Photo credit: @julesdwit.
A not-for-profit media organization supported by people like you.
Perhaps you usually have a clear opinion and a point of view. Yet, are there big topics out there today that you are just not sure about?
Listeners: What big issue of the day are you ambivalent about?
I'm ambivalent about the use of the word ambivalent in these sorts of conversations.
I am ambivalent about the 'solution"to the credit ceiling. The pro side of this is I feel that a ceiling was necessary to preserve our dollar as the number one factor in the world's economy. On the negative side I feel that our president has naively tried to compromise with a brick wall. I think that he should have come out with fire, earllier than the debate and put the republicans on the defensive. After all, it does no good to move the goalposts, as was stated, when the other team has the ball.
The poor and the middle class do not get any benefits by not giving tax cuts to the rich cats who do not pay nearly their share of taxes.
I hope the president awakens to the fact that dominence must preside before thanksgiving.
I'm ambivalent about polygamy. I'm a straight woman who is firmly in support of gay marriage, and theoretically I feel I should support other kinds of chosen lifelong partnerships as well. But somehow I can't work up the enthusiasm when I see one guy with his bevy of wife-sisters. Maybe if it were the other way around...
I am ambivalent about the whole way the issue of employment is being approached by everybody: since the late 1980's corporate downsizing and massive layoffs have reflected the general pattern of , maximizing profits by doing more with less and carrying and over-loaded and over-stressed staff who are expected to do the job of 2 if not 3!!
This continues to this day and is totally separate from the economy and the 2008 recession as real as those problems are for many ... there are profits being made!
Any promise to create jobs that does not address this underlying reality, given this philosophy that profits are seen as higher when employment is lower, makes no sense!! Employers do not find it in their interest to do significant hiring ... and, if you think it is bad now, wait until the veterans start coming home in larger numbers!!
So I find myself wanting employment to be addressed but both angry and confounded when it is.
I missed posting this during the show because I tried to call.
Any promise to create jobs that does not address this underlying reality that, given this philosophy that profits are seen as higher when employment is lower, makes no sense!! Employers do not find it in their interest to do significant hiring ... and, if you think it is bad now, wait until the veterans start coming home in larger numbers!!
I am very disappointed in the debt ceiiing that went through. I feel that the president should have put the republicans on the defensive by not naively feeling that there could be a compromise but should have come out breathing fire, before the republicans even thought of coming out therefore putting them on the defense, After all, we have three branches of the legislature of which the democrats have two.
I am ambivalent about WNYC and on a larger scale open and honest debate. I value highly WNYC's programming and donate to it but fear it fosters a culture of intolerance. One need not look any further than the boards on this morning's Nadler/Grimm segment to recognize the bias among its listeners and, as such, conversants. Anything that does not ring progressive is immediately turned out as evil. If one side comes out swinging then the other has to come out swinging just to stand its ground.
Just as the corporate news programs are beholden to their advertising dollars, WNYC is beholden to its listener-supporters who overwhelmingly despise anything right of center. Where is the objectivity in that?
First of all, I think this is a great segment. So often media focuses on "sides" and I think most of us in our day to day lives think, act, and converse in this way, weighing sides.
As far as my own ambivalence there are plenty of things, but being a graduate student, I am ambivalent about the worth of the lofty priced academic system throughout the United States (and even the world).
Pro: Direct and focused access to combined resources including a network of people within a field of interest.
Con: The expense, being buried under a debt that especially in this economy carries a significant concern about being able to find a job that will allow for alleviating the debt within a reasonable amount of time. Also, the time spent away from projects that will actually be usefully implemented into the community (however, this is more available in graduate school than undergraduate).
There is also education inflation. Its great that more people are getting educated, but it means that more resources/money need to be allocated to this increase and the job market needs to adjust accordingly, which doesn't seem to be happening in an parallel fashion.
Legalizing Pot--it seems like a good idea to add it to the wealth of therapeutic treatments for pain sufferers, but then when you hear about prescription drug abuse, it makes you wonder if we need a different strategy for pain management and the pot thing won't help an increasingly unwieldy problem
I'm ambivalent about ambivalence. When most on one side have well-considered, complex opinions it seems to lose headway & coverage to loud, simplistic, & hyperbole on the other side.
On the other hand, loud, simplistic hyperbole is even more irritating when I agree with the basic sentiment of those involved (Code Pink comes to mind.)
I am ambivalent about bipartisanship. The past few weeks have shown the Republicans being incredibly successful with their goals by being extremely partisan. Although in theory, I like Obama's approach to try to bring people together, I feel that now and then you gain more by being unrelenting and refusing to listen to the other side.
