modern american conservatism (both reagan and trumpesque flavors, as different as they are in many ways) springs from the central viewpoint of "government = bad and we need less of it" but never actually takes steps to realistically show what the latter looks like. it's just an endless series of whining about dumb shit like NPR which takes up 0.001% of our actual budget, passing tax cuts, and not stepping on any sacred cows

i do not in fact believe government is inherently bad and our goal should be to improve it rather than have some ambiguous philosophy around reducing its influence. that's not to say libs have actually done a good job of improving things, but i just flat out don't agree with the core conservative philosophy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568195&forum_id=2/#48104845)

you sound like a classic liberal. congrats for passing the test.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568195&forum_id=2/#48104871)

everyone keeping all the money they earn is not a realistic philosophy, it's a pipe dream. saying "people should keep more of their money" and then not actually making (or even proposing) any real structural change to our bureaucracies is the worst possible outcome because you then end up not actually trimming government *and* running massive deficits. this is just as much handwavy bullshit as the redditor "but communism is like good in theory, man"

"why pointing out that govt being bad = bad"

because it's absolutely fucking useless if you aren't proposing an alternative scenario. if american conservatives were like milei things would be different, but they're all spineless do-nothing fucks who don't know how to do anything besides complain using the same vaguely libertarian platitudes that have been tossed around since goldwater

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568195&forum_id=2/#48104942)

yes it is

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5568195&forum_id=2/#48105336)