What Are Some Things You Agree with Liberals On or Can At Least Kinda, Sorta See Their Point?

 

One of my axioms is that you never see a political sign reading “Both sides have some good points.” I’m the furthest thing from a leftist; frankly, the current Republican Party is too far left of plum for me. But even though I don’t often agree with liberals/Democrats/moderates, I can sometimes agree with their diagnosis, even if I disagree with their solution. Here are a few examples:

Police Reform. I have said before that I think police reform is an issue that should be done thoughtfully and intelligently, but that politicians are incapable of thoughtful, intelligent reforms. I have been proven right as every reform to date has simply been to stop catching criminals and letting the ones they previously caught out of prison. I am not in favor of defunding the police, but I think the structure of law enforcement is outdated (and this is also true of other institutions on our society). It really doesn’t make sense to have the same guys who chase murderers and drug dealers handle mental illness situations. And maybe separate training programs and units for distinct functions would not be a bad idea. Also, the police are way too militarized. I don’t see a need for any city of less than, maybe, half a million people to have a SWAT Team. Also, I think all police cars should be high-visibility vehicles like in Europe. And, yeah, there needs to be a lot more independent oversight of police departments. No-Knock raids should be illegal. Also, the cops who shot Daniel Shaver, Ryan Whitaker, and Ismail Lopez should be in prison.

The Military Budget Is Bloated.  I did not always feel that way. What changed is seeing the military waste billions on overly complex, incredibly expensive, and ultimately ineffective or unnecessary weapons systems. Just to name a few, the F-35 fighter (“can’t climb, can’t turn, can’t run“), the Littoral Combat Ship, $5 Billion wasted on a “digital camouflage pattern” for Army uniforms that were less effective than the old pre-digital camouflage pattern. Or they spend billions on new, expensive, systems that they don’t need and that don’t work; like the “automatic” refueling system on the KC-46, or the magnetic launch system on the Ford-class carriers.  All of America’s ridiculously complex and expensive weapons were defeated by a few thousand goat herders with AK-47s and Toyota HiLuxes.  The military can get by with less costly, less complex weapons systems, and lose future wars at far lower cost to the taxpayer.

Wealthy People Should Pay More Taxes. Because, screw them, most of them vote for Democrats any way. Ideally, the Government would be cut back to levels that could be sustained at lower tax rates, but we all know that’s never going to happen. That being the case, lower-income quintiles should also pay more in taxes because everybody should have some skin in the game. Where I part company with liberals, is I really think the whole tax code should be thrown out in favor of a national sales tax and a flat tax.

There are probably a few other things. I would also agree about wealth inequality, but I have yet to see a policy solution that doesn’t lead to Venezuela. But I have very strong disagreements with them on their authoritarian policy proposals, Government-run health care, letting people get away with crimes and rioting,  mass immigration and open borders and… oh, what’s that other thing we disagree on? Oh yeah, brainwashing children into the Alphabet People Sex Cult.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 104 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Franco (View Comment):
    Republicans are ill-informed generally on the superior technology of electric cars and their ultimate viability. They are so fixated on the environmental claims made by lefties and the virtue-signaling they can’t see the massive upside to the new technology. I disagree with the vigorous phase-out of ICE vehicles however. Even Musk himself finds it too much. 

    There is no upside to forcing it or subsidizing it. Zero. 

    The way to do it is to force compact nukes, which we should be doing anyway.

    • #31
  2. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    Franco (View Comment):
    Republicans are ill-informed generally on the superior technology of electric cars and their ultimate viability. They are so fixated on the environmental claims made by lefties and the virtue-signaling they can’t see the massive upside to the new technology.

    In my experience, conservatives seem well-informed about EVs and the problems associated with them: limited range (“but better batteries are just around the corner” as they have been saying since about 1972), rapid degradation in battery life, insufficient grid capacity to support them, the massive environmental cost of mining lithium and rare earth metals.

    So, no, I don’t see any upside to a technology that costs more, does less, and harms the environment.

    • #32
  3. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Republicans are ill-informed generally on the superior technology of electric cars and their ultimate viability. They are so fixated on the environmental claims made by lefties and the virtue-signaling they can’t see the massive upside to the new technology.

    In my experience, conservatives seem well-informed about EVs and the problems associated with them: limited range (“but better batteries are just around the corner” as they have been saying since about 1972), rapid degradation in battery life, insufficient grid capacity to support them, the massive environmental cost of mining lithium and rare earth metals.

