Quantcast
Opinion

There are no Frodos without Sams: The reality of interdependence

Comments

Return To Article
  • Ranch Here, UT
    April 18, 2014 7:18 a.m.

    Did I just read this in the DN?

    Amazing.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    April 18, 2014 7:42 a.m.

    Ranch, I'm with you. However notice the lack of comments.

    I'm just re-reading outliers for fun and just finished the chapter where Caldwell chronicles this same idea in the lives of so many accomplished individuals. The interesting part here is that this idea is at the heart of his famous 10,000 hours chapter. He shows how without the help of others and some pure dumb luck many famous people would not of even had the opportunity to practice their talent for 10,000 hours and we wouldn't have ever heard of them.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    April 18, 2014 7:59 a.m.

    Gentlemen-
    While this editorial is "precious", Sam and Frodo are fictional charecters and I think that's where this editiorial is leaning as well. For most of the readers of this paper, "a village" is fine for movies or if we are discussing the church but when it comes to the real world, the prefernce should be to live like Jermiah Johnson and just take care of yourself.

  • 1covey Salt Lake City, UT
    April 18, 2014 8:16 a.m.

    Mountain men had to get along with their environment, which included those native to the area. Common sense that life is a mixture of personal responsibility and also cooperation with others.

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    April 18, 2014 8:16 a.m.

    @pragmatistferlife
    salt lake city, utah
    Ranch, I'm with you. However notice the lack of comments.

    --------

    I've posted 2 --
    The DN "monitor" did not post them.

    Must be some hidden "rules" about saying: "Socialism" and getting ready for the negative uber-consenservative comments to come through out the day.

  • GZE SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 18, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    It takes a village - what a concept!

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    April 18, 2014 9:01 a.m.

    A garden is an example of what life is really like. Someone has to till the ground, someone has to water the garden. Someone has to pull the weeds. Someone has to pick the fruit and vegetables. But, once that fruit and those vegetables have been picked, everyone in the community thinks that they have the right to eat because God gave us earth, and sunshine and water. They didn't till. They didn't water. They didn't weed. They didn't even pick the fruit and the vegetables; but, they think that they own the "fruits of labor".

    Mr. Obama did not pay for the roads, the schools, or anything else that we all hold in common and have all paid for. (Government pays for nothing. The People pay all the bills of government.) We all have equal access to those "roads" and to everything that "government" claims to have provided. If someone uses those "roads" to gain a profit, he is entitled to his profit. ANYONE can do the same. NO ONE deserves any of those profits except the person who labored for them.

  • Hutterite American Fork, UT
    April 18, 2014 9:17 a.m.

    Everyone is entitled to the profits of their labours. However, as noted in the article, they took advantage of all the benefits of our organised, governed society to create those profits from labour. We all have responsibility to maintain the infrastructure, including governance, that underpins our prosperity. The prosperity wouldn't be there without it. Who knows, this concept could even be extended to the provision of health care, but that's for another article.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    April 18, 2014 9:18 a.m.

    @Mike Richards
    How do your post get approved with CAPITALS? We "the people" are the goverment. That was Barrack's point. In addition to hard work, sucess requires a strong support system of family, friends, and community. We are blessed to live in a country that provides a person with great opportunities because of the sacrifices made by many of those around us and those that came before us. By putting a piece of our profits back into the community pie we pay it forward for those around us and those coming after. That's what my religon teaches me and one that I have instilled in my children as well. What you espouse seems to be one of greed and selfishness.

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    April 18, 2014 9:28 a.m.

    Great article!

    It gets something right that often goes unrecognized in a society drunk on worshipping and aspiring to be rich & famous – namely, that smart people employing a strong STEM education undergird most of our achievements & civilization, often with little material reward.

    And any article that would make Ayn Rand’s head explode is a good one, although she may have been ‘almost’ correct in one regard – if scientists & engineers (not only entrepreneurs) ever decide to “shrug Atlas” en masse, we’re in deep trouble.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    April 18, 2014 9:31 a.m.

