Simple truth
Published
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum
A place for civil discussion of the events of the day for Tidewater residents without the limitations imposed by media forums.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
No the test is to allow sufficient abundance that everyone has the opportunity to earn their way.
LikeLike
I will take FDR’s insight and write yours off to your well-known social Darwinism and your moral philosophy that says to other people . . . “I got mine, now you get yours.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “No the test is to allow sufficient abundance that everyone has the opportunity to earn their way.”
Well put. In fact, that strikes me as a valid interpretation of FDR’s statement, even if he might have had something else in mind.
LikeLike
So FDR meant something other than what Don is suggesting? Pretzel logic living large on this thread.
LikeLiked by 1 person
@Roberts
Acknowledging that FDR had something else in mind, what makes Tabor’s very different idea “a valid interpretation of FDR’s statement.”
With all due respect, that is nonsensical. You may well like Tabor’s alternative value system more than FDR’s but that does not change what FDR said or meant. And, of course, what he actually was talking about is highly relevant today because for years now we have been going down the wrong path that he identified.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “Acknowledging that FDR had something else in mind, what makes Tabor’s very different idea ‘a valid interpretation of FDR’s statement.'”
I said FDR might have had something else in mind. Point being that the quotation is ambiguous. Meaning that Dr.. Tabor’s comment might represent a valid interpretation.
Did your mother never teach you how to think?
LikeLike
Baloney and weasel words. Tabor gives a diametrically opposite formula and you find it to be the same as what FDR said? Risible. There is nothing ambiguous about the FDR statement and unless you are a total ignoramus you would know that Tabor’s alternative prescription to give unfettered and unregulated big business free reign was NOT what FDR was saying.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “Tabor gives a diametrically opposite formula and you find it to be the same as what FDR said?”
Diamtrically opposite from your formula, but I thought it was funny in an entertaining way that FDR’s quotation taken at face value doesn’t necessarily match your formula.
LikeLike
I have not offered ANY formula. I have simply shared what FDR said and challenged your silly assertion that what he meant was what Tabor said was the correct way to test our progress.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “I have not offered ANY formula.”
If you say so. Obviously, though, you have one in mind that is the opposite of mine.
RE: “your silly assertion that what he meant was what Tabor said ”
That’s what makes your commentary funny to laugh at. FDR’s plain words can be read differently from what you seem to think. FDR doesn’t say how we are to “provide enough for those who have little.”
Allowing, through sound management of the economy, “sufficient abundance that everyone has the opportunity to earn their way” is a perfectly good answer to the question of “how,” which your posting and defense of the meme doesn’t seem to grasp. Dr. Tabor outwitted you, and I made it clear, for those who didn’t catch it.
LikeLike
FDR was not trying to say how to achieve it. He was offering an appropriate measure of progress.
As for Tabor’s preferred measure, the devil is in the details. What does “opportunity” mean. Democrats, contrary to “conservative” lies, have always been about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcomes.
However, “equality of opportunity” is not just about the pro forma legal framework. There are many obstacles to true “equality of opportunity” when there is systematic discrimination based on race,ethnicity and/or gender, under-funded educational systems in poor communities, red-lining by banks, education that is only affordable for the wealthy, unaffordable healthcare, systematic malnutrition, etc. etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “FDR was not trying to say how to achieve it. He was offering an appropriate measure of progress.”
So was Dr. Tabor which, as I pointed out, is consistent with, although possibly differently intentioned from, FDR’s quote as given.
I found it humorous that you mounted a disagreement on such flimsy grounds.
LikeLike
Except it is NOT consistent what what FDR was saying. It was an entirely different idea of how to measure progress. If you wanted to agree with Tabor, fine. But you do not get to project your preferences on to FDR.
LikeLiked by 1 person
RE: “But you do not get to project your preferences on to FDR.”
Why not? That’s what you did. Hence the joke at your expense.
LikeLike
That’s what I did? Uh, no. I generally agree with what FDR said. No need to project anything.
LikeLiked by 1 person