Query by Alpine junkie: Why is the remaining battling against financial flexibility?
Wealth redistribution = less liberty
Huge quantities of enterprise regulation = much less flexibility
Government picking winners and losers = a lot less flexibility
Individual mandate = government coercion, much less flexibility
Nanny condition laws (like seatbelt legal guidelines, banning huge sodas) = significantly less independence
Cap and trade = less flexibility
Numerous bans (like mild bulbs, bottled water in SF, and so forth) = significantly less alternatives, much less flexibility
Why is the left fighting in opposition to economic liberty?
Solution by James
Wealth redistribution? How is this occurring. Examples?
Enormous amounts of business regulation? This sort of as?
Government selecting winners and losers? I presume you suggest aiding some organizations but not all. They helped preserve industries that had been important to the US economic climate these kinds of as our auto industry. Far more Freedom.
Personal mandate? Republican concept. Only way to provide health care for everybody (short of the single payer plan). A lot more flexibility now that you do not have to fret about obtaining unwell (which will happen).
Nanny condition legal guidelines? Equally sides are responsible for these. What do these have to do with the overall economy? Gee…lets not dress in our seat belts and view the economic climate recover overnight!
Cap and trade? Republican idea, and a very good notion. Do you really consider its a excellent idea for organizations to have the capacity to pollute the air as significantly as they want with out any added expenses.
Sarah Palin, who made the phrase “cap-and-tax” popular supported cap and trade until Obama did. Don’t be fooled by the buzz.
This is the problem with politics right now. This entire list is a bunch of hyperbolic buzz terms. I have no a lot less independence than I had 10 a long time ago.
Give your response to this concern under!