    FT,

    You have equal right to use the roads, benefit from the schools and use any infrastructure that THE PEOPLE have paid for. All of us paid for those things. All of us can use those things. All of us, if we have the incentive, can travel those roads to take our product to market. Because THE PEOPLE have built those things with their money and their sweat, all people have the right to use that infrastructure.

    No one has the right to make a businessman pay a "toll", for the use of that infrastructure. He is one of THE PEOPLE. He paid his fair share. What he did that most don't do is to work hard in his business to develop a service or a product. Using that infrastructure makes it possible for him to get his service or product to market. All people have that same opportunity. No bandits are allowed to rob that businessman for travelling on a public highway. That's what many want to do. They won't work, but they'll rob that businessman.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    April 18, 2014 10:05 a.m.

    @ Mike Richards
    Yes, many don't want to work and sponge the system. And many business's and individuals don't want to pay their fair share and cheat the system (think Clive Bundy). They want to use the things "we the people" paid for and rob the common man who is working just as hard. Business and the wealthy have done better under this current President than they ever have before. Yet, they cry for more.
    Our world would be a better place if we had a few more "Sam-wise" around (think BO) and a few less Golums (think Mike Lee).

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 18, 2014 10:06 a.m.

    Maybe this is what our President was telling us when he said, "If you've got a business—you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen".

    Maybe he was right.

    But I still think it would have been a pretty boring movie with just Sam and no Frodos...

  • Monsieur le prof Sandy, UT
    April 18, 2014 10:20 a.m.

    Frodo be darned. Of course we all depend on others who have helped us. That’s obvious. This meandering piece wanders hither and yon and finally reveals itself in the last paragraph: a socialist diatribe against those nasty wealthy people who just don’t pay enough taxes! A hint was given early on in her rationalizing defense of Obama’s stupid “You didn’t build that” remark, which of course he did mean.

    The fact that the top “one percenters” pay thirty percent of this nation’s tax bill seems to have eluded her. That and the fact that Mitt Romney’s 13.9 % contribution is far more substantial than my meager 30% tax bite. 50% of Americans pay no taxes at all and are riding on the backs of those wealthy capitalists they envy so much. And the fact that many wealthy people take advantage of the tax code is less a condemnation of them than of the writers of that unwieldy morass of regulations. Most people I know try to take advantage of the deductions that are allowed under the law.

    As Churchhill said, “Capitalism is the unequal distribution of wealth. Socialism is the equal distribution of poverty.”

  • one old man Ogden, UT
    April 18, 2014 10:31 a.m.

    Has DN become liberal?

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    April 18, 2014 10:33 a.m.

    "ANYONE can do the same. NO ONE deserves any of those profits except the person who labored for them."

    Wow Mike right out of the mouth of Marxist.

    Sam Walton 62 billion

    Walmart "worker/laborer $10 an hour and food stamps. Is that what you were talking about?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 18, 2014 10:52 a.m.

    FT,
    When you categorize people and compartmentalize them into your caricatures, like "Businessmen who cheat the system (think Clive Bundy)", etc... When you setup a frictional paradigm and pretend it fits in general (because it's your reality)... you lose some people.

    Seeing people as YOUR movie character allegories. More "Sam-wise" (think BO) and a few less Golums (think Mike Lee)... etc... is no way to view the world IMO.

    ===

    Open Minded Mormon,
    If you comments aren't getting posted... there's usual a reason (not a DMN conspiracy against you, or some hidden "rules" about saying: "Socialism").

    Stay on topic, don't troll or be offensive, and it will get posted. There's no rule against saying "Socialism"... it's the rest of the stuff in there (I suspect).

    ===

    Bottom line...
    People are not your stereotypes for them, or the movie character for them. They are real people.

    Try to seeing EVERYBODY as real people (not as Ayn Rand, Frodo, Sam, Darth Vader, catnis, Bundy, or Golum).