    So, no, I don’t see any upside to a technology that costs more, does less, and harms the environment.

    Last night on Mark Levin, he read an article about the ridiculous exponential increase in mining that is required. 

    Remember when natural gas cars were popular in Utah in Southern California? They should just put a bunch of compact nukes in that area and let it happen naturally.

    • #33
  4. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Republicans are ill-informed generally on the superior technology of electric cars and their ultimate viability. They are so fixated on the environmental claims made by lefties and the virtue-signaling they can’t see the massive upside to the new technology.

    In my experience, conservatives seem well-informed about EVs and the problems associated with them: limited range (“but better batteries are just around the corner” as they have been saying since about 1972), rapid degradation in battery life, insufficient grid capacity to support them, the massive environmental cost of mining lithium and rare earth metals.

    So, no, I don’t see any upside to a technology that costs more, does less, and harms the environment.

    The problem is the forced adoption of a technology that isn’t mature. If a technology is superior it will be rapidly adopted without coercion or subsidies. The left is trying to force adoption- which opens up all sorts of avenues for mischief- subsidies all to easily  become bribes and the difference is difficult to discern (see Solyndra etc). Favored groups get the subsidies- both producers & purchasers- more government corruption & log rolling. We should support R&D, but not the sales, because if it is, in fact better, it will need no sales support. 

    • #34
  5. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Victor Tango Kilo: Wealthy People Should Pay More Taxes. Because, screw them, most of them vote for Democrats any way. Ideally, the Government would be cut back to levels that could be sustained at lower tax rates, but we all know that’s never going to happen. That being the case, lower income quintiles should also pay more in taxes because everybody should have some skin in the game. Where I part company with liberals, is I really think the whole tax code should be thrown out in favor of a national sales tax and a flat tax.

    Well, those in the top 10% of income pay something like 70% of the income taxes collected. Just how much more do you expect them to pay? 80%? 95%?

    That’s a serious question, by the way. What share of the income tax collected should the top 10% pay, and why is that the correct answer? If one can’t answer this and provide reasonable justifications, then that policy should not be chosen.

    Personally, I think the Federal government should go back to relying on customs duties and tariffs, and excise taxes. Shrink the government until it fits within those revenues. Pipe dream, sure, but one must dream!

    • #35
  6. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    Well, those in the top 10% of income pay something like 70% of the income taxes collected. Just how much more do you expect them to pay? 80%? 95%?

    It’s absurd. I used to know how to look up the PDF at the IRS. 

    So what they really mean is wealth taxation which is both unconstitutional and unworkable. When it comes to this it means you screwed up decades ago. Then they think it’s OK to take it out on people that played by the rules. 

    The fun part is, some people have so much wealth, they can zero out their income and just borrow for generations. Zero tax. Idiotic system. 

    • #36
  7. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    COMRADES! MORE CENTRAL PLANNING! FOLLOW THE COMMITTEE!

     

     

     

     

     

    • #37
  8. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Well, those in the top 10% of income pay something like 70% of the income taxes collected. Just how much more do you expect them to pay? 80%? 95%?

    That’s a serious question, by the way. What share of the income tax collected should the top 10% pay, and why is that the correct answer?

    That is an interesting question. I don’t have an exact measure or policy, but I have some notes. I wondered what the tax situation in South Korea was, so I did a bit of alternative-to-Googling and discovered South Korea has a tax system that would put a Bush-Republican into coronary thrombo. Every income level pays something, beginning at 6% for the lowest income levels and gradually increasing to the top rate. The top tax rate of 45% kicks in at around $770K in income. Korea also has a 10% VAT.

    Their tax system produces the same proportion of revenue (tax revenues to GDP) as the USA. (26.9% [SK] to 27.1% [USA] of GDP). Koreans seem to get a lot more bang for their tax bucks, though. They seem to be better at spending taxes on services and infrastructure rather than staffing bloated regulatory bureaucracies.  And they have a GINI wealth inequality index quite  lower than the USA (31.4 versus 41.4). They also have great infrastructure, a proficient military, and the streets of their major cities aren’t choked with garbage, fecal matter, and homeless camps; so they must be doing something right.

     

    • #38
  9. Franco Member
    Franco
    @Franco

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    Franco (View Comment):
    Republicans are ill-informed generally on the superior technology of electric cars and their ultimate viability. They are so fixated on the environmental claims made by lefties and the virtue-signaling they can’t see the massive upside to the new technology.

