If you have any intelligence at all, you can see that the title of this section is an oxymoron. There is not any logic in the concepts developed by liberals.
Liberals declare concepts based on social issues. Pick any social issue and then decide a solution that creates no personal responsibility and, presto, you have the liberal position on the topic.
Let's start with public education, K through College Education. In order to avoid any personal responsibility, make the entire process free, then eliminate grades because that would create competition. Of course, getting bad grades means you will lose self esteem when you do not perform at the same level as others so the future business leaders are people with participation trophies.
Then jump over to immigration control, get rid of the word control because that implies that one person has some type of influence over someone else. Then, of course, the idea of borders implies that one area, occupied by a particular group, is better than another are with another group. These borders will then create the impression that you are not allowed to go somewhere, and, like any four year old dog, you have to jump the fence to see what is on the other side.
The point is that liberals think in generalities instead of specifics. Generalities are an overall view, kinda like the bird's eye view from a thousand feet up. At this level, you don't make out the details but you can see the big things. A good example would be planning to fix the infrastructure but not having detailed plans, have no clue on where to get the plans and think that jobs just appear because a shovel needs to be used.
Specifics are the details. Like starting with where the money comes from. Then establishing the scope of the work to be performed, the time frames, what comes first, second, on down till the work is finished. Then there is a need find workers based on the work that needs to be done not based on some vague concept of just using a shovel. Construction projects require material, equipment and labor, with each part scheduled to insure that each segment gets completed in the proper time frame so that the last segment can be built on while preparing for the next segment.
Free education is a general goal but avoids the specifics of how it is paid for, how it is structured, and what is the expected result. Before even beginning, the first step is to understand the reason for the expectation because many people need trade training and not college education. Different jobs require different levels of education with different specializations. You don't want a surgeon that only has plumbing training and the education of training a surgeon is wasted on a plumber because so much of the education would not have a bearing on how a drainage system works.
There are basically four groups of people 1) those that come from wealthy families and don't need to worry about the cost, 2) those that get scholarships to offset the cost (consider the work required under the terms of the scholarship), 3) those that don't have the money, take more time, work a job and pay as they go, and 4) those that borrow money because they want speed, they want no distractions.
In getting an education there are tons of questions and options so the first step is to identify the choices made for this education. Did you choose a local state school with in state tuition or did you want a prime school, out of state tuition and dormitory expenses? This is, of course, one of the primary cost impacts. Whenever you see a student that declares thousands and thousands in debt from college, it is normally the result of selecting an out of state, high end college. Why?
Too many students fail to understand the market for their education before picking a major, this is the best example of putting the cart before the horse. If you want to make the best investment in your education, know in advance the long term planned results of the education. While you may not know the exact firm or job, you need to know that your Fine Art degree will have a place in the market. It is one thing to dream of a particular job but you need know in advance that there is a demand for this skill and then you direct you major to satisfy the needs of this skill.
Next, if you are unwilling to get your education in-state then do not be surprised at the total cost. However, If you have chosen to maximize the cost of your education, then do not whine and complain about the cost of the decision you made. Remember, decision have consequences and you must endure the consequences of your decisions.
Worst case is that many people fail to grasp that if they work hard at a local college and prove themselves in an academic environment, they can transfer to a prime university for the last year, possibly on a scholarship and still get the lamb skin with the desired name.
The real question is simple: why do so many students want free education? Unless someone knows the intended application of an education in a specific path, they are simply wasting their time and the taxpayer money for a free education. The point of giving someone an education is to provide them the ability to become a contribution to society instead of a drain. To this point, if the taxpayer is going to pay for an education, wouldn't the smart choice be to require an aptitude test for everyone desiring a free education and run this person's education toward the goal of the aptitude test so that society has the best chance of getting productivity out of the education cost.
Of course, if there is going to be taxpayer paid education, what standards of performance will be required to insure that the student maximizes? After all, if a student is being educated at taxpayer expense, shouldn't the taxpayer have a right to expect that the student is achieving the highest level of performance.
So, if we go back to the students today that want a free education. How many of these students are dedicated to investing a productive education? How much of that debt is the result classes versus lodging versus being free from working to party?
Most people are smart enough to understand that when someone graduates from college and can't find a job in their field, perhaps they failed to effectively research the market before selecting their major. There are too many stories of college graduates that end up in fast food because there are no available jobs. So, effectively, the debt is the result of poor choices and then having to suffer with the consequences of those poor decisions.
Overall, whenever anyone wants something free, it is because it is not worth working for because the results that have been experienced were not as desired. Ask yourself, if someone has a good paying job as a result of the education that caused them to go into debt, will they be better off in the long run if they use their education to its maximum benefit.