    Books and movies are great... but don't use them to simplify, compartmentalize, stereotype the REAL people in your life.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:01 a.m.

    @Mike Richards
    South Jordan, Utah
    FT,

    You have equal right to use the roads, benefit from the schools and use any infrastructure that THE PEOPLE have paid for. All of us paid for those things. All of us can use those things. All of us, if we have the incentive, can travel those roads to take our product to market. Because THE PEOPLE have built those things with their money and their sweat, all people have the right to use that infrastructure.

    No one has the right to make a businessman pay a "toll", for the use of that infrastructure. He is one of THE PEOPLE. He paid his fair share.

    =========

    GE made $60 billion and paid ZERO taxes to use any of that intrasturcture that THE PEOPLE paid for.

    Call it whatever you want,
    but Corporations need to be paying their fair share of tzxes or "tolls".

  • Kent C. DeForrest Provo, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:09 a.m.

    FT,

    In case you hadn't noticed, Mike and other conservatives get a free pass on all caps. The rest of us get censored if we try to emphasize a word. I once got a comment denied for all-capping the inflammatory word "sixteen."

    On the real topic here, anyone who thinks a CEO or entrepreneur should get 400 times as much pay as his employees is hoping for the demise of this fair land. All we have to do is look at where the Reagan revolution with its addiction to voodoo economics has taken us and look at the trajectory to get a sense for where we are headed. And it ain't pretty.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:14 a.m.

    So if I invent a new kind of widget that I think everyone would want to buy for $10 each; and I can make a profit selling them if I can get people to build my widgets for $7 each; then I am evil if I sell 100 million of them and get rich?

    I am evil if I don't share my profits with each of my workers (just pay them the $7 for each one they make), even thought they didn't invent it, take any risk starting the company, or invest any capital (just their labor) in the venture?

    If I pay my workers by the widget and some can build a widget in 1 hour (below minimum wage) while others can build them in 10 minutes each ($42 per hour), then I am evil because my low-skilled workers can't raise their families on their low production wage?

    I am evil if I don't give all my profits to the government (just taxes - a huge portion of my profits) because the government built some of the infrastructure (education, roads, communications, etc.) my company uses to get my product to market?

    Is that what you are saying???

  • Ranch Here, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:21 a.m.

    Mike Richards paraphrased:

    Anyone can use someone elses labor to make a fortune and the laborers deserve zip.

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:26 a.m.

    @ 2 bits-
    I'm not as current as I probably should. What is IMO? Also, just having some fun. These blogs can get so serious and nasty. @Mike Richards has some interesting, informative takes but the glasses in which we view the world are defintely with a different perscription. I enjoy reading his posts.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    April 18, 2014 11:26 a.m.

    2 bits
    Cottonwood Heights, UT

    Try to seeing EVERYBODY as real people (not as Ayn Rand, Frodo, Sam, Darth Vader, catnis, Bundy, or Golum).

    Books and movies are great... but don't use them to simplify, compartmentalize, stereotype the REAL people in your life.

    10:52 a.m. April 18, 2014

    ===========

    Great advise --

    You you think the Obama is the Anti-Christ, Lucifer, and Hitler all rolled into one crowd will get on board with that pledge?

    I somehow doubt it very much.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    April 18, 2014 12:07 p.m.

    LDS Liberal: "You you think the Obama is the Anti-Christ, Lucifer, and Hitler all rolled into one crowd will get on board with that pledge? I somehow doubt it very much."

    No, the left firmly established that position for G. W. Bush during his 8 years as president. Funny how liberals who called (and continue to call) anyone in the GOP every name in the book now call foul every time someone criticizes this president.

    I'm not condoning all the bad behavior by some conservatives, but the hypocracy of the left when it comes to name-calling would be laughable if it wasn't so serious an issue.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    April 18, 2014 12:10 p.m.

