Opinion of the hard lefty laborites who are upper middle class or better

[traininthedistance]

Well, I'm admittedly much more of a latte lib than a laborite, so I don't agree with them on everything, but FF all the same.  The reason is very simple:

This idea that you must have lived in a situation to feel real compassion for the people who live in it, while unfortunately true to some degree (see Portman and the other Republicans who are conservative on every issue except the single one that affect them or their relatives), is truly disgusting. I am actually very proud of the fact that my political principles go beyond my own personal situation.

Having concern for everyone, not just people who are not "like you" is, well, a sign of a well-developed morality.

[traininthedistance]

As TNF said upper middle class libertarians who presume to give others lectures about "hard work" are infinitely worse then latte liberals. They are some of the most sheltered people you will ever meet.

Ayn Rand is just Marx for rich kids.

Sounds like Torie?

That's not nice. And I'm not a libertarian.

What?  Socially you are......no?  

Torie is smart enough to recognize that public goods are a thing that exists, and that public spending is also good for rich people, ergo he is not a libertarian.

[traininthedistance]

My favorite part was when the thread went from "we're not stereotypes" to stereotyping libertarians.  Good job boys!  Then Sanchez showed up and changed the direction of the anger.


Anyway, yes they are hypocrites, just like Christians that drive around in $40k cars and live in $200k houses.

Where I live, $200k isn't enough to buy you most one-bedroom apartments.

[traininthedistance]

My favorite part was when the thread went from "we're not stereotypes" to stereotyping libertarians.  Good job boys!  Then Sanchez showed up and changed the direction of the anger.


Anyway, yes they are hypocrites, just like Christians that drive around in $40k cars and live in $200k houses.

Where I live, $200k isn't enough to buy you most one-bedroom apartments.

That's what happens when you treat cities like exclusive clubs rather than growing, evolving, organic conglomerations of human habitation.

Your $200k closet is because of NIMBYism, pure and simple.  You got in, now it's your religious duty to prevent the next guy from getting in.  And so it goes in progressive cities all across America (NYC, Seattle, SFO being the worst).

I loathe NIMBYism and think we need to radically increase the housing supply (over the objections of NIMBYs), but this is overly simplistic tripe and you know it.  One would have to tear down wide swaths of existing buildings (it's not like we have lots of open land here, or have had open land in many decades), and even so, one should expect a certain price premium in areas with higher wages and more amenities.

I mean, I don't entirely disagree- it's certainly a factor.  But your seeming eagerness to paint urban progressives as all sorts of horrible hypocrite is pointing you down some very tendentious paths.