Politics, Economics, and Religion

Information

Politics, Economics, and Religion

Religion has so many connections to political and economic beliefs, there needs to be a place to identify linkages, problems, goals, options, action plans and evaluation criteria.  

Members: 119
Latest Activity: Jul 21

What is the purpose of life?

An eternal question, what is the purpose of life?, occupied philosophers’ thoughts throughout history. Stone pictographs reveal even primitive peoples reflected on this query. Each one has the capacity to define his or her personal thinking about politics, economics and religion.

Discussion Forum

The Corporate Power Deadlock and Anthropogenic Climate Disruption

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner Jul 21. 0 Replies

Will Denayer's article thrusts us into startling clarity, by summing up our climate/economic/political situation.How climate change…Continue

Tags: fossil fuel corporations deadlock on governments, climate model failures, Anthropogenic Climate Disruption

Pew: Nonbelievers Make Up Largest "Religious" Bloc (Washington Post)

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by Plinius Jul 17. 18 Replies

The title rather says it all.  Nevertheless, details matter.  Here's the story from this morning's Plain Dealer (16 July, 2016):…Continue

Tags: plurality, nones, Pew, religious

I have a theory

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Plinius Jul 16. 1 Reply

I have a theory and I have had it for a long time. It started when I realized that religion was nothing more than myths and fables turned into sacraments and scriptures, that they were created by human beings, and they did not tell the truth. From…Continue

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Politics, Economics, and Religion to add comments!

Comment by Daniel W on June 8, 2014 at 1:32pm

I had a difficult time deciding whether I am fiscally conservative or not.  I don't like to think I belong to a particular catgory, buty if the shoe fits.... 

Much of my financial philosophy comes from experience.  Through much of my education, I saw administrators raising tuition, and professors demanding expensive texts or other devices, with the disingenuous claim "You will make much more money in the future as a result". Which for many was not true at all.  It's a bit analogous to the government, taking away hard earned savings of ordinary people and going into debt, to enrich cronies and military - corporate - investor complex by going into debt and creating misadventures abroad.

Wikipedia def of fiscal conservative "Fiscal conservatism is a politicoeconomic philosophy with regards towards fiscal policy and the advocating of fiscal responsibility."  I don't know about the details, but that describes aat least come of what I think.  The Reaganites were not fiscal conservatives - they created more debt, made the country into a debtor nation, and created transfer of resources from ordinary people to robber barons.

I do accept there are times when gov't must tax in order to obtain resources required for security, prevent invasion, protect people, or create important infrastructure.  Those funds should come from honest taxation, not the sneaky taxation and shell games of pretending it results in a better tomorrow for all, when in reality it results in more wealth for the 1%.

I am no economist, so what do I know.

I suspect anyone would fine be very very socially progressive, but with some precautions thrown in.  For example, I'm all for education for all - which is not our current system - but there should be accountability, so academic admin doesn't just squander the efforts, trust, and financial futures, of the students and their families.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on June 8, 2014 at 12:42pm

I don't think liberals are fiscal conservatives. We tend to fund education, medical care, infrastructure maintenance, social security, etc.

One of the familiar slogans associated with fiscal conservatism since the Reagan years is "starve the beast," a phrase which suggests a policy approach of limiting the size of government by limiting appropriations for government programs. The assumptions underlying are that that government is less capable than businesses and individuals in spending money. [wikipedia]
Comment by tom sarbeck on June 8, 2014 at 2:23am

Ruth:

About all I can say that I didn't say in your Evolution of political difference thread is that liberals tend to be socially progressive and fiscally conservative.

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on June 7, 2014 at 9:51pm

Gladstone's lines sound right, Tom. But I don't understand what you mean by

...in San Francisco:

Progressivism is anger at liberals for their prudence.

For prudence, read fiscal conservatism.

Great cartoon, Loren!

Sentient Biped, the USDA's regulatory capture sickens me, mentally and possibly literally. Chicken makes up half of my protein.

Your wisdom is right on target, as always, Joan.

Comment by tom sarbeck on May 20, 2014 at 3:06am

Loren, your Gladstone quote helps me answer Ruth's post (in a thread about political evolution) saying she thought America's liberals and progressives are the same people.

First, though, I read a lot of pre-1688 English political history and can  say with confidence that centuries of conflict between Parliament (the Commons, not the Lords) and monarchs ended when William and Mary agreed to a largely advisory role.

I read too little of post-1688 English history to identify Gladstone as Liberal or Conservative. His describing Conservatives as fearful and Liberals as prudent tells me he was a Liberal.

Keeping in mind that the words Conservative and Liberal identify that nation's political parties, and the words Republican and Democrat identify ours, swapping Gladstone's two lines helps me answer Ruth.

In England:

Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear.

Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence.

In America, or at least in San Francisco:

Progressivism is anger at liberals for their prudence.

For prudence, read fiscal conservatism.

Comment by Loren Miller on May 19, 2014 at 5:01pm

Liberalism is trust of the people tempered by prudence. Conservatism is distrust of the people tempered by fear.
-- William E. Gladstone, 1866

Comment by Loren Miller on May 16, 2014 at 1:20pm


Yup ... makes perfect sense ... and if you believe THAT one...!

Comment by Daniel W on May 13, 2014 at 6:48pm

I don't know why Nancy Sinatra is delivering the lyrics, but it makes for interesting imagery.

Comment by Joan Denoo on May 12, 2014 at 3:30pm

Daniel and Loren, We have to be noisier! More vocal! Able to confront ignorance! Stop being afraid of offending someone for their beliefs! Be critical! Speak what we know to be true! 

The old hard headed ones won't listen and I don't really care. They will die off. The sad thing is, the younger ones are indoctrinated before they learn how to think and become contaminated with delusions. 

The people I want to read and think about my writings are the ones who haven't thought about these important issues one way or the other. They hear both sides, but don't understand the real challenges facing us. 

Contaminated foods of all kinds exist, they can be proven to do harm to farmers, consumers, and surrounding environments. Ignorance is not bliss. 

Comment by Loren Miller on May 12, 2014 at 3:22pm

 
 
 

line

Update Your Membership :

Membership

line

line

Nexus on Social Media:

line

Latest Activity

© 2016   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service