    Joe Capitalist, you simply a very complicated issue. Once again you like most on the right are looking for a black and white answer when one doesn't exist.

    First of all your premise that those of us who believe in a different form of capitalism than you think getting rich is evil is just wrong. Let me say it again just wrong.

    Secondly your presentation of disagreement as thinking someone who disagrees with you is evil is simplistic and distracting from a reasonable discussion.

    Thirdly, "I am evil if I don't give all my profits to the government (just taxes ). Who ever said you owe everything to the government? Please tell me where this comes from.

    Lastly, the discussion is not about evil but what is effective, sustainable, desirable, and productive.

    If you want to join in that discussion you will be taken seriously but not when your entire premise is, it's mine and anything to the contrary is evil.

  • GZE SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    April 18, 2014 12:40 p.m.

    "just their labor' - That's a pretty big "just." How many of your widgets would have been produced without it?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 18, 2014 12:41 p.m.

    @LDS Liberal,
    I never said your strawman. I never said, "Obama is the Anti-Christ, Lucifer, and Hitler all rolled into one"... so don't tell me I believe that (when I don't).

    See how stereotyping and grouping people by their "Type"... goes wrong?

    I actually think Obama's a pretty good guy (on most things). But since I've been "Typed" by you... now you assume I believe all the other ridiculous stuff you hang on everybody of that "type".

    If you got away from typing people and believing all your presumptions about them are correct... your posts would be WAY more objective and credible.

    =====

    @FT,
    IMO = In My Opinion. I use that one a lot because I don't assume ANYTHING I say is "correct"... it's just MY opinion.

    FYI = For your Information. I use that one a lot too, because I don't assume anything I say has any value... it's just more information to take in and consider (or not consider, whatever, it doesn't matter to me).

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    April 18, 2014 1:31 p.m.

    @2 bits – “Try to seeing EVERYBODY as real people (not as Ayn Rand, Frodo, Sam, Darth Vader, catnis, Bundy, or Golum).”

    Love it… especially the inclusion of “catnis” made me laugh… thanks.

    But you do realize that Ayn Rand was a real person who espoused a real ideology (full of so many straw man cartoon situations & villains she makes Star Wars look like a WWII documentary) and had very real followers – some in fact who are very powerful, like the former Fed Chairman and the current House Budget Committee Chairman.

    That said…

    @2 bits – “If you got away from typing people and believing all your presumptions about them are correct... your posts would be WAY more objective and credible.”

    This is good advice for us all… and I say this as both a former victim and a perp.

    @JoeCapitalist2 – “No, the left firmly established that position for G. W. Bush during his 8 years as president.”

    Really Joe… the “two wrongs somehow make a right” defense?

  • RFLASH Salt Lake City, UT
    April 18, 2014 1:38 p.m.

    We can make a difference. I am gay. I say that because it is part of what I want to say. I work for the state and most everyone I work with is Mormon. They all know that I am gay. None of them have ever done anything to put me down. The opposite is true! A few years back I almost died. I had some serious operations and it is truly an experience when you know that you won't make it without help. I want to tell you that over a period of months or maybe more, these Mormon co workers helped me along my path! It wasn't so much the things I could pin point, but it was more in a spiritual way, which is what I truly needed! It is hard for people to discuss God with me, but they did! They listened to how I felt! They helped me keep my job! Some things are hard to put into words! Knowing that they cared was one of the most powerful things I have ever felt. It was scary, but I thanked every single one of them and they knew why!

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 18, 2014 1:50 p.m.

    Ok, seeing that the discussion is quickly devolving into a liberal vs. conservative dialoge, we need to look at Sam.

    The liberals are all saying that it takes a village. The difference is how the help of the village is brought into play. The liberal mindset is that the village must be mandated to help. The conservative says that help should be voluntary.

    Sam, just like the other examples here, volunteered. Nobody forced them, and the person who received the help was prepared to go it themselves regardless of obtaining help. If you have actually read the Lord of the Rings you would see that each person volunteered, nobody was forced into going on the quest. Just like in an Amish barn raising. People are not forced to help, but do so out of a desire to help their neighbor.