    In my experience, conservatives seem well-informed about EVs and the problems associated with them: limited range (“but better batteries are just around the corner” as they have been saying since about 1972), rapid degradation in battery life, insufficient grid capacity to support them, the massive environmental cost of mining lithium and rare earth metals.

    So, no, I don’t see any upside to a technology that costs more, does less, and harms the environment.

    This is outdated. EVs are pushing the range to over 300 miles per charge and it will keep going up. Tesla has chargers almost everywhere and most people use cars for commuting and short trips anyway. Charging times are speeding up too. I don’t know who can’t take a 30-45 minute break on a road trip to eat, pee and stretch after 250 miles of driving.

    Batteries now have a 500,000 mile life, as do electric motors.

    I’m not an environmentalist and I don’t buy the propaganda generally, so it may defeat the enviro argument that mining is bad but I think this will all work out soon anyway. Lithium isn’t the only mineral that can be used. They are working on that issue right now.

    Grid capacity will increase and we will have plenty of electricity if we restart nuclear. Totally clean energy, “Now with less radioactivity!”

    • #39
  10. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    EVs have perfect torque curves. Theoretically they handel better. The complications are obvious to people that want them. It doesn’t need to be forced.

    • #40
  11. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    Well, those in the top 10% of income pay something like 70% of the income taxes collected. Just how much more do you expect them to pay? 80%? 95%?

    That’s a serious question, by the way. What share of the income tax collected should the top 10% pay, and why is that the correct answer?

    That is an interesting question. I don’t have an exact measure or policy, but I have some notes. I wondered what the tax situation in South Korea was, so I did a bit of alternative-to-Googling and discovered South Korea has a tax system that would put a Bush-Republican into coronary thrombo. Every income level pays something, beginning at 6% for the lowest income levels and gradually increasing to the top rate. The top tax rate of 45% kicks in at around $770K in income. Korea also has a 10% VAT.

    Their tax system produces the same proportion of revenue (tax revenues to GDP) as the USA. (26.9% [SK] to 27.1% [USA] of GDP). Koreans seem to get a lot more bang for their tax bucks, though. They seem to be better at spending taxes on services and infrastructure rather than staffing bloated regulatory bureaucracies. And they have a GINI wealth inequality index quite lower than the USA (31.4 versus 41.4). They also have great infrastructure, a proficient military, and the streets of their major cities aren’t choked with garbage, fecal matter, and homeless camps; so they must be doing something right.

     

    Interesting comment, VTK, but I’m not talking about tax rates. I’m talking about the actual percentage of taxes collected. There’s a difference. If the government collects $1B in income taxes, ~$700M of that comes from the top 10% in income. The other $300M comes from the other 90%.

    So the question is: Should the top 10% pay $800M of the $1B? $900M? $980M? And why?

    • #41
  12. MWD B612 "Dawg" Member
    MWD B612 "Dawg"
    @danok1

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    EVs have perfect torque curves. Theoretically they handel better. The complications are obvious to people that want them. It doesn’t need to be forced.

    I’ve said this to folks IRL: If the public actually wants EVs in any significant numbers, the car companies would produce them in significant numbers without being forced to. The fact that the government has to subsidize the purchase of an EV, and that the State governments are trying to mandate them, shows that there’s no real appetite for EVs.

    The market is telling us this, but our policy makers refuse to listen.

    • #42
  13. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Public goods only. 

    If you start a government actuarial system, be transparent and honest about it, otherwise it turns into a nuclear bomb.

    The Fed stops pushing the economy around.

    One flat tax with one deduction for procreating non-felonious  W-2 slaves.

    That is how you do it.

    • #43
  14. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    I used to live in Phoenix. Recently I was in a car dealership where the guy was saying that they can’t keep hybrids on the lot. This was on Bell Road in Glendale. The reason is that road is so crowded and the damn parking lots are a bitch to navigate(for a variety of reasons I’m not going to go into) that electric is superior. I’m sure it’s just like when I had my prelude and I could do all kinds of dangerous maneuvers on this crappy Bell road just because I could drop it in the first and get it done no problem. Then throw in the fact that it’s preferable to have a golf cart in these crappy parking lots that are full of crazy drivers.

    • #44
  15. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):
    So the question is: Should the top 10% pay $800M of the $1B? $900M? $980M? And why?

