<<
<< Conservative half would do better, as the liberal half would starve >>
most of the cash would go to the conservatives, all the labor and working class would go to the liberals. cash would quickly move over to the liberal side since the conservatives would have no working class (which oils the machinery of capitalism and war), liberal side becomes conservative as their wealth increases, conservative side becomes liberal as their wealth decreases, yadda, yadda, yadda. >>
I think this is the only reply that hit it on the head exactly. This is the way society behaves. Let's look at some other replies to see if we can find the "political dog chow" the mass media dishes out in health servings:
<<
if you count liberal is people who voted for gore in the last election, then basically all the big cities and metropolitan areas would be in the liberal part. all the cosmopolitan and international cities. Statistics show that people with higher education tend to be more liberal, so i'm figuring the liberal side would be far better off >>
The big cities have crowded urban areas that benefit from expanded social policies that are usually enacted by liberal statesmen. The big cities, however, are centered around industrial/technology corporate leaders of America that are the conservative base of America. As for liberals being more "educated", I think any historian could tell you clearly that conservatives tend to be more educated. Whether this "education" has served a purpose remains to be seen. Hitler was educated well, but he didn't turn out to well. It is true, however, that most Ivy League college students have extremely liberal views, and they just happen to be children of this rich corporate America leaders
<<
well the liberals would have a nice environment but would spend a little to much on welfare,medicade... programs like that
the conservates would have a very divided class system of a few really rich people and more poor/ middle class people with a horrible environment and a deficit to china b/c of military spending and would have horrible relations with other countries due to their isonlationist stand point >>
Liberals would have a nice environment because all the production lines would come to a halt. Labor would ask for $300/hour to build a car, and that would pretty much kill any industry. Same applies for any union. They wouldn't have a tax base to stand on even with a tax rate of 80% (cough Europe cough) since their would be no "rich folk stealing wealth from the poor." Conservatives don't believe in class divisions. They believe that everybody is equal and it's their own responsibility to help themselves. Instead they would feud over which religion, corporate laws, and estate laws. Do you really think they would keep separation of church and state when they want English as a standard language. The trade deficit can largely be owed to public works and not to defense spending. To believe otherwise means you've been successfully brainwashed. Look up SS' influence on the annual budgeting over the past decades. The number one determination in the federal budget is SS. As far as foreign relations, the conservative side would have killed the rest of the world and the liberal side would have been invaded by Columbia
<<
yup, the large cities would be on the liberal side... liberals seem to get along better with their range of views. just look at current ultra conservatives.. they don't tolerate their moderate wing. rockefeller republican? haha, pretty much extinct. conservative side would go down the slippery slope of merging religion with government..freedoms will go away
ask yourself, which side would the kkk chose? >>
While that scares me the the KKK would choose the conservative side, it should also comfort you to know that every member of the KKK caught committing a crime would be promptly put to death right there in the court
Of course my dark skin color would still make me anxious
<<
Seat of science, engineering, and higher learning would be on the liberal side.
There would be more artists, poets, actors, doctors and multi-cultural professionals on the liberal side.
Lawyers would mostly be on the conservative side. And the majority would only be upper crust, elites on the conservative side. Power would equate with money.
So, you'd have 1/8 of the people of the US on the conservative side, 7/8 other side. The Republicans would support farm subsidies, so the farmers wouldn't have to work. Then the conservatives would all starve to death, leaving plenty of room for the liberals to take back to build cultural sensitivity centers, gay churches, free health clinics, and solar power arrays. >>
Science, engineering, and higher education would be on the liberal side? What would be their motivating factor? Without the income from capitalistic corporations there would be no motivation for people to work towards goals. Curiosity doesn't put food in your stomach. Personally I'm in med school and while most of my classmates vote liberal they generally act conservative. The conservative side would have the worst entertainment though. Imagine if every song and TV show you ever saw for the rest of your life mirrored everything up to this point. Nobody would push the barriers with creativity as it wouldn't pay (not as high a gauranteed chance of success being an actor is it is being an engineer)
Republicans would not support farm subsidies should they be divided. Remember the rule to minimize government control. Once again the liberal side would have no industry seeing as all the labor bosses would want 10x the current wages. The conservative side would be faced with tons of medical emergencies as people who never saw a vacuum cleaner in their life are forced to use one for the first time because their maid when to the other side. Not to mentioned increased incidences of MI and berry aneurysms as the "lazy rich" are forced to suddenly get down and dirty
I take offense at your statement that lawyers would be conservative. You can have them, I don't want 'em!!! Except for the corporate law ones, most lawyers would love to practice in the liberal society where personal injury litigation is supreme. Of course ever citizen in the conservative country would have 8 lawyers planning his/her estate
<<
Liberals of course. The conservatives would fail because they would have no one to discriminate against, so thus they would turn on themselves. They would kill each other off in a decade. Or make war with the liberals like they did in the civil war. They would lose again as well. Plus they would have suck @ss radio programs like that fat slob Rush Limbaugh. The liberals would struggle but make it because they would work to get along with each other. The more I hear the term "conservative" and see what they say and do, the more disdain I develop for them. And no I don't give a damn about what some of you will say about me either. >>
As much hypocrasy as can be posted in such a small amount of text. Judging by your closed mind and hatred of a group of people you should be on the conservative side
Yes the radio would suck, but because of the afore mentioned reason. I won't even bother responding to the rest of you post
<<
classy >>
because you can't live up to your handle...
