrying “blowback” is a simple way to defend their position regardless of whether or not it is sound.
“Blowback” is bad. And according to their theory, being bad it must be avoided. But the problem is that it ultimately cannot be avoided. It’s a catch 22. Sort of damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
I generally tend to find that those who decry “blowback” as a reason against action in everything from local to foreign affairs are people that just don’t want to deal with consequences and making moral judgments. Even though by taking such a tactic they are still having to deal with consequences and are making moral judgments. To quote a famous lyrical line, “if you chose not to decide you still have made a choice.” And you are probably no better prepared to deal with the inevitable blowback that decision results in I’m sad to say.
As we see in the example above where the locals refuse to finger a criminal, confront evil and chose inaction for fear of “blowback”, they still get blowback just the same.
On an international scale, fear of blowback is often perpetrated by those that have an “I’ve got mine now go fend for damn yourself” mentality who forget our own history of asking for and receiving help from the likes of France during our own revolution.
But history is not important. Remember, they’ve got theirs. No go away! Don’t ask them for help. Shoo!
Blowback happens. Much like excrement I’m sad to say. It’s a fact. Whether you chose to act or opt instead for inaction you get blowback of one form or another. Whether you chose to act or opt instead for inaction, I have bad news for you, someone is not going to like you. Maybe that dislike is justified or maybe it is irrational. But that doesn’t matter.
Decrying “blowback” as a reason not to act is silly. Especially knowing this. Choosing not to act and intervene on behalf of someone in a given situation against evil is still a choice. A very, very bad choice. And all you have done by making such a bad choice is possibly created two enemies instead of one; the evil which probably already hates you and the people that would have been willing to be your friend, even if tentatively, had you helped them. At best you’ve created only one new enemy. Which is one more than you had previously.
All actions we take result in another action which result in another action which in turn result in another action whether we chose to remain neutral, stand by side A or ally with side B. Decrying “blowback” and quaking before the possibility of the ifs and buts that might come as the result of ones actions is really nothing more than justifying cowardice. And it can be paralyzing for some.
Choosing not to decide or choosing to not do what is right on purpose can have just as dire of consequences as making poor choices and decisions. Making reasoned choices is important and good. Being paralyzed by fear is bad.
Make no mistake, I am not suggesting the United States run around the world lending our military to every pet cause. I’ve talked about making reasoned choices in how we act and not every situation requires that we do. But each situation does require independent thought. And if in the end action is a sound choice it should be taken.
In the end, the best thing is to simply do the right thing. The best thing to do is stand by people who want to at least try for liberty and some semblance of freedom. Just remember that they, like you, are probably not perfect. They will make mistakes in that pursuit and you probably will not agree with everything they themselves want to do in their quest.
But it’s best to give them a chance if you think they are honest and sincere in their desire. Because the blowback is coming whether you like it or not; whether you act or not. That’s called reality.
Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/blowback-happens-regardless-261981.html
About the Author:J.J. Jackson is the owner of American Conservative Daily Blog . He is also the lead designer for The Right Things - Conservative Political T-shirts . His weekly articles and exclusive content can be found at Liberty Reborn .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
