Am I liberal or conservative?

[ElishaElijah]

Have you done that?

How's it worked out for you?

Also, how is it "freedom" to trade your labor for a wage when that is basically the only option you have?

Yes I have done that since I was 12 and bought my own lawn mower, got jobs from my neighbors and earned money that way. Socialism doesn’t end up with ownership and freedom, you serve at the whim of the select few.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yes I have done that since I was 12 and bought my own lawn mower, got jobs from my neighbors and earned money that way.

Okay. And would you say you have more or less freedom than someone significantly richer than you who never even worked for it?

Socialism doesn’t end up with ownership and freedom, you serve at the whim of the select few.

I haven't mentioned socialism. I asked you how you can consider the ability to work for a wage a "free" choice when you literally have no other option.

Also, what you have just said makes no sense. It applies more to capitalism than it does to socialism. Under capitalism, you work for a wage while only owning what you can buy at the whims of a select few. Under socialism (or, at least, in a socialised workplace) you OWN part of where you work and are therefore entitled to a share of the profits, and essentially function without the coercion of a higher authority.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Okay. And would you say you have more or less freedom than someone significantly richer than you who never even worked for it?

I would say that as a citizen of the US I’m just as free whether rich or poor no matter as long as my God given rights were protected as in the Bill of Rights. As a believer in Christ I’m free no matter where or what government I am under.

I haven't mentioned socialism. I asked you how you can consider the ability to work for a wage a "free" choice when you literally have no other option.

Also, what you have just said makes no sense. It applies more to capitalism than it does to socialism. Under capitalism, you work for a wage while only owning what you can buy at the whims of a select few. Under socialism (or, at least, in a socialised workplace) you OWN part of where you work and are therefore entitled to a share of the profits, and essentially function without the coercion of a higher authority.

Just so we are talking the same definitions. Don’t see private ownership in socialism.
Definition of CAPITALISM

Definition of SOCIALISM

 

[ElishaElijah]

I asked you how you can consider the ability to work for a wage a "free" choice when you literally have no other option.

Everyone has to work to eat, either you grow your own food and eat off the land or trade your labor and buy from the farmer. I’d rather be able to earn and be rewarded for how hard and good I work instead of being lumped in with everyone, working for the same wage no matter if I work hard and produce or just occupy a spot and work half heartedly.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I would say that as a citizen of the US I’m just as free whether rich or poor no matter as long as my God given rights were protected as in the Bill of Rights. As a believer in Christ I’m free no matter where or what government I am under.

So you don't think that, in any way, a wealthier person can, say, work less, be more likely to get away with crimes or obtain more political power than you?

Just so we are talking the same definitions. Don’t see private ownership in socialism.
Definition of CAPITALISM

Definition of SOCIALISM

Wait... Are you telling me that the sum total of your knowledge of these two subjects is a single dictionary definition?

Are you serious?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Everyone has to work to eat,

No they don't. There are many people who are simply born into a position where they never have to work a day in their lives, and there are many more who work every day from a very young age and are still borderline starving.

either you grow your own food and eat off the land or trade your labor and buy from the farmer.

Except the majority of that land is privately owned, and land is commodity, so you can't simply CHOOSE to grow food on it. Either way, the choice you are proposing is the choice to live a life on the knife edge of subsistence (against a system which fights you) or a system of selling your labour to others to live, at least, a baseline standard of living. That is no more a free choice than the free choice of slave to either kill themselves or work for their masters. It is still coercive.

I’d rather be able to earn and be rewarded for how hard and good I work instead of being lumped in with everyone, working for the same wage no matter if I work hard and produce or just occupy a spot and work half heartedly.

What if you work really hard and still have very little, compared to someone else who may work significantly less hard (or not work at all) and live a lifestyle you can only dream of? Is that fair or free?

Again, I'm not advocating for socialism. I am simply challenging your very naive view of capitalism. Essentially, you are saying that you are happy to suffer if it means living a life one millionth as comfortable as the billionaires who disproportionately benefit from your labour.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Again, I'm not advocating for socialism. I am simply challenging your very naive view of capitalism. Essentially, you are saying that you are happy to suffer if it means living a life one millionth as comfortable as the billionaires who disproportionately benefit from your labour.

Why do you say essentially I am saying such and such when I’m not saying any such thing? What I’m saying is in a Capitalistic society people have the opportunity to own property, own businesses, improve their lives to become wealthy or not. Of course there may be some wealthy people who have money handed down to them, but to say they don’t need to work is a fallacy. They still need to work to maintain what they have or will lose it all. The other thing is I’m not a covetous or envious person so not going to project or worry about billionaires and whether or not they benefit from my labor. A lot of people benefit from my labor and that’s the point, I provide a great service that people want to pay for. I too plan on leaving an inheritance to my children and theirs, that’s also the point, to bless future generations.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Why do you say essentially I am saying such and such when I’m not saying any such thing? What I’m saying is in a Capitalistic society people have the opportunity to own property, own businesses, improve their lives to become wealthy or not.

