dvictr
03-04-2008, 05:18 AM
The election season narrows the field of presidential candidates, to two. We get to choose between the two colors of the American flag. Liberty Blue or Patriot Red. Actually the name of the shade is completely subjective, the candidate from each party provides the paint for everyone to splash themselves. So which brand of the two colors do we have this year?
The republican candidate John McCain, quickly corrected himself last week after he called himself, a “conservative-liberal republican”, apparently the word “liberal” in a crowd of republicans, is a recipe for getting kicked off stage. He was making the point that he is a proud conservative, and would have a spirited debate with any liberal democrat. “Their are stark differences between the two of us” he said. According to the mass media, the difference is that Republicans are Red and the Democrats are Blue. The problem is that the stereotypes associated with the colors are confusing. If you are not pro-life then you must be pro death?? and what is pro-choice? It sounds like the instruction on a scantron exam. Issues that are important enough to make people support one color over another should not have a true/ false answer, but at least a short answer response.
The idea of “get out the vote” sounds biased in my opinion. It infers that if you don't vote, the bad guy will win and the the result would have been different otherwise. I'm not sure if this is statistically plausible, so its my excuse for being apathetic. I think the important thing is having educated voters. I would like to see a debate as to what the role of government should be in the first place. A main idea in Economics is that any deviation from a state of perfect competition is an inefficient outcome. Also a controversial thesis, is that all government policies move markets away from perfect competition. I argue that every tax dollar collected by the government would have have been more resourcefully utilized by the people who earned it. The government also funds its operation buy selling bonds, a promise to repay a debt with interest. Here the government is competing with or pushing out the market for investment funding, every dollar loaned to the government, is one less dollar available for private investments. Guess who has to repay the government's debt? My conclusion is that government, is a bad monopoly.
I don't want a choice between Red or Blue, I want the courtesy to make any choice I want. The only issue that should be important to voters is personal liberties. The government moves to regulate all aspects of our lives in order to protect us from ourselves. But is it worth our giving up of freedoms? No thanks. I say we have the government focus on protecting private property, and a free market will lift everyone up, the environment included. The 30 some articles in the Constitution are all the direction we need.
The republican candidate John McCain, quickly corrected himself last week after he called himself, a “conservative-liberal republican”, apparently the word “liberal” in a crowd of republicans, is a recipe for getting kicked off stage. He was making the point that he is a proud conservative, and would have a spirited debate with any liberal democrat. “Their are stark differences between the two of us” he said. According to the mass media, the difference is that Republicans are Red and the Democrats are Blue. The problem is that the stereotypes associated with the colors are confusing. If you are not pro-life then you must be pro death?? and what is pro-choice? It sounds like the instruction on a scantron exam. Issues that are important enough to make people support one color over another should not have a true/ false answer, but at least a short answer response.
The idea of “get out the vote” sounds biased in my opinion. It infers that if you don't vote, the bad guy will win and the the result would have been different otherwise. I'm not sure if this is statistically plausible, so its my excuse for being apathetic. I think the important thing is having educated voters. I would like to see a debate as to what the role of government should be in the first place. A main idea in Economics is that any deviation from a state of perfect competition is an inefficient outcome. Also a controversial thesis, is that all government policies move markets away from perfect competition. I argue that every tax dollar collected by the government would have have been more resourcefully utilized by the people who earned it. The government also funds its operation buy selling bonds, a promise to repay a debt with interest. Here the government is competing with or pushing out the market for investment funding, every dollar loaned to the government, is one less dollar available for private investments. Guess who has to repay the government's debt? My conclusion is that government, is a bad monopoly.
I don't want a choice between Red or Blue, I want the courtesy to make any choice I want. The only issue that should be important to voters is personal liberties. The government moves to regulate all aspects of our lives in order to protect us from ourselves. But is it worth our giving up of freedoms? No thanks. I say we have the government focus on protecting private property, and a free market will lift everyone up, the environment included. The 30 some articles in the Constitution are all the direction we need.