liberals: why do you depend on society when you should depend on yourself?

Question

I'm trying to understand your mindset. If I want to buy something, no matter what it is, I either save for it or work harder for it. In either case, I benefit society by being self-sufficient.

It seems liberals take the position that other, richer people should pay for the things they want. So, if they want better unemployment benefits or healthcare benefits, it should come from society in general. For rich libs, the increase in taxes never impacts their lifestyle. For poor libs, the increase in benefits always outweighs the increase in taxes. What is the reasoning behind this?

Answer 1

Short Answer: I do depend on myself, and I'm willing to let some fellow countrymen depend on me temporarily as well.

Long answer: The flaw in your reasoning is that many liberals are very well off. We want to support social programs because we believe that what happens to our fellow countrymen reflects on us. If another American is suffering from ill health and unable to get medical care, that reflects on the whole country. If another American is being discriminated against, that reflects on the whole country. We believe that the United States of America is so powerful, and so well off, that we can help the underprivileged among us without losing any of our power or most of our wealth. That's why.

Answer 2

Uh, are you under the impression that other people buy liberals houses or pay their rent, and buy their food, clothing, books, TVs, etc.

Whoever told you that was lying to you, as it's simply not true.

Most liberals work for a living.

We simply believe that, when you work, you should be paid for that work, rather than slaving for someone else's profit.

And we think that people who can't work shouldn't be living in the streets starving to death, because that's just cruel.

Currently, the people at the top (a very few people who own nearly everything -- which was not true 3 decades ago, but which is what post-Reagan conservatives keep pushing for: a country where a few hundred own everything, and everyone else is their serf) pay relatively little in tax, and are handed huge piles of money by the government.

The middle class (which is shrinking, and stuggling to put food on the table) pay most of the taxes and get the fewest services.

The poor pay little and get little -- one they get little of is help pulling out of poverty so they can contribute.

What the neo-conservatives want is, they own everything, and the goverment completely subsidises their lives.

Everyone else is kept just above starvation so we can sweat for their profit.

So the question becomes, why should the majority of citizens continue to suffer so as to subsidize the life-styles of the rich and worthless?

Since that's what YOU support, it's on you to explain how that is either reasonable or fair.

Answer 3

The increase in benefits always outweighs the increase in taxes? If you're increasing benefits you tax the rich (because they can afford it). So the arguement that benefits=higher taxes doesn't apply to the lower level income people of the country (in a just society that is).

So basically, your question is a lie right off the bat and therefore impossible to answer truthfully.

Answer 4

That is not the liberal stance. The help liberal thinkers want to give is to the people who cannot afford to pay for food or a decent living.

And who decided that your views of the world were right anyway? was there a secret meeting that the leaders of the world decided that your views were the only correct views?

I suppose you have been to areas of towns and cities where the standard of living is so low and crime is so high, that you cannot escape. I patrolled them i know what they are like. I have seen the single mom trying to raise two kids on a waitress salary. Where her life was good, but the hubby decided to split town and not pay a dime of child support. It's not always the person's fault that they are unable to sustain themselves.

And yes, I would even spend my tax money on helping you! Even when your fellow Conservative thinkers abandon you because you are weak and should be able to pay your own way.

Answer 5

well... it's generally thought that society can do somethings better than the individual on the whole...

like education... road maintenance... policing... fire protection... postal services... and some think health care

now... I pay taxes and I do get police service, fire service, postal service and decent roads... as do most liberals... (not that many people are on welfare you know, overall)

and I've seen some of the places that don't have these services from the government and it's no where I want to live.... have Republicans ever been anywhere with no state roads... no state police... no state education? yet you want to be like these places?

you can hide behind "self reliance" all you want... but I've never really seen your ideas work to any degree I would ever want to live in...

and if you ask me... the current health care system in the U.S. is only getting worse and more and more can't afford it and companies are hemorrhaging to keep up with costs rising 5 and 10 times the rate of inflation... it can't keep afloat in it's current system...

If I'm paying taxes... and I get these programs... I am depending on myself as are most "liberals"

Answer 6

for 5 years the 'liberal media' pronounced count number-of-factly that saddam had nukes!! no longer very liberal!! the liberal media under no circumstances uncovered the truths of the bush admins' lies till suitable after the 2nd pres. elections. it grew to become into already standard that there have been no wmds, that valerie plame were outed, and so forth. why did the 'liberal media' wait till after the election? the media is a for earnings scores medium. if professional-conflict sells, they'll sell it. while anti-conflict sells, they'll turn. it is approximately scores and revenue. i'm an athiest. i've got under no circumstances committed adultery, under no circumstances even dated 2 women people in the comparable week while i grew to become into single, under no circumstances stole, under no circumstances killed, beat up some punks while i grew to become right into a baby. Athiests dislike faith the comparable as you. do no longer you hate Al Qaeda? suitable wing christians and muslim extremists are the comparable. different prophet, comparable god, comparable motives for attempting to disclaim different's their freedoms. if my infants are pressured to bow to Allah or god or toddler jesus or krishna at college, i'm gonna shoot the instructor. that straightforward. it is all of the comparable, indoctrination into wierd cowardly totalitarian societies. i'm an American. people who indoctrinate will die.

Answer 7

It's called taking and giving back to those you took from. How did the rich get rich.....they are taking it form others supporting them. When is enough enough, how much should someone take before their conscience says "Ok I've done well now time to help my fellow man get to where I am. I'm not talking welfare...just reason-ability, and responsibility.

Answer 8

I am willing to bet there are the same amount of white Republicans with 8 kids who are soaking the system just as much...But I can't prove it and you can't prove your point either because there are no statistics on it

Answer 9

Actually, most liberals (pseudo-liberals like myself included) make their own way, just like any other working stiff out there. The difference is when considering people who are worse off than ourselves, we would like to help people rather than give them a cold shoulder.

Your assumptions are incorrect.

Vaughn - Great answer.

Answer 10

I am what most anybody would consider rich, and I am a liberal. I believe in helping the less fortunate in basic ways that they cannot help themself, because everyone deserves a fair chance at becoming self-sufficient. Most everyone in the United States is NOT independently wealthy like me, so I see it as my noble obligation to give Ceaser what is Ceasers and give the Lord what is the Lords.

I do depend on myself, and so do others like me. Unfortunately for most people, that is not the case. Most people are living on credit, mortgage(s), hope, government, and paycheck to paycheck.

Those are the people whose financial situation is fragile and could collapse at anytime with a health issue, job loss, natural disaster, etc. Many people are overly dependant on the insurance industry to bail them out.