User talk:The Four Deuces/Archives/2012/August
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:The Four Deuces. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
AfD: 2nd or 3rd?
Re new AfD for List of Tea Party politicians: the link is pointing to the old 2nd nomination. I think you want a new 3rd nomination. --Noleander (talk) 02:35, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
- I'm starting to think you put the AfD tag there by accident, so I removed it. If you want a new AfD, make sure it is #3. Also, the second AfD just closed 2 weeks ago, with a very strong Keep consensus ... so, if you do want a 3rd one, make sure you review that AfD. --Noleander (talk) 02:39, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 08:12, 9 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Lone boatman (talk) 08:12, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
Poverty and conservatism
- The relation between poverty and conservatism is indirect.
The relation is directly measurable. See List of countries by inequality-adjusted HDI. It's right there, in your face. Viriditas (talk) 04:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- The discussion was not about whether poverty caused conservatism, but about whether poor people were conservative. While their is a direct relation between lack of education and conservatism, the relation between poverty and conservatism is indirect. Poor people are more less likely to be educated. Otherwise there is a direct relation between wealth and conservatism. TFD (talk) 14:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- Not according to history. Poverty in the US had its greatest increases under Hoover, Reagan, Bush and Bush. The direct relationship between conservatism and poverty is measurable. Sure, a few people got rich. But most became poorer. There are numbers to back this up.[1] Viriditas (talk) 20:30, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
- The discussion was not about whether poverty caused conservatism, but about whether poor people were conservative. While their is a direct relation between lack of education and conservatism, the relation between poverty and conservatism is indirect. Poor people are more less likely to be educated. Otherwise there is a direct relation between wealth and conservatism. TFD (talk) 02:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- It would be interesting to look at the actual statistics. Are wealthy people more likely to self-identify as conservatives? That's the popular wisdom, but I'm not convinced. Wealthy people, on average, probably tend to be pro-business, fiscally conservative, but socially liberal. Long-term trends show that societies and governments are becoming more liberal and corporations are becoming more socially conscious. Wealthy conservatives are more a product of their culture and region than their wealth or class status. Personally, I think it is a myth that there is a direct relationship between wealth and conservatism. The evidence shows that conservative societies are poorer societies. By the numbers, liberalism is associated with more income equality and more upward mobility. Canada and Australia are two examples. For more evidence, see The Loss of Upward Mobility in the U.S (2012). If you look at the data, you'll see that conservatism and conservative policies are no longer relevant in the 21st century, and are directly impacting the ability of the U.S. to compete in the global economy. If conservatives are trying to turn the U.S. into a third world country, then they are doing a good job.[2] Virtually every conservative position—from the economy to education to climate change—is a century out of date. The way forward isn't back. The future demands change, flexibility, and new approaches, and conservatism can't compete or offer anything with a vision. In other words, it's a dead philosophy. Viriditas (talk) 04:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- A lot of this is semantic confusion caused by applying the terms "liberal" and "conservative" to the US political spectrum. If we were to use the same terminology as used in Europe, the Republican establishment would be right-wing liberals, Democrats would range from right-wing liberalism to reform liberalism, and the Tea Party would be extreme right. Hence Romney, who was the most conservative of the Republican candidates, received the largest support from the wealthy. TFD (talk) 16:01, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- It would be interesting to look at the actual statistics. Are wealthy people more likely to self-identify as conservatives? That's the popular wisdom, but I'm not convinced. Wealthy people, on average, probably tend to be pro-business, fiscally conservative, but socially liberal. Long-term trends show that societies and governments are becoming more liberal and corporations are becoming more socially conscious. Wealthy conservatives are more a product of their culture and region than their wealth or class status. Personally, I think it is a myth that there is a direct relationship between wealth and conservatism. The evidence shows that conservative societies are poorer societies. By the numbers, liberalism is associated with more income equality and more upward mobility. Canada and Australia are two examples. For more evidence, see The Loss of Upward Mobility in the U.S (2012). If you look at the data, you'll see that conservatism and conservative policies are no longer relevant in the 21st century, and are directly impacting the ability of the U.S. to compete in the global economy. If conservatives are trying to turn the U.S. into a third world country, then they are doing a good job.[2] Virtually every conservative position—from the economy to education to climate change—is a century out of date. The way forward isn't back. The future demands change, flexibility, and new approaches, and conservatism can't compete or offer anything with a vision. In other words, it's a dead philosophy. Viriditas (talk) 04:16, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- The discussion was not about whether poverty caused conservatism, but about whether poor people were conservative. While their is a direct relation between lack of education and conservatism, the relation between poverty and conservatism is indirect. Poor people are more less likely to be educated. Otherwise there is a direct relation between wealth and conservatism. TFD (talk) 02:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
- Not according to history. Poverty in the US had its greatest increases under Hoover, Reagan, Bush and Bush. The direct relationship between conservatism and poverty is measurable. Sure, a few people got rich. But most became poorer. There are numbers to back this up.[1] Viriditas (talk) 20:30, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Moving Burma to Myanmar - ongoing poll
This is to let you know that an ongoing poll is taking place to move Burma to Myanmar. I know this happened just recently but no administrator would close these frequent rm's down, so here we go again. This note is going out to wikipedia members who have participated in Burma/Myanmar name changing polls in the past. It does not include banned members nor those with only ip addresses. Thank you. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Your Credo Reference account is approved
Good news! You are approved for access to 350 high quality reference resources through Credo Reference.
- Fill out the survey with your username and an email address where your sign-up information can be sent.
- If you need assistance, ask User:Ocaasi.
- A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a Credo article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free Credo pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:Credo accounts/Citations.
- Credo would love to hear feedback at WP:Credo accounts/Experiences
- Show off your Credo access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/Credo_userbox}} on your userpage
- If you decide you no longer can or want to make use of your account, donate it back by adding your name here
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi 17:23, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 17:41, 23 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.