More important- Fiscally conservative or socially liberal?

[AaronC]

i am a registered libertarian, and can't imagine a better party, unfortunately i don't see such a candidate in Kentucky...

I find myself more concerned about the rights my state wants to restrict than their economic blunders.

With any luck the republican party will reform itself with out the extreme christian base and we can finally see some real progress in both areas.

[Truth Warrior]

"Libertarian Party" is merely an oxymoron. :p :rolleyes:

Do You Consider Yourself a Libertarian?
http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/liberal-post-interview.html (http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/liberal-post-interview.html)

[JosephTheLibertarian]

socially liberal. I can tolerate big government if I can have my weed to sedate me. Ever listen to that romones' song, "I wanna be sedated"? That's how I feel. :D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMD7Ezp3gWc

[Paulitician]

Social liberalism. Mainly because it's nigh impossible to have a fiscal government anyway, and what do I care, I'm not paying for much taxes (nor do I use any government services that I don't have to).

[Fox McCloud]

Fiscal conservatism; having an unsound monetary policy will lead to people giving up civil liberties for something they perceive as "stability" in the economic realms of their lives.

Granted, I hate the Patriot Act and the Military Commissions Act, but given the choice of eliminating BOTH of those or removing the IRS (or the Fed), I'd remove the IRS or Fed any day over the other two....but that's me; while I value both civil liberties and economic freedom immensely, I still value economic freedom a little more.

[angelatc]

I have always thought the people that considered themselves fiscal conservatives but social liberals were oxymoronic.

[Truth Warrior]

I have always thought the people that considered themselves fiscal conservatives but social liberals were oxymoronic. What's oxymoronic about balanced budgets and no victimless crimes? :confused:

:)

[sailor]

You can have big government that is socialy liberal. You can not have big government that is fiscaly conservative.

[gls]

"Personal freedom and economic freedom cannot remain separate. If we have a right to our lives, we have a right to live our lives as we choose and to keep the fruits of our labor. These two rights are the same." - Ron Paul, from his keynote speech at the Rally for the Republic

[sailor]

You can have big government that is socialy liberal. You can not have big government that is fiscaly conservative.

Netherlands is a good example of a big government that is reasonably socialy liberal.

[Feenix566]

Property rights are rights, too. I want the government to uphold all my rights. I shouldn't have to choose which rights I have to give up.

[Truth Warrior]

Property rights are rights, too. I want the government to uphold all my rights. I shouldn't have to choose which rights I have to give up. That'll cost ya some more in taxes. :D

[Zippyjuan]

Neither of the major parties today can be considered fiscally conservative. Which is too bad. Let's spend lots of money- worry about how to pay for it later. Let someone else pick up the tab. Congress (or the president) takes credit for the program but none of the heat for raising taxes (or cutting some other program) to pay for it. Win- win as far as they are concerned.

[tmosley]

You really can't value one form of liberty above another.

What use is freedom when there is no food on store shelves, and no water or electricity (due to economic collapse)? What use is sound money when the police arbitrarily detain people on the street and spirit them away to their torture and death?

I want both.

[The_Orlonater]

I have always thought the people that considered themselves fiscal conservatives but social liberals were oxymoronic.

In this case it means, leaving people the fuck alone.
Like not annoying gays if they want to get married. Annoying paleocons. :rolleyes:

[Grimnir Wotansvolk]

I'd argue that a civil-libertarian socialist state buys the people enough time to work out the fiscal aspect without any major mishaps. This is because war and privacy are imminent dangers, while welfare can be sustained if the leadership keeps a balanced budget.

Now, a state without civil liberties that adheres to fiscal conservatism is in danger of moving towards corporate fascism. I sincerely doubt that a feudalistic private sector is any better than a lawless public sector.

Need I remind you of Augusto Pinochet?

Now imagine that we wave a magic wand an the past 8 years have been replaced by a Nader/Kucinich or somesuch administration. With that kind of strength on the side of civil liberties and free speech, there would be an infinitely larger platform for a man like Ron Paul to speak from.

[sailor]

The term fiscal conservative has been hijacked. It used to mean not running the printing presses and keeping the taxes low. Now it means not running a budget deficit. But explain to me what is fiscaly conservative about a massive budget covered by massive taxation so as not to run up the national debt? By that definition Lenin was a fiscal conservative!

A government that would truly be fiscaly conservative would by necesity be a small government since it simply wouldn`t have much funding. It wouldn`t matter what sort of policy it would pursue at all since they wouldn`t have the means to carry them out. Spying laws are useles if you don`t have the money for surveilance equipment and FBI`s wages.

[AaronC]

I meant it more as a comparison on the margin.

I would like to see our freedoms restored first since the marginal costs of these changes are minimal.


I do think there is some truth to measuring the welfare of the public at the quartiles can tell you how well a country is doing. (unless of course you have some crazy extremes like 10% slave population)

That said i would be happy to see the government make EXTREME cuts in the budget eliminating or privatizing many programs.