Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Good vs. Evil

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Well said
Gary

On 27 Apr 2005 at 11:10, Arvel L. Williams, P.E. wrote:

> Mr. Wish,
> 
> That is perhaps the most complete and reasonable response that I've
> seen posted on this or any other non technical topic.  Yes my rhetoric
> is strong, and having spent significant time and money in the current
> health care system, I'm not happy with any of the available or
> proposed options.  It's the only industry that can have a 30-40%
> Administration overhead and still stay in business.  Education is not
> far behind on the administration cost and the ill management.
> 
> As far as liberal, socialist, and communists, I don't believe that
> these terms are evenly closely related.  But, I do believe that some
> liberals have forgotten what the word really means.  By the same token
> some conservatives have also forgotten what that really means.
> 
> Traditionally the title Liberal or liberalism is defined by Webster as
> either a theory in economics emphasizing individual freedom from
> restraint and usually based on free competition, the self-regulating
> market, and the gold standard c : a political philosophy based on
> belief in progress, the essential goodness of the human race, and the
> autonomy of the individual and standing for the protection of
> political and civil liberties was not afraid of change, tolerant of
> others, and protective of civil liberties. Additionally they believed
> in a self-regulating economy.  The original definition is based on the
> Protestant movement from about 400 years ago.
> 
> This is far from what I see the current liberal policy maker doing and
> promoting in Washington today.
> 
> Conservative or Conservatism is a political philosophy based on
> tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions,
> and preferring gradual development to abrupt change.
> 
> Socialism is a system or condition of society in which the means of
> production are owned and controlled by the state.   Wouldn't state ran
> medical care be the reverse of liberalism, as actually defined, and
> the meet the definition of socialism?
> 
> Communism is, when I use the term, a totalitarian system of government
> in which a single authoritarian party controls state-owned means of
> production or is the final stage of society in Marxist theory in which
> the state has withered away and economic goods are distributed
> equitably.
> 
> All definitions are from Webster's Online.
> 
> What really concerns me is that he liberals talk of protecting civil
> rights, but I don't seen one minority person in a position of power in
> the Democratic party.  Nor did I see one during the Carter or Clinton
> Administrations.
> 
> As far as government programs, I lean toward liberal economical
> policies, that are now conservative, and libertarian ideals.
> 
> The best protection for Civil Liberties is Individual Liberties.
> 
> Arvel
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Structuralist [mailto:dennis.wish(--nospam--at)verizon.net]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2005 1:45 AM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: OT: Good vs. Evil
> 
> 
> It's been bothering me lately to see so many posts by professionals
> who are polarized to one extreme or the other. While I've had a long
> post planted let me put it in simple terms:
> 
>     * Liberals are not socialist, communists and without strong faith
>     or
>       moral value. This is simply a lie spread by those who can't
>       stand the idea of believers who are concerned with the civil
>       rights of Americans and who wish to provide protection against
>       this abuse.
>     * I have a number of friends who are first generation citizens
>     from
>       communistic societies and they are naturally conservative. They
>       fear the potential abuse of the left and because of this they
>       migrate as far away from the left as possible. While they may
>       not be happy with the current events, they feel that the basic
>       ideology of the conservative will protect them.
>     * Those of us who are voicing opinions on health care, social
>       security,  outsourcing and more are accused of being liberal and
>       potential communists. The truth is that there is no position to
>       the far right or the far left that will work - the same as
>       socialism or communism based on the frailties of human pettiness
>       prevents any political ideology work. What this means is that a
>       government run program is just as likely to fail as a publicly
>       owned (private industry) corporation. The support for Globalism
>       and NAFTA or outsourcing spans both sides of the aisle and
>       became evident to the surprise of Democrats during the Clinton
>       administration. What concerns me is the growing number of
>       conservatives who are now understanding that an unbalanced
>       system of profiteering does not work and have returned to the
>       ideology of protectionism.
>     * Finally, there are still those who hate - they hate anyone who
>       disagrees with their opinions, they spout the words of past
>       patriots out of context and fail to prove how their ideology is
>       successful in todays world. Someone  asked to name one
>       government program that has worked and there are many. However,
>       I can also name a number of programs that government was
>       involved with that has taken advantage of the private sector
>       such as Worldcom, Enron, Lawsuits against health care providers
>       who are billing medical and insurance companies for twice what a
>       patient with insurance pays in order to compensate for their
>       loss (Tenet is one health care provide who has defaulted and
>       agreed to reimburse those who were charged for emergency room
>       services who did not have insurance in the late 90's and early
>       2000's). There are many examples of how the private sector is
>       taken advantage of and pays the price for these abuses.
>     * The answer lies in the middle - a mixture of private enterprise
>       and government checks and balances. The same should be true of
>       government - we allow bills to be submitted that contain
>       compromises for one party or the other that has little or
>       nothing to due with the bill and then when the representative or
>       senator of one party votes against the bill, the spin is to
>       blame the politician for his vote - a no win situation. This
>       happened when Kerry was accused of voting against money for Iraq
>       when he found that the bill contained a compromise for the
>       communications industry that would give exclusive rights to
>       develop a wireless standard in the middle east (which could not
>       actually compete with an existing standard already in place in
>       Saudi Arabia). The point is that we live in a society that is
>       much more complicated than some of our more outspoken
>       conservatives, liberals, faith-based and anti-immigration
>       writers post to this site. However without each persons
>       constitutional right to free speech being enacted, a proper
>       solution will never be found.
> 
> I may be of the liberal mindset, but I would hope that I am open
> minded enough to recognize a good idea and not be bound by partisan
> pressure. As an American, I am free to believe and practice what I
> believe to be appropriate for the issue at hand. I am a protectionist
> but only until the field and competition is reasonable. Nobody in this
> world deserves to take or expect us to voluntarily give up our jobs to
> those in other countries and not be compensated for the debt we have a
> responsibility to repay - we become deadbeats to those who baited use
> and placed us in this position. If you don't believe it, count the
> number of pre-approved loan offers you have each day. I've learned
> years ago to live with what I have until it dies - this way I won't
> become an endured slave to my society - but our youth has much to
> learn and they will learn it like many of us have - the hard way. Few
> of us have the family ability to pull our children out debt and the
> new laws make sure our children are harnessed with the stress and
> worry of repaying debts that have been paid many times over in
> uncontrolled interest rates but needed to satisfy the corporate
> investors profits.
> 
> Apathy is lethal - a phrase used many times in the last few years. I
> urge each of you to use your constitutional freedom of speech and
> voice your opinions - no matter what you have to say, you have a right
> to speak your mind and nobody can violate your right. If they do, I
> want to be the first to know and I'll make an issue of it.
> 
> That's my promise to you.
> 
> Sincerely,
> Dennis S. Wish, PE
> 
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
> 
> 
> 
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> * 
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
> *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
> *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
> *   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********