In terms of borders and immigration, the generality is no borders, the specifics is where will they stay and who will provide for them. The specifics is more about the impact on the balance of the economy, which is never considered.
The reality of the specifics can be compared to your home. Do you have a lock on your door? Why? Do you have plans of letting other people, that you don't know, move into a spare bedroom or sleep on the couch? Probably not but why not? Of course, it should be taken one step further, would you be willing to sign a legal and financial obligation for the benefit of the illegal immigrant? What this would mean is very simple, you would need to commit that if the illegal immigrant committed a crime or caused damage for someone else, you would step in if the illegal immigrant is not available.
Most people, oh who is kidding who, no one would commit to this agreement. But this is exactly the situation that exists whenever an illegal immigrant enters this country. They have by passed the lock on the door and come into your home, they have taken whatever they wanted from your home, they have committed crimes and not been punished, they have incurred costs for others without having to pay, they have incurred costs for their upkeep.
Yes, the answer is that we owe this freedom to the people of other countries - wait, who owes? If you want to provide someone in another country with a better life, go there and make their lives better by spreading your joy, you know, those speeches of equality and overcoming suppression and how some have it better than others. But take your betterment there, don't bring your burdens here because by bringing it here, you are forcing others to share the burden that you made to accept on your own. But, we are back to the same old conclusion: Decisions have Consequences.
GRAND OLD STAND BY
The liberals keep falling back on the old standard of "Tax the Wealthy" & "Pay their Fair Share". But these are the generalities without the specifics. Once you get into the specifics you can realize the lack of thought given to this approach.
First, let's learn from others. Greece developed an economy where no one had to stand out, everyone just laid back and went with the flow. The problem is that the economy that does not produce cannot generate the tax revenue required for the government to be able to provide the benefits to everyone that doesn't want to be part of the income production. Greece's economy crashed. Now you may be wondering why they didn't tax the wealthy - they did but the wealthy protected their assets from the taxations and moved their assets out of the reach of the tax collectors.
Another example is France. The liberal government of France decided to provide benefits to the citizens and pay for these benefits by taxing the wealthy. But, like most liberals, they didn't think that anyone would not work with them by shifting their tax basis. What ended up happening is simple, the wealthy moved away. Yes, that's right, the wealthy sold their homes and packed up and moved their assets and income to a location that was not as taxing as France, and this ended up increasing the deficit because they were already committed to the benefits.
The conclusion that can be drawn from this example is simple: middle class people don't have the flexibility to shift their income or their assets, whereas the wealthy have these options. Think about the use of money and how this money provides flexibility. If you are living paycheck to paycheck then you can't change your income flow or go anywhere else, however, if you have assets that can be converted to cash as needed then you can shift the timing and form of the income. Liberals don't seem to grasp that the wealthy are smarter than the liberals. Liberals are only interested in finding sources of funding to support their programs of benefits, this is the generality. The Specifics are the part that identify a source of taxation that can be used to support the funding and then figuring out how to keep that source of taxation from changing. The Specifics recognize that the wealthy, when confronted with a new taxation form, will identify the means to reduce the impact of the taxation to the lowest possible level. This action is expected because everyone will make every effort to reduce the impact of taxes since no one, in their right mind, is going to pay more in taxes.
Lastly, when a liberal wants to denigrate someone else, they place them in a category of racist towards any number of groups. Racists does not mean a white person hates black people, it means one person has a hatred towards another group of people for their color or heritage or religion or even GENDER. When a liberal has no worthy argument other than a political or idealogical position, they will resort to personal attacks instead of facts or logical analysis.
The conclusion is very simple, anyone can take any topic and figure out the liberal position by considering the option that offers benefits.
From this comment you should be able to figure out the primary difference between a liberal and a conservative, liberals do not accept the concept of personal responsibility, no one is responsible for their actions because they do whatever they do as a result of social or peer pressures. One of the best examples of this approach is abortion (yes, there is an opinion on abortion). The biggest claim is that women should have the right to control their bodies, however, this only applies to the result of failure to control their bodies. Personal responsibility says that you make decisions and those decisions have consequences. If you make the decision to engage in sexual intercourse without taking the standard birth control options then there is the probability that the consequence will be a pregnancy.
So, instead of controlling her body, she fails to take the known steps to avoid a pregnancy so does it appear that there is any personal responsibility or simply the steps needed to clean up the failure of controlling her body and making responsible decisions instead of childish reactions.
What it boils down to is the position on everything by liberals, they don't care about the rights or opinions of anyone else that opposes their position. They will lie and distort the truth to support their agenda and they will denigrate anyone that has an opposing view. Most important, if you ask a liberal why they have a position, they will start by attacking your character and then start an endless stream of blather that has no bearing on the topic but generally supports the liberal agenda.