Go Back   Sports Central Message Boards > Community Discussion > The Lounge > Politics & Religion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-06-2007, 07:34 PM   #1
buckeyefan78
Happy Land
 
buckeyefan78's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,864
buckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the roughbuckeyefan78 is a jewel in the rough
Default Compassion Versus Reality...

Interesting artice here...

Compassion Versus Reality
By Walter E. Williams

Dr. Thomas Sowell, a distinguished economist and longtime friend and colleague, recently wrote a series of columns under the title "A War of Words." He pointed out that liberals succeed in duping the public because they are so clever with words that they give the appearance of compassion. Liberals talk about the need for "affordable" housing and health care. They tarnish their enemies with terms such as "price-gouging" and "corporate greed." Uninformed and unthinking Americans fall easy prey to this demagoguery.

Politicians exploit public demands that government ought to do something about this or that problem by taking measures giving them greater control over our lives. For the most part, whatever politicians do, whether it's rent controls to produce "affordable" housing, or price controls to eliminate "price-gouging," the result is a calamity worse than the original problem. For example, two of the most costly housing markets are the rent-controlled cities of San Francisco and New York. If you're over 40, you'll remember the chaos produced by the gasoline price controls of the 1970s. Socialist agendas have considerable appeal, but they produce disaster, and the more socialist they are, the greater the disaster.

Liberals often denounce free markets as immoral. The reality is exactly the opposite. Free markets, characterized by peaceable, voluntary exchange, with respect for property rights and the rule of law, are more moral than any other system of resource allocation. Let's examine just one reason for the superior morality of free markets.

Say that I mow your lawn and you pay me $30, which we might think of as certificates of performance. Having mowed your lawn, I visit my grocer and demand that my fellow men serve me by giving me 3 pounds of steak and a six-pack of beer. In effect, the grocer asks, "Williams, you're demanding that your fellow man, as ranchers and brewers, serve you; what did you do to serve your fellow man?" I say, "I mowed his lawn." The grocer says, "Prove it!" That's when I hand over my certificates of performance -- the $30.

Look at the morality of a resource allocation method that requires that I serve my fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces and contrast it with government resource allocation. The government can say, "Williams, you don't have to serve your fellow man; through our tax code, we'll take what he produces and give it to you." Of course, if I were to privately take what my fellow man produced, we'd call it theft. The only difference is when the government does it, that theft is legal but nonetheless theft -- the taking of one person's rightful property to give to another.

Liberals love to talk about this or that human right, such as a right to health care, food or housing. That's a perverse usage of the term "right." A right, such as a right to free speech, imposes no obligation on another, except that of non-interference. The so-called right to health care, food or housing, whether a person can afford it or not, is something entirely different; it does impose an obligation on another. If one person has a right to something he didn't produce, simultaneously and of necessity it means that some other person does not have right to something he did produce. That's because, since there's no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy, in order for government to give one American a dollar, it must, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American. I'd like to hear the moral argument for taking what belongs to one person to give to another person.

There are people in need of help. Charity is one of the nobler human motivations. The act of reaching into one's own pockets to help a fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else's pocket is despicable and worthy of condemnation.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/W...versus_reality
buckeyefan78 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 01:35 PM   #2
grizzle_810
All-Star Player
 
grizzle_810's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Indiana
Posts: 322
grizzle_810 is on a distinguished road
Default

If you listen quietly, you can hear CKFresh's head exploding.
__________________
www.gamedaythreads.com
grizzle_810 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 01:40 PM   #3
DETMURDS
Detroit Native!
 
DETMURDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: God's Green Earth
Posts: 1,703
DETMURDS has a little shameless behavior in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by buckeyefan78 View Post
Interesting artice here...

Compassion Versus Reality
By Walter E. Williams

Dr. Thomas Sowell, a distinguished economist and longtime friend and colleague, recently wrote a series of columns under the title "A War of Words." He pointed out that liberals succeed in duping the public because they are so clever with words that they give the appearance of compassion. Liberals talk about the need for "affordable" housing and health care. They tarnish their enemies with terms such as "price-gouging" and "corporate greed." Uninformed and unthinking Americans fall easy prey to this demagoguery.