It is due to ambivalence on many issues that over 40% of AMerican voters now call themselves "independents." That they see some merits on each side of the usual Left/Right divide, and can't in full conscience fully commit totally to either side.
I'm ambivalent about SUCESS IN BUSINESS
It really seems one has be a sociopath, and run over people to become wealthy. I don't have it in me to knowingly harm other people.
On the other hand, I have a wife and kids and we have to be sharks to survive.
Yes, homelessness. I never give handouts because I have seen too many people who are kept on the streets because they are able to survive by handouts, but how can I just walk by. How can I ignore everyone, how do you know the difference between a short term need and keeping someone on the street?
I am ambivalent about the Dream Act (if passed). I think the concept is very good and believe in helping these young people on a path to citiizenship. However, the military piece concerns me. ( My son is Army ROTC btw) If a young person brought here illegally by parents is not College "material", they are forced to join Military in order to become a Citizen. It feels close to conscription, and we have a completely volunteer Service now. I think it is a slippery slope. Sounds too "English" as my old Irish father would say.
I am ambivalent about subsidized student loans. As a medical student, I greatly appreciate the discounted interest rates offered by the US gov't. As an armchair economist, I also appreciate some government subsidies for human capital and things that create long-term economic growth. On the downside, the easy access to borrowed funds has to have played a part in sky-rocketing tuition in the past few years. When school budgets get squeezed, I feel like students are an easy source of money so long as we have hopes and dreams and access to student loans.
I'm profoundly ambivalent about the protection that the First Amendment gives to hate speech.
I can't decide which topic to pick because I feel ambilivalent about which topic I feel the most ambivalence towards.
immigration, specifically the dream act.
I appreciate that the children brought here are not to blame for their parent choices and its not fair to punish them when they have a lot to contribute to our society....but I often wonder if our economy / educational institutions as they exist can support a sudden flood of millions of more people when there are barely enough resources / loans etc for people (legally) born here.
I feel like a bigot thinking these things and that the bill might encourage more illegal immigration.
I am ambivalent about President Obama's performance and Senator Bernie Sander's suggestion that it is time for a primary challenger from the left. I fear a challenger would just split the vote (think Nader 2000), but I am so very disappointed in Obama. I am convinced that he will continue to help Republicans wage class warfare on working and middle class Americans if the Left (folks like Senator Sanders and me!) don't make our voices heard more and more . . .
Brian !!!!! You expect your ultra liberal audience to be ambivalent about ANYTHING ?????
Just watch, your callers will use this to one more time put forward their liberalism.
Profoundly ambivalent about the protection the First Amendment offers to hate speech.
I'm ambivalent about being ambivalent. Nuance never seems to win the argument.
Laws against illegal drugs.
On the one hand - people are free to abuse alcohol and cigarettes, why not marijuana?
On the other hand, when cops do undercover buy and bust operations on dealers - they often remove violent offenders whom neighborhood people might be otherwise too frightened to testify against. That is good for society.
Religion. My husband is a devout atheist, my sister a buddhist. When asked, I say I'm an agnostic, which I guess is the safe way of saying I don't really care if God exists or not.
Passing a Balanced Budget Amendment to the Constitution is like passing a law for OBESE people to immediately get slim or be executed. You might as well take a meat cleaver and cut the fat off and see if the patient survives. THe fact is, we have had national debt since WWI. The problem is the percentage of debt compared to what we produce annually (the GDP) has gotten to a historic high level.But England and some other countries have even higher debt to GDP ratios, and the people are not starving in the streets. WE definitely have to reduce the debt, but in an intelligent way, like getting a very fat person to reduce in an intelligent and sustained manner. And not by using a meat cleaver on his or her thighs and belly.
ABortion. I am in favor of it's legality, for the usual reasons, but only with the underlying moral logic that life on earth is sometimes very cruel and unfair.
The Balanced Budget Amendment seems on the face of it a good idea (no more deficit). Yet most politicians regard it as carrying some pretty negative weight. For what reason?
Email addresses are required but never displayed.
Brian Lehrer leads the conversation about what matters most now in local and national politics, our own communities and our lives.
Subscribe on iTunes
Brian Lehrer Weekend: The Nation Magazine, Des Bishop & Eva Moskowitz
WNYC 93.9 FM and AM 820 are New York's flagship public radio
stations, broadcasting the finest programs from NPR, PRI and American Public Media, as well as a wide range of award-winning local
programming. WNYC is a division of
New York Public Radio.