Younger Americans Cite Liberalism as Defining Aspect, Poll Says

[Peikko 1,575]

Cynicism has its uses.

Using ideological labels to argue a point, rather than addressing the uniqueness of each problem as it arises is one of the biggest problems.

[Ali G. 37]

I find as I get older I'm becoming more liberal actually. Growing up and through University I was very conservative and a registered republican. Since getting out in the real world I've definitely become more liberal. I consider myself a moderate but hey who knows by 40 I may be a staunch left wing liberal.

Personally, I am a conservative, well definitely what is considered abroad as being a conservative. Naturally, when I first moved here, I thought Repubs shared my views and stuck by them. As time went on, I just don't feel I share the same views of Repubs on various issues. We have diametrically opposing views on government, what actually is smaller government, where money should be invested, guns and so on. The older I get, the longer I live here, and the more I rely on education and international experience, I'm definitely leaning against a Repubs take on what constitutes a successful country. However, it will be a cold day in hell before I share liberal or libertarian yank views.

I refuse to participate in the us versus them politics (or ideology) prevalent in the US. I prefer to analyze each issue individually. Furthermore, I let the facts guide my views, rather than my views 'pick' the facts.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[Ali G. 37]

Using ideological labels to argue a point, rather than addressing the uniqueness of each problem as it arises is one of the biggest problems.

This is true and is certainly not something I experienced in Aus, until moving here.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Personally, I am a conservative, well definitely what is considered abroad as being a conservative. Naturally, when I first moved here, I thought Repubs shared my views and stuck by them. As time went on, I just don't feel I share the same views of Repubs on various issues. We have diametrically opposing views on government, what actually is smaller government, where money should be invested, guns and so on. The older I get, the longer I live here, and the more I rely on education and international experience, I'm definitely leaning against a Repubs take on what constitutes a successful country. However, it will be a cold day in hell before I share liberal or libertarian yank views.

I refuse to participate in the us versus them politics (or ideology) prevalent in the US. I prefer to analyze each issue individually. Furthermore, I let the facts guide my views, rather than my views 'pick' the facts.

You might find it weird, but I hold socialist AND libertarian views. I see the perfect government through capitalism but not pure capitalism. Instead it should be tempered by a socialist framework. I want a healthcare system like the NHS etc. and higher taxes. And yet I'm against things like the Patriot Act, internal CBP checkpoints, DUI checkpoints, ALL cameras, wiretapping, and I think the government has no business outlawing things like marijuana, gay marriage, or firearms.

[Ali G. 37]

You might find it weird, but I hold socialist AND libertarian views. I see the perfect government through capitalism but not pure capitalism. Instead it should be tempered by a socialist framework. I want a healthcare system like the NHS etc. and higher taxes. And yet I'm against things like the Patriot Act, internal CBP checkpoints, DUI checkpoints, ALL cameras, wiretapping, and I think the government has no business outlawing things like marijuana, gay marriage, or firearms.

Hence, why I would never be a liberal. I totally support the patriot act, DUI checkpoints, cameras and wiretapping. Why should the rest of society have to suffer for the bad decisions of others? Those with liberal yank views like to talk about freedom but tend to play dumb about any side effects associated (directly related) with those decisions or the lack of. For example, by you saying you don't support DUI checkpoints, you are basically endorsing behavior of people who drive drunk and ultimately kill others. Why? Just so you are not inconvenienced by a 2 minute check.

After all, there is a reason why so few other first world countries actually practice or endorse your typical view held by those that are a liberal yanks. The patriot act and DUI has saved thousands of lives in both Australia and the UK, with a group of terrorist just sentenced the other work. Had they been forced to work around the red-tape faced by authorities here, they'd be morning the anniversary or people killed now. The United States already has the worst crime rate of any first world country, yet you actually advocate less camera, no wiretapping and probably more rights for the criminals.

Much like Republicans view of smaller government, we have a totally different view on freedom. Freedom to most of us in the first world is to be able to walk in a park, with your family, without fear of being robbed, raped or killed. Freedom is being able to drive down a street (anywhere) and not worry whether this is a no go zone, and end up dead. Freedom is certainly not leaving people fearing their life, just so criminals are not profiled. After all, there is a reason why the most mocked characteristic of the United States abroad, is the definition of freedom.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[Ali G. 37]

Edit should be libertarian.. rather than liberal..

The rest of the successful developed world is definitely leaning against libertarian views, with the majority of first world countries being an example of this. To this day, I have yet to see one first world nation that practices libertarian ideology.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Well on the subject of DUI checkpoints, they are basically expensive billboards. The police openly admit that they are not efficient in actually catching DUIs instead they advertise police presence. Saturation patrols are far more efficient, primarily because the checkpoint is made public ahead of time and habitual drink drivers avoid them because they know they are going to drink and drive.

[Ali G. 37]

Actually, many look at the US and see it as a shining example of why letting anyone or any private company literally do as they please, is a bad bad idea. Rules and regulations are why subprime loans make up less than 1% of loans by Australian banks. Rules and regulations are why Australian banks are still profitable and not over leveraged. Federal government mandates require a 100 point id checks and the verification of the ability to pay a loan, yes even if after arm equivalent loan resets.