Politicians exploit public demands that government ought to do something about this or that problem by taking measures giving them greater control over our lives. For the most part, whatever politicians do, whether it's rent controls to produce "affordable" housing, or price controls to eliminate "price-gouging," the result is a calamity worse than the original problem. For example, two of the most costly housing markets are the rent-controlled cities of San Francisco and New York. If you're over 40, you'll remember the chaos produced by the gasoline price controls of the 1970s. Socialist agendas have considerable appeal, but they produce disaster, and the more socialist they are, the greater the disaster.

Liberals often denounce free markets as immoral. The reality is exactly the opposite. Free markets, characterized by peaceable, voluntary exchange, with respect for property rights and the rule of law, are more moral than any other system of resource allocation. Let's examine just one reason for the superior morality of free markets.

Say that I mow your lawn and you pay me $30, which we might think of as certificates of performance. Having mowed your lawn, I visit my grocer and demand that my fellow men serve me by giving me 3 pounds of steak and a six-pack of beer. In effect, the grocer asks, "Williams, you're demanding that your fellow man, as ranchers and brewers, serve you; what did you do to serve your fellow man?" I say, "I mowed his lawn." The grocer says, "Prove it!" That's when I hand over my certificates of performance -- the $30.

Look at the morality of a resource allocation method that requires that I serve my fellow man in order to have a claim on what he produces and contrast it with government resource allocation. The government can say, "Williams, you don't have to serve your fellow man; through our tax code, we'll take what he produces and give it to you." Of course, if I were to privately take what my fellow man produced, we'd call it theft. The only difference is when the government does it, that theft is legal but nonetheless theft -- the taking of one person's rightful property to give to another.

Liberals love to talk about this or that human right, such as a right to health care, food or housing. That's a perverse usage of the term "right." A right, such as a right to free speech, imposes no obligation on another, except that of non-interference. The so-called right to health care, food or housing, whether a person can afford it or not, is something entirely different; it does impose an obligation on another. If one person has a right to something he didn't produce, simultaneously and of necessity it means that some other person does not have right to something he did produce. That's because, since there's no Santa Claus or Tooth Fairy, in order for government to give one American a dollar, it must, through intimidation, threats and coercion, confiscate that dollar from some other American. I'd like to hear the moral argument for taking what belongs to one person to give to another person.

There are people in need of help. Charity is one of the nobler human motivations. The act of reaching into one's own pockets to help a fellow man in need is praiseworthy and laudable. Reaching into someone else's pocket is despicable and worthy of condemnation.

http://www.townhall.com/Columnists/W...versus_reality
Pretty good,..they try to exploit what they call "problems" just to make more problems. And it is all for thier own personal gain. WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE DAYS OF FDR, AND JFK? Where have all the good Dems gone to?
DETMURDS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 01:52 PM   #4
CKFresh
Most Hated Member
 
CKFresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 7,377
CKFresh will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzle_810 View Post
If you listen quietly, you can hear CKFresh's head exploding.
:lol::lol::lol::lol:

Yeah, I decided to not even touch this thread... I'll let the conservatives enjoy this one without me proving them wrong for once

Quote:
Where have all the good Dems gone to?
Canada and Europe mostly.
__________________
Do yourself a favor, become your own savior.

Think Fresh.
CKFresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 01:54 PM   #5
DETMURDS
Detroit Native!
 
DETMURDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: God's Green Earth
Posts: 1,703
DETMURDS has a little shameless behavior in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CKFresh View Post
Canada and Europe mostly.
Canada and Europe has issues,...I don't think so.
DETMURDS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 01:55 PM   #6
CKFresh
Most Hated Member
 
CKFresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 7,377
CKFresh will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DETMURDS View Post
Canada and Europe has issues,...I don't think so.
Which country doesn't have issues?
__________________
Do yourself a favor, become your own savior.

Think Fresh.
CKFresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 10:51 PM   #7
DETMURDS
Detroit Native!
 
DETMURDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: God's Green Earth
Posts: 1,703
DETMURDS has a little shameless behavior in the past
Default

Canada and Europe has MAJOR issues. Sorry to confuse you.
DETMURDS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2007, 09:16 AM   #8
CKFresh
Most Hated Member
 
CKFresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 7,377
CKFresh will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DETMURDS View Post
Canada and Europe has MAJOR issues. Sorry to confuse you.
Like what? Less violence, less crime, less murder, longer life expectancy, less poverty, free education (in most of europe), and a more peaceful government?

Yeah, sounds like hell to me.
__________________
Do yourself a favor, become your own savior.

Think Fresh.
CKFresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2007, 03:25 AM   #9
Anthony
Moderator
 
Anthony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 8,378
Anthony is on a distinguished road
Default

"Compassion" or "rights" have nothing to do with all this; even as conservative a thinker as Otto von Bismarck (who rather interestingly has been made into a deity of sorts by the neocons on foreign-policy matters) understood this when he advised the Kaiser to enact social welfare programs in Germany and reform the country's labor laws. Bismarck argued that otherwise it would be more difficult to obtain the loyalty of the lower classes in the event of a war.

Well Bismarck was totally vindicated by how World War I turned out, as another equally conservative Prussian thinker, Paul von Hindenburg, pointed out when he cited the "socialists and trade unionists" as among those who would not get behind the war effort and caused Germany to lose, and the monarchy to crumble.

And we tried Williams' "charity" approach 75 years ago. It failed abjectly.

Last edited by Anthony; 06-09-2007 at 06:31 AM.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2007, 12:47 PM   #10
DETMURDS
Detroit Native!
 
DETMURDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: God's Green Earth
Posts: 1,703
DETMURDS has a little shameless behavior in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CKFresh View Post
Like what? Less violence, less crime, less murder, longer life expectancy, less poverty, free education (in most of europe), and a more peaceful government?

Yeah, sounds like hell to me.
Europeans live with much more violence than we do, they have been living with terrorism well before we had 9-11,...go ahead and tell me I am wrong.

Less poverty? Less poverty? One does not have the opportunity of living in the world of capitalism as we do!

Free education? How is it free?

Peaceful government? ....What are you talking about,...explain if you can.

All I know is that most of them in Europe are defeated countries,..either we defeated them, or Germany did,...and we saved those that Germany beat down.

Where would you rather live CKFresh? You complain about gas prices here,...have you ever been to England? Have you seen the gas prices in Europe?

I will watch the NFL here in the USA,...while you watch soccer in Europe!
DETMURDS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2007, 05:53 PM   #11
CKFresh
Most Hated Member
 
CKFresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 7,377
CKFresh will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Europeans live with much more violence than we do, they have been living with terrorism well before we had 9-11,...go ahead and tell me I am wrong.
You're simply wrong. The murder rate and rate of violent crime is 50% less in nearly every European country and Canada. Much of that has to do with gun control, much of it has to do with the general philosophy of the people in those countries.

Quote:
Less poverty? Less poverty? One does not have the opportunity of living in the world of capitalism as we do!
Uhhh... yes, those countries are capitalist, with the exception of one or two European nations. Either way, there is less poverty.

Quote:
Free education? How is it free?
In most European countries the federal government provides frere education, including college.

Quote:
Peaceful government? ....What are you talking about,...explain if you can.
Canada and most of Europe do not use war as policy. They use war in defense, and defense only. They do not wage wars of aggression or preemptive strikes. I am talking currently, so WW II or any other war from the past does not apply.

Quote:
All I know is that most of them in Europe are defeated countries,..either we defeated them, or Germany did,...and we saved those that Germany beat down.
What's your point? Many countries have been defeated in wars and recovered to be great and prosperous.

Quote:
Where would you rather live CKFresh? You complain about gas prices here,...have you ever been to England? Have you seen the gas prices in Europe?
Gas prices? Well guess what Europeans have become educated on evironmental issues so they don't use nearly as much energy as we do. They drive "Smart Cars" which basically look like toys, but are very efficient. An SUV in Europe is rare. They ride bikes for short distances. They utilize public transport to the fullest. In other words, they are more environmentally aware so gas prices bother them very little.

