coriolis wrote:I think that there is a coorelation between age and economic leanings. (This is a generalization with the attendant pitfalls)
A younger person with less accumulated wealth, not established in a career, no family to provide for, etc., has less to lose and more to gain. Not having the resources, this person would be sympathetic to "getting" from other resources. On the contrary, an older person with some wealth, an established career, and a family to provide for has more to lose and less to gain. This person would tend to hold on for what he or she worked for, and would advise the younger person to "get a job."
Unfortunately the socialistic and communistic thinkers don't account for another human tendency - to become lazy when the safety net gets too comfortable. An unintended consequence of the Great Society liberal programs is the rise of the professional recipients, a.k.a. moochers, or the underclass. There's something to be said for the rules set down in colonial Williamsburg (I think). "He who does not work, does not eat."
[rant]
You know, not only is this incorrect, but it is quite insulting and simplistic. Although I must say that there are those who lean liberal because liberals espouse a philosophy that would benefit them, but conservatives do the same thing. But for many, probably most I would say, we aren't liberals because we have little money and want to steal it from everyone else (that's the insulting part). We are liberals because we believe in a certain set of principles regarding how human society should work -- no different from the way conservatives believe, though they have a slightly different set of principles (because in reality, the differences between liberals and conservatives in America are, in the grand scheme of things, not that big).
Also, I dislike how you imply that liberalism fundamentally flawed yet make no mention of the flaws of your side. Fact is, both sides have flaws. If one side truly were more correct and more effective, do you think liberalism would have gotten this far? Conservative values tend to create too much conformity, reactionism and inequality. On the other hand, liberalism tends to open things up too much, ask for equality that isn't there (in the case of communism), or propose idealistic, but unrealistic programs and policies (I won't deny any of this). On the same token, both sides have their good points as well. Conservativism stresses personal responsibility and values, hard work and free market capitalism, which has proven very effective. Liberalism stresses civil rights, social welfare (which as a general principle isn't a bad thing and in many cases has worked well, despite obvious problems with certain programs and policies), and a more progressive approach to problems vs. going with tradition. We need both sides in this country, because the balanced middle road is often the best. Both sides have flaws, of course. And both sides also have strong points that should be considered regardless of the rhetoric and personal associations.
[/rant]
When you address people as being naive you discount the experience that many of us have in the real world. That's both presumptious and belies your obvious intelligence. Talk to me in 20 years and we'll see how your view on the world changes with time....
