Three Dimensional, Short, Rough Political Test

[sophie]

Are you suggesting that by extension, all people with high incomes don't "deserve" their money? That's the implication, isn't it?

I don't even know what the problem is that people have with Paris Hilton. I think it's all rooted in jealousy rather than anything substantive.

First, Paris Hilton is small potatoes at around $45 million. That's a lot to you and me, but compared to the real rich, she's blown away by lots of people in business and entertainment.

Second, what do you think "she" does with that money? I mean of course that she herself probably has no control over her inheritance, but that it's being managed by whatever fund company or broker the Hilton family has. This money is in banks and real estate, creating the basis on which new investments can be made that benefit people like you and me.

Third, we don't tax wealth. We tax income. Even if you raised the top bracket to 99%, Paris Hilton would still have $45 million. You'd be crippling the people that actually do work and do produce things.

Jesus mang, I was just making a joke. No need to fly off the handle.

 

[Perfection]

Jesus mang, I was just making a joke. No need to fly off the handle.

Jokes are funny.

 

[Dachs]

France does, from 0.7% to 1.8%

You're French? I don't think I can keep seeing you man

 

[Arwon]

http://www.ldp.org.au/quiz/index.html

Here, try this one for the lolz.

 

[Zelig]

Controlling inflation will help the economy more than controlling unemployment.

Isn't controlling either of these left-wing? A true economically right-wing government would keep their hands off either these economic controls.

 

[Perfection]

Proposition 8: Government spending should be cut by 50% or more.

Agree always +1.

If you agree always, then if they managed to cut it 50% then you'd still advocate cutting the spending in half to 25%, and if they did that too, then then you'd still advocate cutting the spending in half to 12.5% (because you agree always), etc.

So really, you're saying you don't believe in any government spending at all.

Proposition 10: Disaster relief is not the government's job.

Don't ever agree. -1.

How the hell can the government give disaster relief without spending any money?!

 

[Zelig]

Flat taxes should be implemented.

Support for flat taxes isn't a economically right-wing idea for the most part, as it's not supported for economic reasons, it's supported because of a misunderstanding of the concept of intrinsic fairness.

 

[amadeus]

Jesus mang, I was just making a joke. No need to fly off the handle.

Fly off the handle?

I thought it was just like every other CFC thread out there. This Paris Hilton-as-a-representation-of-the-rich meme comes up quite frequently (or at least frequent enough for me to justify replying to it.)

Support for flat taxes isn't a economically right-wing idea for the most part, as it's not supported for economic reasons, it's supported because of a misunderstanding of the concept of intrinsic fairness.

Right, it's the level at which taxes are set and not the progressiveness of them. If we have a progressive income tax system where the top 1% pay 90% of the taxes but the top bracket is 10%, why complain?

 

[Zelig]

Disaster relief is not the government's job.

Natural disasters? Privately-caused environmental disasters? Publically-caused environmental disasters? Publically-caused financial disasters? Privately-caused financial disasters? Population demographic disasters? Cultural disasters?

 

[sophie]

Fly off the handle?

I thought it was just like every other CFC thread out there. This Paris Hilton-as-a-representation-of-the-rich meme comes up quite frequently (or at least frequent enough for me to justify replying to it.)

Which is why I went with her. Dude, seriously, I was making a hit-and-run joke post and you come back at me with this like paragraph long rant.

 

[Zelig]

Proposition 1: Government should regulate speech sometimes if it is harmful or hateful, even if the harm is indirect. (So, not allowing someone to threaten the president's life wouldn't count)

Not allowing someone to threaten the president's life wouldn't count as speech that needs to be regulated, regardless of your stance on whether the government should regulate speech?

My personal experience is contrary to that.

 

[GhostWriter16]

@Owen Glyndwr- Assuming you actually did get a right-wing score, can you explain why and how? As you are almost as far-left as you can get IRL.
If you are willing to take the time, can you say what you answered on each question.

I'll quote this again and ask, how in the world did I mess up badly enough for a fringe socialist to be right-wing?

Take no offense by that description, but really.

 

[sophie]

Jokes are funny.

