What is the real difference between Democrats and Republicans

Not always.

 

That list is enough to almost make this libertarian-conservative into a democrat. One of the biggest problems with the GOP in 2020 is religious bullshit trying to be hoisted on society by force. Please just stop.

 

Like what for example??

I am a libertarian who came from conservative roots. What about the Democratic platform do you support??

As you call yourself a libertarian not sure how you can arrive at that conclusion??

 

Under what law can an employer force an employee to stay on the job? The fact is an employee can sue an employer for firing them and win in court. Can you cite a case where an employer can sue an employee for walking in one morning and quitting forcing them to keep working?

 

Less & less difference since the Democrats
became the second party of Wall Street


Moi

 

That is too strong. Let me use different terms. Conservatives favor limited government and personal freedom. Liberals see government as the solution to societal problems and favors unlimited government and a trade-off of personal freedom for security. Government good vs. government bad. Every issue revolves around that.

 

The law of survival.

 

Quaint but not a law, there is no law which requires you to stay on a job. But if you want to talk the law if you can sue an employer for firing you why can't they sue you for quitting?

 

Yep the law of survival says that if you can't afford to quit because if you do you can't pay rent, utilities, food, etc. So no people are not always free to quit.

 

Quitting a job does not mean you no longer work. Get a new job before you quit. I had several jobs in my life some I quit some I was fired. No employer ever had the power over me to force me to work for him. If you are not "free to quit" under what you are trying to say that is NOT the fault of your employer nor due to any power they have over you. That's all on you. And again if you want to talk the law if you can sue an employer for firing you why can't they sue you for quitting? Who has more power there?

 

Employers.

 

How do the employers have more power when the employee can sue them but they cannot sue the employee? When has an employer FORCED you to work for them?

 

When they know you need the job.

 

If you own a business do you want your employees to have power over you? Don't YOU want to decide how much you can pay them, how many vacations days they can have, would you roll over and let them decide what is best for you, the one paying them, the one taking the risks to own a business?

If you treat them like crap they are still free in this society to go find another job, under most socialist utopia's you work where the government tells you to work, and you shut up and like it.

 

That's YOU not them. They aren't responsible for your particular circumstance nor can they prevent you from looking for another job or accepting another job but you can sure walk in tomorrow morning and say "I QUIT" leaving them without an employee.

Hey I feel sorry for you if you have always been forced by someone to work a certain job for them, I've executed my independence all my life.

 

And as I noted, the employer fire them and they are likely to sue the employer and get some big bucks but if they just walk in tell the employer to shove it they quit the employer has no grounds to sue them and force them to stay or pay for any cost they incur trying to replace them and the harm that causes the business.

Which way does that power scale tip?

 

Towards employers unless unions are involved.

 

The difference between the Religious undertones and the Atheist overtones is the Religious don't step on life, liberty and the pursuit of mental and physical property. But, the Atheists Democrat Platform is all about killing life, destroying violently liberty and damning mental and physical property.
Democrats = Hate human life. Must kill them off even before they are born and especially if they are Black
Republicans = Love human life. All lives matter including Black lives born and unborn

Democrats = Hate liberty and especially freedom of thought, expression and religion
Republicans = Support the 1st Amendment giving all liberty and the freedom of thought, expression and religion

Democrats = Hate the poor and middle-class having any chance of improving their social and economical position in life. Must force socialism and welfare on them
Republicans = Accept the Declaration of Independence with the right of all Americans to improve their social and economical position in life by championing entrepreneurism

 

Virtually nothing. But I'm THAT sick of the overly religious (especially self-identifying christians) trying to hoist their religious laws onto our society for no other reason then their book of choice said so.

 

That's not the employer's problem, though. They didn't cause it, and it's not their responsibility to do anything about it, aside from fulfilling whatever contract they have in place with their employees.

 

So, you're just a corporation hating left leaning communist. That doesn't make you unique.

 

Sorry but not communist.

 

As a libertarian it is perfectly logical and reasonable to oppose blue laws, but that really isn't a big problem these days.

On the other hand, the Dems embrace all manner of improper, unconstitutional, anti-libertarian government interference in society and directly in people's lives.

I left the Republican Party 35 years ago, but was never fool enough to fall for anything the quasi-Marxist Democrats were selling.

I've voted straight libertarian since the 90's, but plan on voting for Trump in this election.

Trump is flawed, and far from being the ideal frontman to lead the fight against the authoritarians, but he's the only person of consequence who is trying.

 

Uh, which "religious bullshit" is that...?

The Constitution makes it quite clear that the federal government must never create or adopt an official religion (like European countries did or had done at the time of our own American independence)!

Which Republican has ever advocated creating a "State Religion"? After all, this ain't England in the 16th-century, ya know....

. "You Americans already have a 'religion' -- called "IDENTITY POLITICS"!

 

You're right insofar that blue laws are less of a problem than they used to be, but some of them are still hanging on, if only by a thread.

Rather, what I'm more concerned with is what these religious nutters would LIKE to do if given half a chance, based solely on what their "holy book" says. Blue laws are one example, yes, but so is the deep seeded need to see same sex marriage re-criminalized, to even go so far as to outlaw any same sex behavior at all, even non-marital sex between consenting adult humans, and all other manner of their objections to any sexual practices they disapprove of. From porn to sex toys to orgies amongst consenting adults, and whatever else you might think of. Hell, marriage itself is a religious institution that wormed its way into civil law in the first place. Out of necessity, it has to remain there if for no other reasons than parental rights, inheritance, and tax issues, and I'm sure some other things I'm not even thinking about right now. But I also see no reason to limit it to just 2 people, except it would make already ridiculously complex tax laws an order of magnitude more complex to do so. The whole "marriage is between one man and one woman" mantra is, at its core, a religious declaration.

But that's not the end of it either. They want to reinstitute school led prayers (but only if it's THEIR religion that's represented), to display the 10 commandments in Courthouses, and elsewhere (when only a small handful of the 10 commandments would even be Constitutional as laws in the first place), and display religious symbols (such as crosses) in general in the public square. The more extreme among them (not that those who think this way aren't ALREADY extreme) would mandate church attendance (but only in their favored brands of church), and require bible study in public schools, while at the same time prohibiting any other religions from similar treatment. (NONE of the should be allowed.)

I could go on, but I think the horse is already dead.

As for Ds vs. Rs vs. Ls, at least from a formal party perspective, the LP is and always has been a joke. Voter registrations are public record here, but even after I registered Libertarian, they were too stupid to bother pulling the records and reaching out to me, even though it's free to do so. I'm more R than I am D, but I'm far more L than either one of them, and even voted for Johnson in 2016 knowing it was basically a throw-away protest vote. I won't be doing that this year, though. At some point I actually changed my official party affiliation to R because I wanted to vote in a primary, but I can't even remember which one I did that for now.

Agreed. Which is why I won't be voting for the L candidate again this year. Hell, due largely to their incompetence at running a political party, I don't even know who that is.