The Difference

Random thought: It just occurred to me that there is a very big difference between the disagreement that fiscal liberal and fiscal conservative have and the disagreement a social liberal and a social conservative have. A fiscal liberal will say something like, "Poverty is a big problem and those who live in it are at great risk of being abused. Therefore, we should remedy this by instituting, insofar as possible, redistributive taxation and regulation on industry," to which a fiscal conservative might reply, "Indeed, poverty is a big problem and those who live in it are at great risk of being abused. However, the proper way to remedy the problem is to work to allow opportunities for the poor to lift themselves out of poverty. For this reason, regulation of private enterprise should be done with a balance between protecting people and not stifling opportunities inside and outside of industry." Whatever the disagreements are, the problem and a need for a solution are agreed upon by both parties. Compare this to when a social liberal says something like, "I believe all people should be treated with respect. Congress should make no law, and the other two branches should make no policy or judgment, meant to protect men from themselves, rather than one another. Each man's life is his own and he ought to be free to do with it as he likes so long as, by his action, no harm may come to another," to which a social conservative might reply, "I believe all men ought to be treated in accordance with Mosiac Law. Congress shall make no law, and the other two branches shall make no policy it judgment, inconsistent with the law of Yahweh, lest it be inauthentic law. Each man's life is not his own, but God's, and he is free to live his life only within the confines of His will being done." These two have far more fundamental disagreements than the fiscal
liberal/conservative do.

-Frank