    So, before you liberals think that Sam justifies forced help, think again. Remember Frodo and the others were ready to go about their task alone, but appreciated the help that others offered. This is what conservatives have been preaching for years. Prepare to support yourself and your family, but also help your neighbor because you know what help they need.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    April 18, 2014 2:21 p.m.

    "The liberal mindset is that the village must be mandated to help. The conservative says that help should be voluntary."

    Once again Redshirt you are very wrong about the liberal position. The real liberal position is success takes talent, preparation, and opportunity. You as an individual are responsible for the first two either through your own doing or sometimes talent is pure luck. However number three is very complicated. It often depends on circumstances way outside your control which include, family, culture, economic and world conditions, social conditions, and the list goes on.

    To point number three the liberal position is not that help is mandated, but that it is not a desirable society where someone can gain an advantage and then use that advantage to completely dominate the rest of a society. In those situations it is a proper role of government to circumstances or conditions for success for those who have talent and preparation but who otherwise wouldn't have the opportunity.

    It is clear through history that the advantaged will not volunteer the opportunities nor especially will unregulated markets.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    April 18, 2014 2:23 p.m.

    "You Olympians, however, know you didn’t get here solely on your own power. For most of you, loving parents, sisters or brothers, encouraged your hopes, coaches guided, communities built venues in order to organize competitions. All Olympians stand on the shoulders of those who lifted them." - Mitt Romney

    “I know that you recognize a lot of people help you in a business. Perhaps the bank, the investors. There is no question your mom and dad, your school teachers. The people who provide roads, the fire, the police. A lot of people help.” - Mitt Romney

    "If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you’ve got a business — you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.
    ...
    The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together." - Barack Obama

    Really just the same message.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 18, 2014 2:34 p.m.

    To "pragmatistferlife" prove it. If help is not mandated, why is it that liberals have always pushed for more government intervention? Why is it that during the ACA debates they said that we had to help others? Why is it that Obama told Joe the Plumber that Joe had to help those behind him?

    It was liberals/Progressives (both Rs and Ds) that gave us all of the government bailouts and recent increases to the welfare state.

    You claim that liberals do not mandate that you help others, but their record says the opposite.

    You yourself admit that it is the job of government to help. You do realize that government is funded by ALL of us, and when government wants to help somebody they do it at my expense regardless of my personal desire to help that person.

    Actually, history shows that without government force that the wealthy do volunteer. Two local examples are John Huntsman Sr and Larry H. Miller. Historically, look at the Carneges, and look at all of the libraries and foundations that bear the name of wealthy people that were established over the past 100 years.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 18, 2014 3:13 p.m.

    I still think it would have been a boring and pointless movie without Frodo.
    Or if he were drafted or forced by his government to take Sam on his journey and save the shire...

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    April 18, 2014 3:15 p.m.

    @Redshirt
    "Actually, history shows that without government force that the wealthy do volunteer. "

    Not nearly enough. The food stamp cuts that were recently passed into law are the equivalent of all the food pantries in the nation combined, the House version would've cut even more. So... who has doubled their food donations this year?

  • Tyler D Meridian, ID
    April 18, 2014 3:17 p.m.

    @RedShirt – “You claim that liberals do not mandate that you help others, but their record says the opposite.”

    A fair point to some degree, but let’s look at it a different way (not so binary).

    If the majority of the country decides they want to help people (and just to be clear, the vast majority of that help goes to senior citizens no longer able to “raise their own barn”) can a vocal minority, resenting that it will be done through taxes vs. charity, stop them?

    [Let’s assume its constitutionality since no SC has struck down social security or medicare.]

    Seems to me your “everyone must be onboard or it’s illegitimate” view is a direct contradiction to a democratic republic and is something more like anarchy (not the violent kind). That may work in a tribe or small village but it’s hardly the way to run a country our size.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 18, 2014 3:59 p.m.