<<
well wait a second, the kkk is american, and they exist in america.. where would they go? They just happen to be republicans that hate blacks Its simple as that >>
"Scott, you just don't get it do you" (quoted from Dr. Evil). Yes the KKK and Waco would be on the conservative side. It would be a scary place. Yet you could sleep peacefully at night knowing you have 700 guns in your house and are legally allowed to "shoot-to-kill"
Hehe, might be kind of fun. OK, that's sick, sorry. Hate groups would be on the conservative side because the Constitution protects freedom of speech/expression strongly. Crime by hate groups would be eliminated as they would all become human fertilizer.
<<
People who have the education to think for themselves do so. Those people are liberals >>
Oh man, another load of feces! While this statement is true, human beings are not taught be robots!!! If you read the history books you're conservative and if you read the newspaper you're liberal. And if you don't think the majority of the mass media is liberal, then you're just fooling yourself. Maybe you should watch Tom on NBC the night of the November election down there in Florida. I loved that line "We Won Florida!". We? Who's we? The people at NBC studios in New York won Florida? I don't get it....
Remember, educated is a relative term. You get so much from what your brain derives from external stimuli and then you also formulate your own opinions. If you read conservative or liberal propoganda you're educating yourself....straight into a narrow-minded view. By the numbers, there are far fewer register Republicans than Democrats. Those Republicans tend to own more wealth. Those people with more wealth tend to be more educated hence leading to their wealth. By percentage, the portion of conservatives that have a PhD or MS is greater than that of the liberals. The liberals, by number, however, have more PhDs and MSs. Don't let the numbers fool you. Both sides work them. Judging from your one sided post I see you've already been programmed by the robots
<<
And yes, I did read the exit poll data. You'll notice that the people with post-graduate degrees voted in favor of Gore. Or maybe you didn't read it correctly? I don't think that clearly proves me wrong. Quite the opposite.
And no, I don't blindly swallow whatever is fed me. But if studies by reputable sources show that people with more education tend to be more liberal, it doesn't matter who reprints the information, it is still valid. Perhaps we are just a little peeved that centers of learning are teaching something you don't like?
Being stupid does not make you conservative. But being close-minded does. I personally am more libertarian than full out liberal. I really don't mean to offend people, and don't take what I am saying as "If you are conservative you must be dumb," because obviously that is not true. But ignorance does tend to favor conservatism, that's all I'm saying. >>
Glad to see you're trying to avoid stepping on toes, but the last statement just puts your Hallucis Longus in your mouth. First thing I learned in biostatistics at UCLA (a very liberal public school) was that statistics a way of presenting lies in an appealing manner. I don't care which way you slice it or dice it. All you need is a simple bias such as polling location and the whole poll is useless. With that said, intelligent people in my class voted for both Gore and Bush. They interpreted each candidates approach towards solving our country's problems differently.
I don't see how being close-minded makes you conservative. Perhaps I'm too narrow minded to see the point? My parents are immigrants to this county and started off with $0 and 30 years later we're that "1%" which Gore refers too. It's all because of my parents education and hard work - 1 MS and 1 PhD. I think "narrow-mindedness tends to favor illogical thinking" as Tuvoc or Spock would say
I too tend to believe in libretarian views with respects to social policy as far as peoples rights. Do whatever you want, but face the consequences and don't infringe on others. If you don't want to wear a seatbelt, don't. But you can't file an insurance claim. Want to drive 200 mph? Go ahead, but not on public roads.
With respects to goverment control, I think the government is not as intelligent as I am. Sorry if that sounds egotistic, but it's true (to me at least). I believe in my capabilites and my responsibility to control my future and well being. I still think a government is necessary to enforce laws and protect people's rights (as deemed per Constitution), but it should not be there to be used as a cruch for those who have the ability to better themselves but are to lazy to do so. If the goverment gave me back 10% of my payroll taxes and told me that I would get no SS I would be in heaven. I have the self control to save money. For those people who don't have the control, they need the help of the government to control their unchecked desires. If the governemt was not there to enforce the CAL-OSHA standards I could be hurt by a malevolent employer and for the most part I would be powerless to defend against it without the aid of powerful litigation. I could afford it, but most people could not. In such a case the government should enforce the very laws it established at the request of its citizens.
With respects to governent controlling public works, I'm mixed. There's a lot of pork out there, but there's a lot of good. If the government didn't national highways most private companies would not have done so. In the case of energy crisis, any monkey could have seen this country's power crisis coming 3 years before now. You can't have unchecked population growth and a huge booming economy without building your infrastructure. Any dolt who plays C&C for a few hours can figure that out!
With all that babble being said, any form of extreme nation would nullify the pacifying effects of a centerist action and would condemn itself. Like the human body, all things in moderation. Conservatives would die of Mercury poisoning in their water within two years and liberals would die of starvation and bankruptcy in two years.
Facebook
Twitter