(11-11-2020, 12:48 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: But you're not skeptical of what the progressives are trying to do? Why invoke Locke if he's irrelevant?

Also, none of those laws place life over property. Let's not remove agency from this equation.

I mention Locke because he (along with Hobbes) laid the foundation that the Declaration of Independence and constitution would be written on, 100 years later, and yes protection of property was at the center of that system of thought.

And I am skeptical of everything progressives do.  As a conservative I assign a high burden of proof to progressives.  But occasionally some of their ideas meet that burden of proof.  Specifically some of their ideas on health care and climate change turn out to be sound, even if you are skeptical at first. 

A public insurance scheme that leaves room for private insurance schemes that go above and beyond is a sound idea. A plan that expects doctors to simply be employees of the state is not sound and invites extra fraud. But a mixed system is tried and true in many countries.  

A climate change plan that uses financial incentives to reduce but not eliminate the use of fossil fuel is sound, especially if nuclear energy is included. But a green new deal that seeks to eliminate fossil fuels altogether is decades and perhaps even a century ahead of what's technically feasible.  And a green new deal that includes a "jobs guarantee" or a "jobs bank" will devolve into a state-run economy in short order.

---