I remember voting for Reagan the first time and watching him fire the middle class and replace them with employees with no benefits or retirement. I remember all of the mentally ill being kicked out on the streets and this is where they are today. It is amazing that those here in CureZone say there is no difference as to who is power. Whenever a Republican gets in power the poor, mentally ill and powerless lose and the very wealthy win. The economy becomes a benefit to the very wealthiest but those who are not "very wealthy" take the hit. The safety net strengthens during Democratic Administrations. I for one hope that the poor get back some of what the elite and wealthy have taken from the.
From the website: http://www.kirkcenter.org/kirk/ten-principles.html
The conservative endeavors to so limit and balance political power that anarchy or tyranny may not arise. In every age, nevertheless, men and women are tempted to overthrow the limitations upon power, for the sake of some fancied temporary advantage. It is characteristic of the radical that he thinks of power as a force for good—so long as the power falls into his hands.
How do the elite and the wealthy take from the poor when the poor have nothing to give them? The government has to take wealth from the elite and give it to the poor. But the poor are going to stay that way if they don't help themselves. Even when they get money they buy things like drugs and other things many rich people don't value.
You apparently believe in a zero sum game. An economy will not work like that.
Nothing to give? How about rights and future debt?
I don't know what you are talking about. The poor have nothing to give to the rich. Why would they want their rights?
The "elite" takes away individual rights, and rights are more important than money. The elites remove future wealth of the poor by conspiring to place the poor into debt. Slavery and serfdom. Add the middle class to the poor.
What do you think I am trying to do? The more I can enlighten liberals that government isn't the solution and that the principles of conservatism are immutable, the better off we will be. You can't put most of the rich in the class of the elite.
A poor person can have no money, but as long as they are alive their rights can be violated and their future imprisoned with debt. Rights are more important then economics, which is why some people just can't get it through their brainwashed minds that the Constitution is more important than a spreadsheet. The ability to compete in a free market is more important than the ability to pay off a politician to cheat the rules of the free market and the Constitution.
I will agree with this. That is why we have a constitution.
Reagan's "trickle down economics" are the same as today's "trickle down Bailouts" (which the democrats/obama support by the way) and only weeks later the bailouts are being used to pay off the rich instead of fixing the economy. Surprised? It's all the same scam from the same one party system, from reagan to obama...
I don't agree with every point that conservatives believe. The problem with trickle down economics is that government is allowing much of it to trickle over. That is my term I coined "trickle over economics". I heard Mitt Romney say to let the car companies file for bankruptcy. Isn't he a conservative?
Once you get past your alliance with the two party illusion you will see that you are not part of the club. You are not, nor ever will be part of the club of the elite. You too are in fact one of those whose rights are being violated and your money stolen by the "elite".
I am for conservatism. Republicans have been abandoning it.