    To "Tyler D" I am not arguing the method for forcing or that laws that force others to help are illegitimate.

    All I am saying is that typically the liberal/Progressive method is to force everybody to help regardless of desire or ability to help.

    The typical conservatives will help on a voluntary basis and advocates that as a government stance.

    To "Schnee" you also realize that nationally we have more people on food stamps than ever before. You should also realize that food stamps are used for more than just essential food. You can buy pizza from Papa Murphey's, hot dogs at 7-11, and all sorts of other things that those who don't qualify for food stamps would consider a treat. IMHO, food stamps should be cut even more to include all junk food.

  • bricha lehi, ut
    April 18, 2014 4:13 p.m.

    After reading all the comments so far on this forum I am amazed that if you boil down the issues both sides want the same thing. Both sides want to culture a village that helps each person succeed and reach their potential. The difference is semantics. Conservatives tend to think that when each person need to take personal responsibility and works really hard. Liberal's side tend to think that the government is responsible to make sure each person succeeds.

    IMO taken to their extreme neither ideology would work. If conservatives had complete control the US would be full of ponzi schemes and the environment would be ruined in the name of progress. On the other hand if liberals had complete control the average person wouldn't have any reason to try hard, and progress and development would stop.

    But the big takeaway is we should all realize we are trying to accomplish the same objective, by focusing on what is the same it becomes easier to find ways around the differences.

  • OneWifeOnly San Diego, CA
    April 18, 2014 5:09 p.m.

    @JoeCapitalist2
    If you invent a new kind of widget, sell $100 million of them for $10 each, pay zero taxes, pay some (not all) your employees below minimum wage and below a living wage, pay some of your profits to political groups to ensure minimum wage is never raised above a living wage and did I say pay zero taxes while paying political groups to buy the vote (because your corporation is a person) then yes, you are evil.

    So, @JoeCapitalist2, in your scenario of $10/widget produced at $7 each, how much of your 3 profit covers the social welfare net that your employees rely on to eat? Answer that and then we can discuss whether or not you are evil.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    April 19, 2014 6:56 a.m.

    OneWifeOnly:

    Who said anything about paying zero taxes? My widget company would pay a lot of taxes. I would pay each person by the widget (i.e. commission). If they had the skills they would make a good wage. If they were slow or lazy, they might not make minimum wage, but that would be their choice. The $3 profit on each widget is my reward for inventing the widget, starting the company, and taking all the risks.

    I should be able to get rich from selling millions of widgets for a $3 profit each. I should pay some of that in taxes, but the government shouldn't make more from my efforts than I do. I don't owe my employees any of that profit, just the $7 that we mutually agreed as payment for each widget they made for me. It should not matter if I use my money to do things that you do not personally approve of.

  • JoeCapitalist2 Orem, UT
    April 19, 2014 7:11 a.m.

    bricha: "...both sides want the same thing...the difference is semantics."

    No the difference is not "semantics". It is force vs free will.

    The left wants government to insure that everyone does "their fair share" through increased taxes and government regulations. It is not enough to just help, you have to help in the way that the left wants you to or it doesn't count. It is not enough for a rich guy to create a job to help give a homeless person an opportunity, he has to give free money so they can have what they need without any effort.

    I wonder what the left would say if we tried to force people to be religious. Religion inspires the village to look out for others and give generously of their time and money. What if we started mandating that all those godless people out there spend 3 or 4 hours each week in church? Pay tithes and offerings? What if government regulations required that everyone read scriptures and teach Sunday School lessons?

    That would be an intrusive, overbearing government. But it wouldn't be any worse than the government that currently enforces the "religion" of the left.

  • Stormwalker Cleveland , OH
    April 19, 2014 7:29 a.m.

    Conservative vs Liberal, my experience. TMMV.