Forget about being able to smoke weed or not. The US already has pale regulation in comparison to most other first world countries, yet libertarians actually advocate for even less regulation.

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Actually, many look at the US and see it as a shining example of why letting anyone or any private company literally do as they please, is a bad bad idea. Rules and regulations are why subprime loans make up less than 1% of loans by Australian banks. Rules and regulations are why Australian banks are still profitable and not over leveraged. Federal government mandates require a 100 point id checks and the verification of the ability to pay a loan, yes even if after arm equivalent loan resets.

Forget about being able to smoke weed or not. The US already has pale regulation in comparison to most other first world countries, yet libertarians actually advocate for even less regulation.

And thats why we need a socialist framework. But regarding individuals and freedom of movement etc. its different. That's why I hold both views.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Sousuke

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

The UK has also started putting cameras in families homes....don't you find that mildly disturbing?

[Ali G. 37]

Well on the subject of DUI checkpoints, they are basically expensive billboards. The police openly admit that they are not efficient in actually catching DUIs instead they advertise police presence. Saturation patrols are far more efficient, primarily because the checkpoint is made public ahead of time and habitual drink drivers avoid them because they know they are going to drink and drive.

Not true. Police DUI checkpoints work well in AUS and are quite effective in catching drunk drivers. The police can and will setup a checkpoint at anytime, at any place, and will usually pick random places that are inconspicuous to drivers. Furthermore, they have police patrolling the area just in case some get word and think about taking the backstreets or decide to u-turn.

It's interesting you raised this point as when I speak with police here, I am amazed to find out the red-tape they have to go through. They are still not allowed to check for alcohol without probable cause. Many still carry out a range of manual tests, rather than use a breathalyzer, as do cops in Australia. Not to mention, they also have on-the-spot saliva drug tests; which test for a range of amphetamines. You won't find anyone complaining about this there, as they'd rather be inconvenienced for a few minutes, than end up dead or in rehab for months because of some drugged up driver.

It's like everything here relating to law enforcement. First off, it's clear that the power rests in the hands of the criminals, particularly organized crime, rather than 'we the people'. Next you will hear that the war on this and that has failed, when in reality what has failed is the tools and approach used to defeat it. Furthermore, Police are clearly portrayed to be the bad guys throughout America, therefore, even on a psychological level, they are made out to be in the wrong rather than be supported.

What do you guys think this does for morale? How effective would anyone of us do our job if the people we work for told us daily that we're a piece of ######?

[Ali G. 37]

The UK has also started putting cameras in families homes....don't you find that mildly disturbing?

I don't know anything about that but I 100% support that problematic areas in public places throughout America should have 24/7 camera surveillance.

There are areas in east DC that even troops who served in Baghdad refuse to go into. Is this what people call freedom? Can you imagine raising your family in one of these areas? Hoping that today is not the day a random bullet kills your family. That is a reality faced by a hell of a lot of Americans daily. Rather than tackle this head on, we have the ACLU and co suing for the rights of people. Rights? Rights of who? Certainly not the family living in fear of their life, that's for sure.

How about the ACLU setup shop and move its supporters to the ghettos plaguing the United States? Then come tell us about rights. I'd love to seem them walk the talk and actually live amongst the rights of scumbags they swore to defend.

Edited February 24, 2010 by Booyah

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

[Dan J 277]

Not true. Police DUI checkpoints work well in AUS and are quite effective in catching drunk drivers. The police can and will setup a checkpoint at anytime, at any place, and will usually pick random places that are inconspicuous to drivers. Furthermore, they have police patrolling the area just in case some get word and think about taking the backstreets or decide to u-turn.

It's interesting you raised this point as when I speak with police here, I am amazed to find out the red-tape they have to go through. They are still not allowed to check for alcohol without probable cause. Many still carry out a range of manual tests, rather than use a breathalyzer, as do cops in Australia. Not to mention, they also have on-the-spot saliva drug tests; which test for a range of amphetamines. You won't find anyone complaining about this there, as they'd rather be inconvenienced for a few minutes, than end up dead or in rehab for months because of some drugged up driver.

It's like everything here relating to law enforcement. First off, it's clear that the power rests in the hands of the criminals, particularly organized crime, rather than 'we the people'. Next you will hear that the war on this and that has failed, when in reality what has failed is the tools and approach used to defeat it. Furthermore, Police are clearly portrayed to be the bad guys throughout America, therefore, even on a psychological level, they are made out to be in the wrong rather than be supported.

What do you guys think this does for morale? How effective would anyone of us do our job if the people we work for told us daily that we're a piece of ######?

Police are suppose to be servants of the people. but with too much power, they become the bane of the people.

You can easily reduce drunk driving by making the consequences of drunk driving much more severe. In Sweden, it is illegal to have a BAC of .02 or higher, and a BAC of .10 will result in a punishment of 2 years or more in jail. Compared to the US, Sweden has a fraction of the traffic accidents that we do.

[Ali G. 37]

Why is it that the majority of the time you enter any thread involves you mocking someone for their views?

Is it that hard for you to enter a thread and simply state your opinion?