who has a better more honest practical plan for america liberals or conservatives and why?

Answer 1

Conservatives aren't honest. By default the Dems win.

Answer 2

It is not that simple. It is an individual concern among our leaders. Take Barak Obama for example. He is a democrat and thought to be by and large a liberal. However, he has some very practical and honest ideas for the betterment of America. George Bush, a conservative's conservative Republican also has SOME practical and honest ideas for America. The terms Liberal and Conservative add nothing to the discussion as Liberals can be quite conservative on some issues and Conservatives can be quite liberal on issues. Look to the individual policy makers and their ideas not to the labels that have been put on them.

Answer 3

Neither has a lock on having the better, more honest or practical plan. If we go all one way or the other we tend to get in trouble. That is why the current divisiveness is so dangerous.

The health care crises, poverty, and citizens rights issues must be addressed. The liberals usually have stronger ideas in these areas.

At the same time we have got to get the current spending under control, and this administrations incursions into the contiturion must be stopped and reversed. We need the ideas of fiscal and constitutional conservatives for this.

We must learn that we will either succeed together or fail seperately.

Answer 4

I think conservatives have a better plan, because they base it on the realities of the world. First, we recognize that the Constitution is the immutable law of the land, and should not be circumvented, as government has done the past century and more. It is not a "flexible" document, because it was a very specific contract between the people and the states, who gave up certain specified powers to the federal goverrnment, and only those powers.

Second, we recognize that a free market is the best market, that economic freedom is the basis of all our freedoms. We do not believe in the abridgement of any of our individual rights for any reason - not for nebulous campaign finance reform, not for mythical separation of church and state issues, not for feminist domestic violence agendas, not for leftist PC agendas, not for hoplophobes' (people who irrationally fear or hate guns) agendas, etc.

We do not see the government as the be-all and end-all and solution to our problems. We do not agree with the government assuming powers that are neither enumerated in the Constitution (per 10th Amendment) or that have been given to them via amendment.

We would protect all from an overbearing government.

Answer 5

Republicans. They want to stay the course concerning Iraq, knowing if the military were to leave Iraq now, the terrorists would go on a rampage and re-take control of them. Iran would more than likely attack Iraq in their weakened state, and cause even more terror. Tax cuts are working, with them in office, gas prices are getting lower, the economy is improving, but if the liberals come in, they'll over-tax so people cannot afford to buy for their children, or any extras they might like for themselves. The growing economy will come to a stand-still, and even die.
John McCain is the best candidate. He knows what war is like.

Answer 6

Neither. Both are concerned with only one thing:
Promoting themselves.
Both parties have evolved into self-serving entities that have no regard for the well-being of the country.
Also, the basic tenets of the parties have been eroded to a point where there isn't much difference between them.
Both parties strive to amass more money, more power, and more celebrity.
If more people stopped believing the lies and deception of both parties and examined the issues, we'd be much better off.

Answer 7

Traditionally the liberals have been most responsible for prosperity in America, with respect to the middle class working folks. Keep in mind, liberal does not always equal Democrat. Think Teddy Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln as much as FDR.

History shows us that long-term prosperity in this modern age is a function of the ability of a nation to build a strong, wealthy middle class. What people don't agree on is how to build that strong middle class.

Conservatives believe that the best method is to remove traditional stoppers on growth of elite income, thinking that it will raise the rest of the nation along with it. Personally, my opinion is that it looks good on paper but the world doesn't work that way. Certainly history has yet to show an example of this kind of policy creating a strong middle class; in fact, the trend becomes a shifting of wealth *away* from working people. Indeed, the last 26 years of conservative economics in America (with a brief interruption during Clinton's time) has seen just that occurring. Two and three-job households are no longer the exception, but rather the norm. And even then, these households are barely making the same amount of income as a single job home from 30 years ago, adjusted for inflation. After 26 years of "trickle down" theory, I think we can safely conclude that the "trickle" has not, in fact, occurred.

Liberals believe in creating a strong middle class from the ground-up: that is, strong labor protections, progressive taxation, and inexpensive, widely-available education. Obviously this flies in the face with the "limited government" crowd. However, history has shown that a strong middle class occurs only during two situations: an abundance of resources, or controlled availability of labor. This is why FDR's "New Deal" was successful: it made labor more expensive, while at the same time opening resources to business. It was a win-win in many respects, even though business owners grumbled about the higher price of labor. However, with the growth of productivity that also went along with the labor costs, the profits certainly didn't suffer.

Today we see record-high productivity rates with flat and negative income growth. Recent trends may show that income growth may be starting to rise slightly, but nowhere near where it nominally should be compared to productivity numbers. This is why we're seeing record profits from many companies: because they are paying far less than traditional labor rates for the same amount of work performed.

I hope to see more liberal policy applied during the next administration, especially with respect to "free trade" (which is killing us) and private-versus-public ownership of the Commons -- especially health care and basic technological infrastructure. In addition, the above-nominal throwaway rates for military spending need to be restored to rational levels by cutting useless programs like the Osprey, and giant new aircraft carriers that we don't even have enough seamen to staff. (Keep in mind that unlike investment spending for social programs and infrastructure, military spending is basically money that won't generate future tax revenue, so it's gone forever once you spend it. And that's over half our discretionary budget!)

Answer 8

I think conservatives are better at running the military and the economy, but liberals are better at running social programs and helping the less fortunate. We need a balance of the two.

Answer 9

Whichever one will A: defend our nation from terrorists.
B: lower our taxes which makes the economy
grow.
C: respect the rights of Christians to worship
So it's as easy as ABC: Always Be Conservative.

Answer 10

So far Yetti and the one after him have put it best. We NEED what is best for people as a WHOLE. Which is right down the middle. Take the extremists out of the picture, and we could be a GREAT nation once again.

Answer 11

America liberals have a plan? Did they tell you or is it a secret and we have to wait for Richard Armitage to leak it?