As to where I would rather live, the answer is nowhere. American is still the best nation in the world. But that doesn't mean we can't learn from nations with a little more experience than us. To think the America is perfect, and that every aspect of American life is better than European life is ****ing ignorant and simply retarded. Yes America is the best country in the world - no, we are not perfect. You are one of those people who hates France because Bill O'Reilly told you they are *******. You probably say "freedom fries." To discount an entire country for childish reasons is quite irresponsible. Learning from other countries isn't anti-American, in fact it is very patriotic.
__________________
Do yourself a favor, become your own savior.

Think Fresh.
CKFresh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2007, 07:46 PM   #12
Montrovant
Hatecarver
 
Montrovant's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Tampa
Posts: 685
Montrovant is on a distinguished road
Default

Hey now, bashing the French certainly wasn't started by O'Reilly, it's sort of a national pastime. Better than baseball! :lol:
Montrovant is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2007, 10:17 AM   #13
DETMURDS
Detroit Native!
 
DETMURDS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: God's Green Earth
Posts: 1,703
DETMURDS has a little shameless behavior in the past
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CKFresh View Post
You're simply wrong. The murder rate and rate of violent crime is 50% less in nearly every European country and Canada. Much of that has to do with gun control, much of it has to do with the general philosophy of the people in those countries.



Uhhh... yes, those countries are capitalist, with the exception of one or two European nations. Either way, there is less poverty.



In most European countries the federal government provides frere education, including college.



Canada and most of Europe do not use war as policy. They use war in defense, and defense only. They do not wage wars of aggression or preemptive strikes. I am talking currently, so WW II or any other war from the past does not apply.



What's your point? Many countries have been defeated in wars and recovered to be great and prosperous.



Gas prices? Well guess what Europeans have become educated on evironmental issues so they don't use nearly as much energy as we do. They drive "Smart Cars" which basically look like toys, but are very efficient. An SUV in Europe is rare. They ride bikes for short distances. They utilize public transport to the fullest. In other words, they are more environmentally aware so gas prices bother them very little.

As to where I would rather live, the answer is nowhere. American is still the best nation in the world. But that doesn't mean we can't learn from nations with a little more experience than us. To think the America is perfect, and that every aspect of American life is better than European life is ****ing ignorant and simply retarded. Yes America is the best country in the world - no, we are not perfect. You are one of those people who hates France because Bill O'Reilly told you they are *******. You probably say "freedom fries." To discount an entire country for childish reasons is quite irresponsible. Learning from other countries isn't anti-American, in fact it is very patriotic.

A goverment paying for a school system is by no means a free education to it's people,....government is paid by the people.

Japan for example is only doing well because we gave them that opportunity after they surrendered.

Canada, and Europes military isn't much of a military anyhow, they are not capable of having that type of policy even though we don't either...they all have depended on us pretty much past, present, and surely into the future. They all are hanging on the to USA's apron strings. (England barely won the Falkland Islands!)

Europe has always driven small ugly cars. I own an SUV, a full size truck, and a full size sedan,.... and I am happy with it. This is only an issue if you really think there is man-made global warming anyhow,...which I don't believe in.

I have been around the world about 10 times,...the US is the greatest land of opportunity. Anything else is just nice to visit.
DETMURDS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-11-2007, 01:06 AM   #14
Anthony
Moderator
 
Anthony's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 8,378
Anthony is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Montrovant View Post
Hey now, bashing the French certainly wasn't started by O'Reilly, it's sort of a national pastime. Better than baseball! :lol:

Not any more - now that Sarkozy won that election.
Anthony is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
St. Louis Versus NY Mets bama4256 Major League Baseball 10 04-07-2007 12:24 PM
Denver Versus Indianapolis bama4256 National Football League 14 11-29-2005 10:05 PM
Ocean Exploration versus Space Exploration bama4256 The Lounge 6 11-22-2005 10:24 PM
Cuban to give away $1 million on his reality show Marc National Basketball Association 4 03-01-2004 02:27 AM
Reality TV lmanchur. The Lounge 9 01-12-2001 06:25 PM



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:28 AM.