I SEE WHATCHU DID THAR!

 

[GhostWriter16]

Just for fun, I'm going to take the test pretending to be the two major presidential nominees in '08 and see how messed up this test really is:

Obama first, Mccain to come.

Proposition 1: Government should not create a Universal Health Care System

He obviously disagrees as he already made a UHC system -1.

Proposition 2: "From Each According to his ability, to each according to his need" is not a practical way to run the Welfare State.

He'd probably mostly agree, he doesn't want to totally do this of course, but high taxes on the rich and wanting to ensure a minimum standard means he SORT OF wants to do it. +0.5.

Proposition 3: Welfare should be limited to situations outside the person who requests its control.

I'm pretty sure he disagrees, considering how he wants to legalize drugs and create rehab programs for the people who get addicted with taxpayer money. -1.

Proposition 4: He who is not willing to work should not eat.

I don't think he agrees, though he would say he does. The official system Obama is running doesn't allow you to refuse to work, but people cheat the system all the time and get away with it. I'll go with a Neutral 0.

Proposition 5: Private Charity should Replace Welfare.

Obama obviously disagrees -1.

Proposition 6: "Corporate Welfare" should be ended.

Well, Bush did this, I don't know if Obama ever has. I'll go with 0 for now. If anyone has any info let me know.

Proposition 7: Controlling inflation will help the economy more than controlling unemployment.

Umm... He obviously disagrees. -1.

Proposition 8: Government spending should be cut by 50% or more.

Here too.

Proposition 9: Flat taxes should be implemented.

And here -1.

Proposition 10: Disaster relief is not the government's job.

And here -1.

-5.5. I'd consider that accurate for Obama.

Proposition 1: Government should regulate speech sometimes if it is harmful or hateful, even if the harm is indirect. (So, not allowing someone to threaten the president's life wouldn't count)

He probably agrees, while he himself hasn't regulated it yet, the Pennsylvania and Michigan state governments have done so with no negative words from Obama. Since he hasn't done it himself though, I'll add +0.5 instead of +1.

+0.5.

Proposition 2: The government should not repeal drug possession laws.

I think Obama would, strangely, give the same answer I did. -0.5.

Proposition 3: "Government's job is to protect us from each other, when it oversteps its bounds is when it tries to protect us from ourselves" is NOT a good way to make laws.

Clearly not all the time. Banning smoking in PRIVATE Businesses is supported by him, and strangely, you choose to go there. He supports it sometimes like with drugs but not other times like guns. 0.

Proposition 4: Abortion should always be illegal (I hate this question but I'm doing it anyway to be balanced)

The person who allowed partial birth abortions, hmm... I think he'd agree

-1.

Proposition 5: Handguns should not be allowed for home-protection and target shooting.

Meh, he hasn't stated himself strongly against the handgun ban. I personally think he'd like to disarm everyone, but since its not conclusive I'll go 0.

Proposition 6: Weapons are not a good last resort against government tyranny (Intentionally more radical then #5 to divide the big time libertarians from the sort of libertarians.)

This we know is a -1.

Proposition 7: Prostitution should be banned.

Has he ever said? I'd guess he supports it being allowed, but he's never clearly said it. -0.5.

Proposition 8: Gay marriage should be banned (I originally had this down as #3 but for comical effect I changed it)

Good old Prop. 8 Well, he opposed it in California so he'll probably oppose it in the US. -1.

Proposition 9: Public Smoking (In a private restaurant or business, not outdoors) should be banned.

We all know the liberals usually support this. +1.

Proposition 10: The Draft should be used.

Well, he's never used it, but I think he would if the need arose, but not just because he could. 0.

-2.5. Probably a bit too libertarian, but not too terrible. He does support dismantling morality laws, but he supports a basic safety standard so I guess a middle score is sensible.

Proposition 1: Invading a nation simply because it is tyrannical can be a good idea for the most authoritarian and tyrannical regimes.

I doubt Obama would agree to invading anyone ever just because of tyranny (Considering he's a tyrant himself) Of course, the Parenthesis is a joke but -1 still.

Proposition 2: If a portion of your country decides to leave, allowing it should not be considered.

