This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
How could they have liberal ideas? The term "liberal" didn't come aboot until the mid 19th century in British Parliament.
This is the current scenario except garnishing wages. They can't get that right for deadbeat Dads who owe boatloads of $ and are supposed to be paying for kid's insurance. I can't imagine the quagmire of doing this for thousands of people a yr. Yikes!
My head might asplode!! Of course we aren't supposed to weigh kids or tell them they are overweight - Privacy and all that. (Fun fact- research shows most parents have difficulty recognizing their kid is obese even when they are markedly obese) We cut the amount of recess, have school lunches that are an audiovisual aide for poor nutrition and a promotion of unhealthy food, we don't address nutrition and health is schools. Now they think we should do something? There are 2 generations of people who have been indoctrinated into poor eating, less exercise and affordable food being nutritiously bankrupt. Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!
Ha. The avg joe should have 5K or more in the bank but if you bleed that out or more every yr most people can't sustain that. You can't save for the next yr when you aren't keeping up with this yr.
The cost of healthcare is just so crazy these people (who do work, a lot, to keep up) aren't making it.
Just keep in mind that for a lot of people, 5 grand is about 3 months income. If 5 grand is 3 months income, there's not a snowball's chance in hell of saving it.
I woke up thinking about this comment this morning. This sounds OK but take a reasonable scenario and see how it wouldn't be enough.
Thanks for the clarification. My choice of "founding fathers" was an ambiguous term, as technically I meant something a bit different than what I actually said.
Firstly, many of the people involved in the initial bid for independence (e.g Sam Adams and Thomas Paine, most notably) I'd consider "radicals" not "conservatives"; it was an unlikely alliance between radicals like Sam and conservatives like the well-to-do merchants who wanted to keep the tax dollars here rather than repatriate them out of the country, that fought side by side during the American Revolution. Jefferson in my taxonomy is clearly a "liberal" and not a "conservative", as well, and The Declaration of Independence, along with Martin Luther King Jr's "I have a dream" speech, are probably two of the most significant and eloquent expressions of "liberal" philosophy you can find anywhere, any time.
As I'm sure you recall, the first attempt at a central government, the Articles of Confederation, was not working as well as some people would have liked. That first "central" government did not have the necessary authority (in their view) adequately to referee conflicts between the states nor collectively to represent the states in foreign affairs. Many feared that the nascent nation would founder, rent asunder by internal conflicts, too weak to defend itself against an external foe.
Many historians call the enactment of the US Constitution the "conservative counter-revolution."
By "founding fathers" I was thinking more of luminaries like Hamilton, Madison, Jay (see The Federalist Papers), Washington, Franklin, "conservatives" all, the people whose writing and proselytizing convinced people to adopt the US Constitution, which is very much a "conservative" document. As I believe Rover pointed out, Washington "freed" his slaves in his will only after his wife's death.
And so, yes, our "first wave" of "founding fathers" was a nice mix of radicals, liberals, and conservatives, and even a few "monarchists" (who wanted to make Washington our first king!); which subsequently was upstaged by the persuasiveness of the solid "conservative" bloc that followed ten years later.
PS it does seem to be a truism that today's successful radicals become tomorrow's hide-bound conservatives! I think that drives some people crazy; because "the wisdom of your elders" keeps evolving.
The question has always been, can we have a solution where people are expected to be responsible but are also covered in the case of catastrophe. That's the whole point of insurance, after all.