No, what you have said is that this represents a "free choice". It does not. To say you have the "opportunity" to do these things is like saying you have the "opportunity" to win the lottery. The vast majority of people do not see the benefit from capitalism that a very small minority do, and the idea that you participate in the system voluntarily is just blatantly wrong.

Of course there may be some wealthy people who have money handed down to them, but to say they don’t need to work is a fallacy.

No, it is not. Someone who inherits several million dollars is under no pressure whatsoever to work.

They still need to work to maintain what they have or will lose it all.

Again, no. Capital can accrue more capital simply by sitting in a bank account.

The other thing is I’m not a covetous or envious person so not going to project or worry about billionaires and whether or not they benefit from my labor.

What about them benefitting from the labour of sweat shops? Benefitting from flaunting laws? Benefitting from wage theft?

A lot of people benefit from my labor and that’s the point, I provide a great service that people want to pay for.

Which is also fine. But don't you think there is a better way society can work than a very small minority owning all of the property and reaping the vast majority of the benefits from the hard labour of hundreds of thousands of others? Or that wealth essentially granting them more rights than you? Or the decomodification of basic necessities required to live, like food, water, shelter and healthcare?

Or, do you believe it is somehow a virtue to FORCE people to work for less freedom, less rights and to live without basic necessities?

I too plan on leaving an inheritance to my children and theirs, that’s also the point, to bless future generations.

Which is also fine. But wouldn't it be better to leave them a world where they are guaranteed a life of comfort and happiness regardless of what ills may befall them? Or recourse of freedom against coercive control? To guarantee they live in a world where they and families will never face the possibility of starvation, or exploitation, or being driven to poverty by medical bills?

In many ways, the divide between you and I is a perfect illustration of the fundamental philosophical difference between the left and the right. The right believe we should be happy with how things are and should work to preserve the current order (or return to an older one), whereas the left believes we can actually make the world a better place.

 

[ElishaElijah]

Which is also fine. But don't you think there is a better way society can work than a very small minority owning all of the property and reaping the vast majority of the benefits from the hard labour of hundreds of thousands of others? Or that wealth essentially granting them more rights than you? Or the decomodification of basic necessities required to live, like food, water, shelter and healthcare?

I’ve looked at the availability of land across the US and there is a lot of available acreage for sale for anyone to buy, it takes some saving. Also there are over 2 million farms so land ownership isn’t for the wealthiest people although people can hoard land and resources. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Highlights/2019/2017Census_Farms_Farmland.pdf
If you live in the city it may seem like nobody owns any land or has the ability but when you go to the rural areas there are many people who own 3 acres or more, alot live in developments with 1/4-1 acre. Take your pick, we have farms, single family homes, apartments etc. It’s whatever you want to work for or where you want to live, everyone’s different.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I’ve looked at the availability of land across the US and there is a lot of available acreage for sale for anyone to buy, it takes some saving.

You literally just admitted that you can't own land without participating in the capitalist system.

Also there are over 2 million farms so land ownership isn’t for the wealthiest people although people can hoard land and resources. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Publications/Highlights/2019/2017Census_Farms_Farmland.pdf

Except that land isn't used for individual purposes. It is largely heavily subsidized because it produces food and resources to be sold.

If you live in the city it may seem like nobody owns any land or has the ability but when you go to the rural areas there are many people who own 3 acres or more, alot live in developments with 1/4-1 acre. Take your pick, we have farms, single family homes, apartments etc. It’s whatever you want to work for or where you want to live, everyone’s different.

It is not simply people acquiring farmland for their own use. And the availability of land isn't the issue. The issue is the coercion of living a subsistence lifestyle vs. the convenience and relative comforts of wages. Once again, simply saying "you can grow your own food" as a reasonable alternative to participation in the capitalist system is akin to telling a slave they can kill themselves rather than submit to their master. You shouldn't have to live a subsistence lifestyle in order to not be exploited. We should be fighting the exploitation, not telling the exploited that they should be spending what little money they have already on land so that they can live at the absolute bare minimum of sustainability and comfort at the cost of basically all the conveniences of modern living (and largely against the will of local authorities and businesses).

You have also not even remotely responded to the vast majority of my points. Do you or do you not want to leave behind a better world?

 

[ElishaElijah]

You literally just admitted that you can't own land without participating in the capitalist system.