    How much do the top 10% benefit from having access to privilege and opportunity that the bottom 90% don’t has to be part of that equation. We can’t pretend the economy is a meritocracy where everyone has an equal shot. Being born into a wealthy family means having connections and privileges that the lower economic strata simply don’t have. In Korea, this is known as Chaebol. It’s also clear that the super-wealthy have the power to work the system to their benefit. Jeff Bezos didn’t buy the Washington Post because he cares about journalism. Mark Zuckerberg didn’t spend nearly a half-billion dollars to buy the 2020 election because he’s a fan of democracy.

    The top ten percent control an estimated 70% of the wealth in the United States. If they bear 70% of the tax burden, that would seem about right. But again, in my wild-and-never-gonna-happen dreams, I’d ditch the current 90,000 pages of tax code in favor of a basic sales tax and a flat tax with deductions only for kids, one (1) mortgage, and maybe charity.  Also, an iso-ton of tariffs and import duties.

    • #45
  16. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    I’ve said this to folks IRL: If the public actually wants EVs in any significant numbers, the car companies would produce them in significant numbers without being forced to. The fact that the government has to subsidize the purchase of an EV, and that the State governments are trying to mandate them, shows that there’s no real appetite for EVs.

    Yup, same deal with high-speed trains. If there’s a market for it, the Government shouldn’t have to subsidize it. I also don’t support bailouts. GM and United Airlines should have been left to fail.

    • #46
  17. The Scarecrow Thatcher
    The Scarecrow
    @TheScarecrow

    Gossamer Cat (View Comment):

    navyjag (View Comment):
    But the weirdest part GC is how these idiots have got all the forecasts wrong for over 50 years and people are still listening to this crap:

    Yup, I don’t know why they seemed determined to believe in gloom and doom. And they fall for it every time. Must be in their nature.

    Exactly. I have always wondered about this too. Don’t they want the world to be safe from environmental destruction? Don’t they want it to be healthy?

    So when it is discovered that the doomsayers might be lying, or just wrong, why are they not rejoicing? Why do they insist in the face of evidence that the planet is still doomed, when one would think they would be eager to hear the good news.

    • #47
  18. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):
    I’ve said this to folks IRL: If the public actually wants EVs in any significant numbers, the car companies would produce them in significant numbers without being forced to. The fact that the government has to subsidize the purchase of an EV, and that the State governments are trying to mandate them, shows that there’s no real appetite for EVs.

    Yup, same deal with high-speed trains. If there’s a market for it, the Government shouldn’t have to subsidize it. I also don’t support bailouts. GM and United Airlines should have been left to fail.

    *Just for the record, this is not clipped right. That is not my comment.

    Within five years they are going to know if the Hyperloop works. If it does, nobody is going to give a damn about high speed rail.

    They have really screwed up the airline market, but I’m not versed in it.

    • #48
  19. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):
    Don’t they want the world to be safe from environmental destruction? Don’t they want it to be healthy?

    They want power. Climate Change is the perfect perpetual crisis to expand Government Power.

    • #49
  20. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Victor Tango Kilo: frankly, the current Republican Party is too far left of plum for me.

    Actually, I really like plums – be they on my right or on my left.

    (Now to read the rest of the article.)

    • #50
  21. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I used to live in Phoenix. Recently I was in a car dealership where the guy was saying that they can’t keep hybrids on the lot. This was on Bell Road in Glendale. The reason is that road is so crowded and the damn parking lots are a bitch to navigate(for a variety of reasons I’m not going to go into) that electric is superior. I’m sure it’s just like when I had my prelude and I could do all kinds of dangerous maneuvers on this crappy Bell road just because I could drop it in the first and get it done no problem. Then throw in the fact that it’s preferable to have a golf cart in these crappy parking lots that are full of crazy drivers.

    EV’s if you live in urban Arizona are one thing. I would not want to get stuck in an EV on an interstate in Minnesota or Colorado during a blizzard.  Nor in California during a rolling climate-change blackout, for that matter.

    • #51
  22. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    Maybe our common ground with the left is that we are all suckers.  They think they are funding “compassion” when in fact they finance an entire subculture of grifters and those trillions spent since LBJ have somehow not lifted (or even reached) the poor.   

    We conservatives hailed Reagan (government still grew), then the Gingrinch revolution (federal spending went up by 3.5% instead of 5% for a while) then we cheered Trump (swamp left undrained and even triumphant, spending off the charts).

