DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**cjOTw7ov** · 04-07-2008, 08:39 PM

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

Dude, you can pick a place and time at which anything was the norm. Unregulated immigration was the norm till the early part of the 20th century (actually, this is true up to about the same point where tax rates started drastically increasing). Yes, but what of it?

I don't believe that Conservatives were philosophically opposed to new laws or regulation, simply that they tended to be skeptical of change of any kind. On the other hand, I see nothing philosophically inconsistent with a Conservative supporting a new law or regulation to fix one of society's ills as the lesser of two evils.

The Libertarian Free Marketer might also point out that open immigration is not a good idea as long as the welfare state exists (I believe Milton Friedman pointed this out.) The Conservative would agree but also point out that cultural dislocation is also a reason he opposes mass immigration.

Again, I refer you to my paraphrase of Pat Buchanan and especially the quotation I posted from NRO's John Derbyshire concerning immigration. I would be interested in hearing your response to those (Conservative) ideas.

Are you really suggesting that a bunch of people want the US to go back to exactly 1925? Claiming someone wants to "go back" to "exactly 1925" is silly. But I do know of a good number of principled American Conservatives who think that a phase-out of many of the social and economic programs put in place by the New Deal would ultimately benefit the nation.

04-07-2008, 08:39 PM	#24
cjOTw7ov Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 450 Senior Member	Originally posted by KrazyHorse Dude, you can pick a place and time at which anything was the norm. Unregulated immigration was the norm till the early part of the 20th century (actually, this is true up to about the same point where tax rates started drastically increasing). Yes, but what of it? I don't believe that Conservatives were philosophically opposed to new laws or regulation, simply that they tended to be skeptical of change of any kind. On the other hand, I see nothing philosophically inconsistent with a Conservative supporting a new law or regulation to fix one of society's ills as the lesser of two evils. The Libertarian Free Marketer might also point out that open immigration is not a good idea as long as the welfare state exists (I believe Milton Friedman pointed this out.) The Conservative would agree but also point out that cultural dislocation is also a reason he opposes mass immigration. Again, I refer you to my paraphrase of Pat Buchanan and especially the quotation I posted from NRO's John Derbyshire concerning immigration. I would be interested in hearing your response to those (Conservative) ideas. Are you really suggesting that a bunch of people want the US to go back to exactly 1925? Claiming someone wants to "go back" to "exactly 1925" is silly. But I do know of a good number of principled American Conservatives who think that a phase-out of many of the social and economic programs put in place by the New Deal would ultimately benefit the nation.
	Quote