Conservatives Happier Than Liberals

  • Thread starter Thread starter MugenOne
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
goofyjim said:
The study is still a stupid waste of money. How do they measure anyone’s happiness?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I agree that this is a waste of money. What pressing concern did this deal with? None, it only serves as propaganda for someone.
mary_bobo said:
Forgive him. He is young and “idealistic”. Hopefully he will learn as he matures.
Click to expand...
I am rather ashamed to admit that when I was around his age or a little bit before, I held views very similar to his. Given time, he might change his opinions. Let us pray for him.
 
mary_bobo said:
Forgive him. He is young and “idealistic”. Hopefully he will learn as he matures.
Click to expand...
Are you really saying that liberals aren’t mature? The only way to be mature is to accept every conservative value? Only conservatives are on God’s side? My answer to all three questions is no.
 
Regardless of marital status, income or church attendance, right-wing individuals reported greater life satisfaction and well-being than left-wingers, the new study found. Conservatives also scored highest on measures of rationalization, which gauge a person’s tendency to justify, or explain away, inequalities.
Click to expand...
The rationalization measure included statements such as: “It is not really that big a problem if some people have more of a chance in life than others,” and “This country would be better off if we worried less about how equal people are.”
Click to expand...
Tax cuts for the wealthy are much easier to support if one rationalizes away inequality in terms of income.

Harping on and on about people who feed off of welfare systems is much easier if one rationalizes the plight of the unemployed or underpaid.

Believing that health care is not a universal right for all people is much easier when one rationalizes away the inequity of those uninsured or underinsured that contributes to their situation.

If you continue to call yourself your a conservative, you have to live with those issues. You to deal with it somehow, so you rationalize the inequity away. In ignoring suffering, you feel happier. A person who rationalizes away the suffering of the poor is happier in his wealth. A person who has wealth and understands that many people do not, and do not through no fault of their own, is, I think, prone to less happiness.

This study makes perfect sense to me. Happy are the rich who pretend the plight of the poor is either no plight at all or their own fault.
 
Exalt said:
This study makes perfect sense to me. Happy are the rich who pretend the plight of the poor is either no plight at all or their own fault.
Click to expand...
I was afraid I was going to read sentiments like this. We think in stereotypes these days that too often don’t correspond with reality, and this gets in the way of proper analysis.

The problem is that you’re presupposing that all conservatives must be rich. “Happy are the rich…” That’s simply not the case, though. There are plenty of poor and medium-income conservatives.

Conservatism isn’t all about money; there are other issues besides which economic theories one considers to be more effective. An objective-minded poorer person is likely to see some sense in economic conservatism; plenty of economics professors go against the liberal grain at college and economic conservatism isn’t something that only richer folks with selfish intentions are able to grasp.

Caring for the poor is also not exclusively a liberal value. Plenty of conservatives donate to charity. In fact, I recall that a study was done showing that conservatives contribute more to charity, than liberals. (Please do keep in mind that conservative ≠ rich.)
 
goofyjim said:
Are you really saying that liberals aren’t mature? The only way to be mature is to accept every conservative value? Only conservatives are on God’s side? My answer to all three questions is no.
Click to expand...
I don’t know about the others but I was referring to ribozyme’s beliefs about eugenics, genetic engineering, etc, all of which seem to be linked to ribozyme’s political views.
Exalt said:
Tax cuts for the wealthy are much easier to support if one rationalizes away inequality in terms of income.

Harping on and on about people who feed off of welfare systems is much easier if one rationalizes the plight of the unemployed or underpaid.

Believing that health care is not a universal right for all people is much easier when one rationalizes away the inequity of those uninsured or underinsured that contributes to their situation.

If you continue to call yourself your a conservative, you have to live with those issues. You to deal with it somehow, so you rationalize the inequity away. In ignoring suffering, you feel happier. A person who rationalizes away the suffering of the poor is happier in his wealth. A person who has wealth and understands that many people do not, and do not through no fault of their own, is, I think, prone to less happiness.

This study makes perfect sense to me. Happy are the rich who pretend the plight of the poor is either no plight at all or their own fault.
Click to expand...
That is completely untrue. Let me tell you, I am a conservative who happens to be poor. I’m not going make my family and myself dependent on the generosity of big brother or your tax dollars. Just because I don’t believe in big government solutions to problems like healthcare, housing, food, etc, doesn’t mean I ignore suffering, especially my own and that of my family. Having different solutions to society’s problems doesn’t mean one side is rationalizing the problems away.
 
It might be that conservatives are happier because, lacking intelligence, they’re unable to read about the issues of the day and there for live in a disconnected world of delusion. 😃

Here’s some data that supports the point.
A new study by the Pew Research Study shows that viewers of the Daily Show and the Colbert Report have the highest knowledge of national and international affairs, while Fox News viewers rank nearly dead last:
thinkprogress.org/2007/04/16/daily-show-fox-knowledge/
Click to expand...
😃

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
It might be that **conservatives **are happier because, lacking intelligence, they’re unable to read about the issues of the day and there for live in a disconnected world of delusion. 😃

Here’s some data that supports the point.