Probably would not consider it. +1.

Proposition 3: Each Nation doesn't have the sovereign right to do what it wants, if its people don't like it, change should come from outside if the inside can't do it.

Probably would not agree. -0.5 though, as IIRC he though Afghanistan's Al Queda support was too much, but usually he'd agree.

Proposition 4: Defying international law can be justified at times.

I think rarely if ever. I'd say he would if it was crazy. -0.5.

Proposition 5: Pacifism is a bad foreign policy.

I don't think he'd endorse total pacifism, but he is disarming some of our weapons and ending two wars early. I'll go with 0.

Proposition 6: You should fight in situations other than if directly attacked first.

I think he'd agree mostly. +0.5.

Proposition 7: I feel that spreading liberty to others does not disproportionately reduce my own liberty.

I think he'd totally disagree. -1.

Proposition 8: We should put diplomatic pressure on cultures that we consider barbaric or to be denying people their human rights.

Since we're talking about diplomatic, not military pressure, I think +0.5 is appropriate.

Proposition 9: We should not significantly reduce our nuclear arms arsenal.

Umm... He's already doing it. -1.

Proposition 10: The UN has the right to make decisions for countries at times.

He probably thinks so. +1.

So a -1 towards isolationism. I think that's fairly accurate.

So: -5.5 Economic left.

-2.5 Social libertarian.

-1 Towards Isolationism.

I don't think that's inaccurate.

 

[sophie]

Meh, you're talking about his ideology. We're talking about his actions, which are highly corporatist and for the most part conservative.

 

[Traitorfish]

Is it just me, or is the vision of the "far left" that this test presents one of moderate social democracy? I don't that socialism is even considered. Similarly, the authoritarian/libertarian revolves almost entirely around moralistic legislation with a Western democratic state- and mostly around pop-political issues, rather than basic principles- and doesn't acknowledge the possibility of either totalitarianism or anarchism.

I don't even know what the problem is that people have with Paris Hilton. I think it's all rooted in jealousy rather than anything substantive.

Envy, or resentment? The two are quite distinct! Simply because I am unhappy with that fact that our system allows that waste of meat to live an aristocratic lifestyle which she has not earned (as if one could possibly earn such wealth!), it does not mean that I desire that lifestyle for myself. You could just as easily suggest that the only reason people object to welfare cheats is also "jealousy", if that's the level that we're reducing discourse to. Sometimes people's sense of justice extends beyond self-interest, hard as that may be to believe.

 

[Integral]

Isn't controlling either of these left-wing? A true economically right-wing government would keep their hands off either these economic controls.

Depends on who's doing the controlling.

My biases point in the direction of 'controlling inflation' being apolitical at best; the question as stated assumes a static short-run Philips curve and doesn't really make sense post-1978 or so. But I'm not going to give more than 10 seconds of thought to this, to be honest.

 

[GhostWriter16]

Meh, you're talking about his ideology. We're talking about his actions, which are highly corporatist and for the most part conservative.

Corporationist maybe but CONSERVATIVE REALLY? Taxes are about to go up to like 50% for some people in income alone after 2011, which, right or not, isn't conservative.

Is it just me, or is the vision of the "far left" that this test presents one of moderate social democracy? I don't that socialism is even considered.

Well, I would consider the "From each according to his ability..." Proposition definitely does, but as for the rest of the test, maybe not. I'll have to try again sometime and see if I can do better

 

[sophie]

Corporationist maybe but CONSERVATIVE REALLY? Taxes are about to go up to like 50% for some people in income alone after 2011, which, right or not, isn't conservative.

Legitimate (not faux news) links or it didn't happen. Also he's, I believe, anti-abortion in practice, anti-gay marriage, has not made an effort to repeal DADT, is intensifying the war in Afghanistan, is anti-drugs, and approved a very heavily-corporatist healthcare system.

And that's just on the social issues. Usually corporatist politicians are conservative-leaning, because corporations generally have a good thing going and will do whatever they can to ensure it doesn't change.

 

[useless]

A true look at Obama's views and stance on certain issues shows that he's hardly left wing in his beliefs.