    The entire circus runs on its own terms for its own benefit and outside the suckers argue as if the circus even cares what we think. 

    • #52
  23. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I used to live in Phoenix. Recently I was in a car dealership where the guy was saying that they can’t keep hybrids on the lot. This was on Bell Road in Glendale. The reason is that road is so crowded and the damn parking lots are a bitch to navigate(for a variety of reasons I’m not going to go into) that electric is superior. I’m sure it’s just like when I had my prelude and I could do all kinds of dangerous maneuvers on this crappy Bell road just because I could drop it in the first and get it done no problem. Then throw in the fact that it’s preferable to have a golf cart in these crappy parking lots that are full of crazy drivers.

    EV’s if you live in urban Arizona are one thing. I would not want to get stuck in an EV on an interstate in Minnesota or Colorado during a blizzard. Nor in California during a rolling climate-change blackout, for that matter.

    Exactly.

    This reminds me of why in the hell do we have to talk about solar and wind being undependable when they  have never not been undependable. The Democrats keep shoving it down our throats and then we keep repeating that. Everybody is mentally ill.

    • #53
  24. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Old Bathos (View Comment):

    Maybe our common ground with the left is that we are all suckers. They think they are funding “compassion” when in fact they finance an entire subculture of grifters and those trillions spent since LBJ have somehow not lifted (or even reached) the poor.

    We conservatives hailed Reagan (government still grew), then the Gingrinch revolution (federal spending went up by 3.5% instead of 5% for a while) then we cheered Trump (swamp left undrained and even triumphant, spending off the charts).

    The entire circus runs on its own terms for its own benefit and outside the suckers argue as if the circus even cares what we think.

    That’s why I always suggest that people with great big opinions that hate Trump watch the David Stockman interview on real vision. I think they took it off of the Paywall.

    • #54
  25. MiMac Thatcher
    MiMac
    @MiMac

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    The Scarecrow (View Comment):
    Don’t they want the world to be safe from environmental destruction? Don’t they want it to be healthy?

    They want power. Climate Change is the perfect perpetual crisis to expand Government Power.

    the old saying is the Greens are actually Watermelons- Green on the outside, but all red on the inside

    • #55
  26. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    Old Bathos (View Comment):
    Maybe our common ground with the left is that we are all suckers. 

    I have been saying this for at least a decade. The Republicans are a corporatist party with a conservative marketing scheme. The Democrats are a corporatist party with a progressive marketing scheme.

    • #56
  27. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    I’ve lived long enough to begin to recognize that the problem isn’t necessarily with Republicans, Democrats, Libertarian, whatever – the problem isn’t taxes, or police, or military, or politics:  These things, and our complaints, revolve around symptoms.

    Quite simply, the problem is the voter. 

    Local elections prove my point.  It isn’t a matter of good/bad, right/wrong, better/worse, it’s simply who says what the voter most wants to hear and how persuasive they are.  If what they most want to hear is “Republican”, guess what?

    On a quite related matter, I have learned that the winner of any debate isn’t necessarily correct, he’s just a better debater.  And that could be a matter of looks.

    • #57
  28. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    If we start putting up compact nukes, we will need ***z e r o***  wind turbines and solar panels. 

    • #58
  29. Chuck Coolidge
    Chuck
    @Chuckles

    Victor Tango Kilo (View Comment):

    RufusRJones (View Comment):

    I used to live in Phoenix. Recently I was in a car dealership where the guy was saying that they can’t keep hybrids on the lot. This was on Bell Road in Glendale. The reason is that road is so crowded and the damn parking lots are a bitch to navigate(for a variety of reasons I’m not going to go into) that electric is superior. I’m sure it’s just like when I had my prelude and I could do all kinds of dangerous maneuvers on this crappy Bell road just because I could drop it in the first and get it done no problem. Then throw in the fact that it’s preferable to have a golf cart in these crappy parking lots that are full of crazy drivers.

    EV’s if you live in urban Arizona are one thing. I would not want to get stuck in an EV on an interstate in Minnesota or Colorado during a blizzard. Nor in California during a rolling climate-change blackout, for that matter.

    Caveat emptor.

    • #59
  30. Henry Castaigne Member
    Henry Castaigne
    @HenryCastaigne

    So I wrote an essay not about disagreeing with leftists but just not understanding them at all. Constitution and law nerds are welcome. 

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.