309
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Arkouda@lemmy.ca 36 points 1 week ago

There is no such thing as a "Fiscal Conservative". They all hold the same values, the smart ones just know not to say it out loud.

[-] HonoredMule@lemmy.ca 26 points 1 week ago

While there may be a nicer way to say it, I'm bothered by the downvotes you're getting. Fiscal conservatism is the motivated reasoning that bridges or abstracts values and logical steps people often cannot even consciously admit to themselves.

It's like how moralizing homelessness and feelings of disgust toward them protect oneself from the fear of becoming homeless, by manufacturing a distinction.

Nobody doesn't believe in spending money wisely and sustainably.

[-] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 week ago

I've called myself a fiscal conservative, and I have a lengthy comment in my history about it. I'm not finding a link.

Most of the proposals by people who call themselves fiscal conservatives don't want to spend money now, and don't want to think of spending money later. This doesn't solve the current issues and does nothing to prevent those issues from recurring in the future. They also seem to think that policing and incarceration are free, and that poor people have no interest in eating or shelter, which means they obviously won't break the law to achieve those goals. They also ignore that a good education for everyone, not just their kids, is one of the best predictors for a financially successful future (and that financially successful people are less of a financial burden to society), and that hungry kids don't learn as well. In spite of that, they don't want to pay for public education. They also don't want to pay for school lunch programs in spite of all the studies showing that wherever they are implemented they provide a net economic benefit of at least 6 to 1.

The only conclusion I can come to is that most people who call themselves fiscal conservatives don't want to spend money, not even wisely, and fail to recognize that the costs will still be there - you just get to choose whether you want to spend it on education and social services or policing and prisons.

[-] scott_anon_21@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 week ago

Wish I could upvote this multiple times. It is consistently a pay now or pay later equation. Often spending money to avoid a problem costs you less than paying for the fallout later.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (22 replies)
this post was submitted on 04 Apr 2025
309 points (99.0% liked)

Canada

9507 readers
870 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

  2. Election Interference / Misinformation

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS