Politics, Economics, and Religion


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: 121
Latest Activity: 20 minutes ago

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

Overton Window shifted toward burn everything down

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by tom sarbeck on Tuesday. 3 Replies

"Breitbart's whole goal was to burn everything down...and Trump has gone full Breitbart."Ben Shapiro ( former Breitbart editor-at-large,  who has become a vociferous critic)…Continue

Tags: far-right echo-chamber overtakes national voice

Bill Maher on Donald Trump

Started by Loren Miller. Last reply by tom sarbeck Oct 15. 8 Replies

Bill Maher has spared nothing on his Real Time program in repeatedly eviscerating Drumpf in every last available way.  Those assessments are usually focused on one particular aspect of Drumpf's behavior or personality, but to borrow from…Continue

Tags: Bill Maher, asshole, Drumpf, Donald Trump

Comment Wall


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

Comment by Loren Miller on June 16, 2014 at 7:00am

You recall correctly, Tom ... which is why I don't give the Washington Times a whole lot of cred ... any more than I gave Ronny.

Comment by Idaho Spud on June 16, 2014 at 6:55am

Tesla is opening up its patents.  The world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform," Musk said. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/small-business/latest-n...

Comment by tom sarbeck on June 10, 2014 at 5:35am

As I recall, the Wash Times is the Moonies' newspaper.

Comment by Grinning Cat on June 10, 2014 at 12:46am

A bit of a tangent:

A Washington Times online poll finds most respondents saying that Ronald Reagan, if he were still alive, would have aligned himself with the Tea Party!

(Of course, Washington Times readers are a decidedly conservative self-selecting sample!)


Comment by tom sarbeck on June 8, 2014 at 10:48pm

Much depends on definitions, so until someone demands different definitions, my anger-driven radical is further to the left and my fear-driven reactionary is further to the right.

Which costs more lives, "sustainable" or "self-extermination"?

I see an imbalance there. 

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on June 8, 2014 at 10:13pm

Where does radical fit in your dimension? I'm a bit left of progressive, as I think the entire economic/political system needs a drastic overhaul if we're to achieve sustainability instead of self-extermination.

Comment by tom sarbeck on June 8, 2014 at 9:29pm

       ...liberals tend to be socially progressive and fiscally conservative.

That would be clearer, if more complicated, as

... liberals tend to be socially progressive relative to conservatives and fiscally conservative relative to progressives.


progressives - - - - - liberals - - - - - conservatives

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on June 8, 2014 at 4:20pm

Sentient Biped, I get more upset about corporations and the wealthy using tricks to avoid taxes. I absolutely loathe taxes being used "to enrich cronies and military - corporate - investor complex" too. I guess our common ground is honesty in government and accountability to ordinary people. Right now politicians don't listen to regular voters at all, just big campaign donors.

Comment by Daniel Wachenheim 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]


Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


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

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service