You’re probably correct, you work, earn money, buy things. Do you expect to sponge and mooch off someone or what?

 

[ElishaElijah]

In many ways, the divide between you and I is a perfect illustration of the fundamental philosophical difference between the left and the right. The right believe we should be happy with how things are and should work to preserve the current order (or return to an older one), whereas the left believes we can actually make the world a better place.

This is a a false premise you have, conservatives are interested in preserving the US Constitution, Bill of Rights and preserving Truth. When a society descends into immorality and chaos like is being promoted by the left right now, we will push back and you should as well because the current policies from the Democrats are not making the world a better place.

 

[ElishaElijah]

The issue is the coercion of living a subsistence lifestyle vs. the convenience and relative comforts of wages. Once again, simply saying "you can grow your own food" as a reasonable alternative to participation in the capitalist system is akin to telling a slave they can kill themselves rather than submit to their master. You shouldn't have to live a subsistence lifestyle in order to not be exploited. We should be fighting the exploitation, not telling the exploited that they should be spending what little money they have already on land so that they can live at the absolute bare minimum of sustainability and comfort at the cost of basically all the conveniences of modern living (and largely against the will of local authorities and businesses).

Not sure what you’re trying to communicate here, in the US capitalist system a person has the freedom to work at whatever they want to. I used land ownership as an example of how anyone has the ability to own land whether to farm or personal use. A person has the potential to earn as much money as they want to, many do, I don’t have that desire, I’m content with what I have. To say people in the US are slaves and exploited (as far as a normal job) isn’t true. I would say 90% of homes in our area for example have multiple tv’s, vehicles, cell phones etc. Just don’t see anything close to what you’re describing unless you go to poorly run cities.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

You’re probably correct, you work, earn money, buy things. Do you expect to sponge and mooch off someone or what?

You realize we're debating capitalism, right? You didn't think the idea of labour and wages was somewhat involved in that?

 

[ImmortalFlame]

This is a a false premise you have, conservatives are interested in preserving the US Constitution, Bill of Rights and preserving Truth. When a society descends into immorality and chaos like is being promoted by the left right now, we will push back and you should as well because the current policies from the Democrats are not making the world a better place.

I don't know what to say to this, except that you are demonstrably wrong. Hence why the most recent Republican leaders are rapists who attempted an actual coup to overturn democracy and shred the constitution.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Not sure what you’re trying to communicate here, in the US capitalist system a person has the freedom to work at whatever they want to.

Not quite. Work availability, skills and qualifications play a big role. It's not an entirely free market.

I used land ownership as an example of how anyone has the ability to own land whether to farm or personal use.

But they don't, as I explained.

A person has the potential to earn as much money as they want to, many do, I don’t have that desire, I’m content with what I have.

This is just fantasism. Not everyone can be a billionaire. Capitalism is absolutely dependent on a massive underclass of people existing who have to depend on minimum wage in order to live.

To say people in the US are slaves and exploited (as far as a normal job) isn’t true. I would say 90% of homes in our area for example have multiple tv’s, vehicles, cell phones etc. Just don’t see anything close to what you’re describing unless you go to poorly run cities.

Around 34 million people (about 10% of the population) live in actual poverty. A further 25 million depend on welfare.

In any case, saying that people own cars or phones doesn't mean that they aren't being coerced or exploited. Those things have nothing to do with eachother.

 

[ElishaElijah]

In any case, saying that people own cars or phones doesn't mean that they aren't being coerced or exploited. Those things have nothing to do with eachother.

This has nothing to do with Capitalism but some people are just evil and take advantage of others

 

[ElishaElijah]

Around 34 million people (about 10% of the population) live in actual poverty. A further 25 million depend on welfare.

The problem is the break down of the family without a responsible man in the home to train sons how to work. Government programs designed to help haven’t solved the problem.
How Welfare Harms Kids

 

[ElishaElijah]

This is just fantasism. Not everyone can be a billionaire. Capitalism is absolutely dependent on a massive underclass of people existing who have to depend on minimum wage in order to live.

Who ever said you have to be a billionaire to be wealthy, content or happy? What I’ve noticed is people can be happy with what they have till they notice their neighbor or someone else has more than they do and all of the sudden they feel like they’ve been wronged somehow, this is just covetousness and envy. https://www.thebalance.com/how-much-money-does-it-take-to-be-rich-358043

 

[ElishaElijah]

So you don't think that, in any way, a wealthier person can, say, work less, be more likely to get away with crimes or obtain more political power than you?

Of course they can and this is a problem, can be eliminated by removing all the corrupt politicians and stop voting party instead of character. Look at California, how could Newsom not have been recalled? Larry Elder was a much better option.