Atheist Nexus Logo

Politics, Economics, and Religion

Information

Politics, Economics, and Religion

Religion has so many connections to political and economic beliefs, there needs to be a place to identify linkages, problems, goals, options, action plans and evaluation criteria.  

Members: 101
Latest Activity: on Wednesday

What is the purpose of life?

An eternal question, what is the purpose of life?, occupied philosophers’ thoughts throughout history. Stone pictographs reveal even primitive peoples reflected on this query. Each one has the capacity to define his or her personal thinking about politics, economics and religion.

Discussion Forum

If We Evolved from Monkeys, Why Are There Still Republicans?

Started by Bertold Brautigan. Last reply by Grinning Cat on Wednesday. 3 Replies

Do politicians' beliefs about evolution matter? Reasonable people, whether they cotton to communism or the Constitutional Party or anything in between, ought to be alarmed at the fact that leading contenders for the Republican presidential…Continue

Tags: Evolution

Corporate profit takes over your entire world this month

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Grinning Cat Feb 15. 1 Reply

Obama is pushing to Fast Track the TPP and TPIP, which means congress will vote to pass them with NO DEBATE or public scrutiny. Under the guise of protecting trade, they'll empower unrestrained corporate profit, with no regard for public good....…Continue

Tags: Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, Trans-Pacific Partnership

North Americanism - Republican 2016 strategy

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by sk8eycat Feb 13. 7 Replies

Are you ready for Cold War 2.0 and a fossil fuel free-for-all surge from Mexico to Canada? Michael Klare describes the Republican campaign strategy for "a nightmare of environmental degradation and global conflict."…Continue

Tags: Republican campaign, 2016 election, North Americanism

Which Is Better, Liberalism or Conservatism?

Started by Bertold Brautigan. Last reply by tom sarbeck Feb 10. 6 Replies

While grinding my morning axes, I ran across quite an old article on Alternet by Greta Christina, gatheist activist and…Continue

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of Politics, Economics, and Religion to add comments!

Comment by tom sarbeck on June 16, 2014 at 11:30am

Re the resistance of some state governments to allow Tesla to sell cars:

It reminds me of the reports I heard in San Francisco of GM's buying up transit systems and closing them in order to sell more automobiles.

American capitalism is so efficient.

Comment by Loren Miller on June 16, 2014 at 7:00am

You recall correctly, Tom ... which is why I don't give the Washington Times a whole lot of cred ... any more than I gave Ronny.

Comment by Idaho Spud on June 16, 2014 at 6:55am

Tesla is opening up its patents.  The world would all benefit from a common, rapidly-evolving technology platform," Musk said. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/small-business/latest-n...

Comment by tom sarbeck on June 10, 2014 at 5:35am

As I recall, the Wash Times is the Moonies' newspaper.

Comment by Grinning Cat on June 10, 2014 at 12:46am

A bit of a tangent:

A Washington Times online poll finds most respondents saying that Ronald Reagan, if he were still alive, would have aligned himself with the Tea Party!

(Of course, Washington Times readers are a decidedly conservative self-selecting sample!)

http://www.washingtontimes.com/polls/2014/may/23/if-ronald-reagan-w...

Comment by tom sarbeck on June 8, 2014 at 10:48pm

Much depends on definitions, so until someone demands different definitions, my anger-driven radical is further to the left and my fear-driven reactionary is further to the right.

Which costs more lives, "sustainable" or "self-extermination"?

I see an imbalance there. 

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on June 8, 2014 at 10:13pm

Where does radical fit in your dimension? I'm a bit left of progressive, as I think the entire economic/political system needs a drastic overhaul if we're to achieve sustainability instead of self-extermination.

Comment by tom sarbeck on June 8, 2014 at 9:29pm

       ...liberals tend to be socially progressive and fiscally conservative.

That would be clearer, if more complicated, as

... liberals tend to be socially progressive relative to conservatives and fiscally conservative relative to progressives.

Graphically:

progressives - - - - - liberals - - - - - conservatives

Comment by Ruth Anthony-Gardner on June 8, 2014 at 4:20pm

Sentient Biped, I get more upset about corporations and the wealthy using tricks to avoid taxes. I absolutely loathe taxes being used "to enrich cronies and military - corporate - investor complex" too. I guess our common ground is honesty in government and accountability to ordinary people. Right now politicians don't listen to regular voters at all, just big campaign donors.

Comment by Daniel W on June 8, 2014 at 1:32pm

I had a difficult time deciding whether I am fiscally conservative or not.  I don't like to think I belong to a particular catgory, buty if the shoe fits.... 

Much of my financial philosophy comes from experience.  Through much of my education, I saw administrators raising tuition, and professors demanding expensive texts or other devices, with the disingenuous claim "You will make much more money in the future as a result". Which for many was not true at all.  It's a bit analogous to the government, taking away hard earned savings of ordinary people and going into debt, to enrich cronies and military - corporate - investor complex by going into debt and creating misadventures abroad.

Wikipedia def of fiscal conservative "Fiscal conservatism is a politicoeconomic philosophy with regards towards fiscal policy and the advocating of fiscal responsibility."  I don't know about the details, but that describes aat least come of what I think.  The Reaganites were not fiscal conservatives - they created more debt, made the country into a debtor nation, and created transfer of resources from ordinary people to robber barons.

I do accept there are times when gov't must tax in order to obtain resources required for security, prevent invasion, protect people, or create important infrastructure.  Those funds should come from honest taxation, not the sneaky taxation and shell games of pretending it results in a better tomorrow for all, when in reality it results in more wealth for the 1%.

I am no economist, so what do I know.

I suspect anyone would fine be very very socially progressive, but with some precautions thrown in.  For example, I'm all for education for all - which is not our current system - but there should be accountability, so academic admin doesn't just squander the efforts, trust, and financial futures, of the students and their families.

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

Nexus on Social Media:

Latest Activity

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service