    I was a member of a conservative church. Policy and custom said every member should hold a volunteer position to contribute and maintain engagement. Some filled key leadership positions for the congregation or congregational groups. But many were make-work, like "Choir Music Librarian" and other such.

    I now attend a church that is very liberal. We have a small paid staff - two half-time ministers, an administrator, a finance officer, a couple of others. And there are Sunday school and other teachers. Congregation members have huge volunteer efforts in the community. Some I am aware of includes Gay rights; human trafficking; fracking; healthcare legislation and access; voter access; prison and sentencing reform and at least 20 more areas.

    Two evangelical churches I attended were more like the first, and a Methodist church I was part of was closer to the latter.

    My experience says conservative groups tend to turn in and be primarily (not exclusively) focused on the group. Liberal groups tend to turn out, and put efforts into helping those in the wide-world and building inclusive beloved community.

  • Mike Richards South Jordan, Utah
    April 19, 2014 9:18 a.m.

    Marxism is alive and well on this thread. Look at how many posters believe that being paid for your labor is not enough. They believe that you have to be given part of the company. "Lick" was paid for his efforts. He had no further claim on the Internet, yet liberals tell us that he deserved $billions. Why? He was paid for what he did. They believe that when you and I and they each pay our fair share of the infrastructure, that they get to own it, and that we have to pay them to use it. Why? Who made them more equal than the rest of us?

    We eat our bread by the sweat of our brow, but too many think that they are entitled to be served at the King's table without working. They think that their labor, for which they have been paid, also entitles them to the deed for the property.

    Who taught them those Marxist theories? Were they sluffing school when AMERICAN civics were being taught?

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 19, 2014 11:30 a.m.

    "I wonder what the left would say if we tried to force people to be religious. Religion inspires the village to look out for others and give generously of their time and money. What if we started mandating that all those godless people out there spend 3 or 4 hours each week in church? Pay tithes and offerings? What if government regulations required that everyone read scriptures and teach Sunday School lessons?

    That would be an intrusive, overbearing government. But it wouldn't be any worse than the government that currently enforces the "religion" of the left."

    No worse then the current government? What country do you live in? Because here in 'Merica nobody forces you to volunteer at the homeless center, or read Marx. What government regulations do you think are equivalent to requiring you to read scripture and teach Sunday school?

    You do realize, don't you, that nobody forces you to help the poor?

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    April 19, 2014 1:59 p.m.

    @Redshirt
    "hot dogs at 7-11, and all sorts of other things that those who don't qualify for food stamps would consider a treat"

    No civilized society has ever considered 7-11 hotdogs a "treat".

  • Stormwalker Cleveland , OH
    April 19, 2014 3:06 p.m.

    Liberal Agenda: “If you want to be perfect, go and sell all your possessions and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven.”

    Clearly socialist: “I tell you the truth, it is very hard for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. I’ll say it again—it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God!”

    Welfare Moocher: "For I was hungry, and you didn’t feed me. I was thirsty, and you didn’t give me a drink. I was a stranger, and you didn’t invite me into your home. I was naked, and you didn’t give me clothing. I was sick and in prison, and you didn’t visit me."

    Probably a homosexual apologist: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy."

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    April 20, 2014 2:51 p.m.

    To "Stormwalker" you have it wrong.

    The Liberal Agenda is we will take your possessions and distribute them to the poor, while retaining some for us. Unless we force all to do this, all will be lost.

    The conservative agenda is, if you want to help then volunteer your help. If you don't want to help that is your choice. If you offend us, don't expect our business anymore.

    The welfare moocher is not as you paint it either. The welfare moocher says I need more stuff, but don't expect me to give up my $300 smart phone, booze, or smokes. Don't expect the moocher to work more than 1 job if they do work.

    Through your examples you try to make liberals look sainted. However, research and hard facts show that liberals give more to art programs than food shelters, and are hard to find when volunteer efforts are needed. Conservatives are the ones giving to the poor, helping the poor, and are looking to keep us away from Sodom.