😃

Jim
Click to expand...
Hmm…IIRC, you have described yourself as a “conservative,” haven’t you? 😉
 
rlg94086 said:
Hmm…IIRC, you have described yourself as a “conservative,” haven’t you? 😉
Click to expand...
Well, I’ve been told by folks in this website so many times, that I’m a liberal or progressive, I’ve come to believe them. :cool:

and for the record, I rarely watch Fox News. 🙂

Jim
 
JimR-OCDS said:
It might be that conservatives are happier because, lacking intelligence, they’re unable to read about the issues of the day and there for live in a disconnected world of delusion. 😃

Here’s some data that supports the point.

😃

Jim
Click to expand...
Do not trust that link: the people at Think Progress work at the nefarious think tank Center for American Progress.
That is completely untrue. Let me tell you, I am a conservative who happens to be poor. I’m not going make my family and myself dependent on the generosity of big brother or your tax dollars. Just because I don’t believe in big government solutions to problems like healthcare, housing, food, etc, doesn’t mean I ignore suffering, especially my own and that of my family. Having different solutions to society’s problems doesn’t mean one side is rationalizing the problems away.
Click to expand...
But I think the poor will be better served with government programs and policies designed by the people at the Economic Policy Institute, Center for American Progress, Center on Budget and Policies Priorities, and the Brookings Institution.
 
ribozyme said:
I do not think libertarianism is a political position: it is merely the manifestation for petty-bourgeois cupidity.

inthesetimes.com/article/3328/floating_utopias/
Click to expand...
ill be honest, i dont even know what that means:D

and serious Libertarians will tell you that, while we do support what some may call “massive tax cuts”, we would not advocate breaking current tax laws as a way to accomplish a goal. Becuase the taxes today do pay for things, programs that would be cut along with the taxes
 
ChristIsTheWay said:
I agree that this is a waste of money. What pressing concern did this deal with? None, it only serves as propaganda for someone.

I am rather ashamed to admit that when I was around his age or a little bit before, I held views very similar to his. Given time, he might change his opinions. Let us pray for him.
Click to expand...
When I was his age i was campaigning for McGovern. As the old saying goes:

Those who are not liberal when they are young have no heart, those who remain liberal as they mature have no mind.
 
ribozyme said:
I do not think libertarianism is a political position: it is merely the manifestation for petty-bourgeois cupidity.
Click to expand...
Actually, Libertarianism is an angelistic fallacy dressed up in a defunct social Darwinism, and enabled by a psychopathic inability to feel fear coupled with an inane delusion that one is invincible.

But the leaders you unquestioningly, uncomprehendingly obey…oops, I meant to say “admire”…do no better, ribo. Soros’ ideas and policies (his “philanthropy” and “charities”) are largely motivated by guilty feelings arising from his cooperation in the Holocaust, and the means by which he got his money. His socialism is another angelistic fallacy, namely that governments do no wrong, but coupled with contempt for the masses and a corresponding belief in his own specialness. Since he’s special and the people are fools, he has the right to order the lives of others (most of whom didn’t help the Nazis confiscate Jewish property, or destroy any small nations’ economies) for them. Neurotic guilt coupled with delusions of grandeur seems odd, but it isn’t actually all that unusual.

Singer, on the other hand, is motivated entirely by a psychotic algophobia–an aversion to pain that motivates insane behavior, in this case a rationalized antisocial disorder (you can call it pragmatism, but it’s really just wordy sociopathy).

Got any more idols I can smash?
 
estesbob said:
When I was his age i was campaigning for McGovern. As the old saying goes:

Those who are not liberal when they are young have no heart, those who remain liberal as they mature have no mind.
Click to expand...
I guess I have no heart then(im only 18), unfortunate, as I think a heartless Priest wouldnt be a very good one at all:D .

I would like to point out that that statement gave me the image of the Grinch in full vestments.
 
SenorSalsa said:
I guess I have no heart then(im only 18), unfortunate, as I think a heartless Priest wouldnt be a very good one at all:D .

I would like to point out that that statement gave me the image of the Grinch in full vestments.
Click to expand...
Some wise up earlier than others! I not only voted for McGovern I also voted for Carter-first time. i then had one of the greatest priveleges of my life-getting to vote for Ronald Reagan!
 
estesbob said:
Some wise up earlier than others! I not only voted for McGovern I also voted for Carter-first time. i then had one of the greatest priveleges of my life-getting to vote for Ronald Reagan!
Click to expand...
ive only voted for one person ever, in a primary, and he finished dead last >_>. My friends all laugh at me, but ill show them. I managed to convince at least 2 to my side.
 
estesbob said:
When I was his age i was campaigning for McGovern. As the old saying goes:

Those who are not liberal when they are young have no heart, those who remain liberal as they mature have no mind.
Click to expand...
And there is a saying by John Stuart Mill:
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.
Click to expand...
So it redounds on you…

If you also agree with Mill, it does not follow that people who are not stupid adhere to liberalism. They might adhere to libertarianism too.
 
ribozyme said:
And there is a saying by John Stuart Mill:

So it redounds on you…

If you also agree with Mill, it does not follow that people who are not stupid adhere to liberalism. They might adhere to libertarianism too.
Click to expand...
Mill was refering specifically to the conservative party in in Britain-not conservatives in general. You might do a little research before cut n pasting quotes which have no relevance top the issue at hand.
 
ribozyme said:
And there is a saying by John Stuart Mill:

So it redounds on you…

If you also agree with Mill, it does not follow that people who are not stupid adhere to liberalism. They might adhere to libertarianism too.
Click to expand...
Well part of the problem with comparing the quotes is that a conservative at that time is not the same as a conservative today.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top