Political stance

[NightCrawler]

I want to see if INTPs land on a specific group more often than others.

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

Example result (not mine):
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/draw.php?p=5&e=5

[Rhu]

My socioeconomical stance is too complex for a mere two dimensions.

[Fierys]

You know, i hate these labels of ideas as liberal or conservative, its not that simple. But anyway, i fall into Liberal and libertanian categories, right on the border of both.

[panda]

aspiring tyrant/emperor

apolitical

[Lurker]

You know, i hate these labels of ideas as liberal or conservative, its not that simple. But anyway, i fall into Liberal and libertanian categories, right on the border of both.

Liberal and libertarian here, too. Basically I want a socially liberal, financially supportive government that doesn't infringe on my personal liberties whatsoever - mind you, I do want them to be extremely active when it comes to legislating Big Business. They also need to tax the shit out of the wealthy and redistribute the funds to less fortunate folks, general social welfare, infrastructure, and so on. But - they better not attempt to control me!

As you can see, it's a good thing I didn't go into Political Science. :)

I want to have my cake and eat it, too.

[mancroft]

My socioeconomical stance is too complex for a mere two dimensions.

How many fucking dimensions do you need?

[Rhu]

How many fucking dimensions do you need?

How many you got?

[Dr. Haight]

Libertarian Socialist.

[sbw]

Libertarian Socialist.

he wants no government at all except for the one that prevents anybody from getting wealthy.

Scott

edit: ;P

[Stoic]

Market socialist.

[panda]

he wants no government at all except for the one that prevents anybody from getting wealthy.

Scott

edit: ;P
You can't help yourself, can you?

[sbw]

You can't help yourself, can you?

why should I want to?

Scott

[panda]

Capitalista (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/capitalista.htm)

[Stoic]

he wants no government at all except for the one that prevents anybody from getting wealthy.

Scott

edit: ;P

And how many people get wealthy without some kind of exploitation and/or economic coercion?

[sbw]

Capitalista (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/capitalista.htm)

thank you, but I'm not sufficiently knowlegeable as to pull it off as described.

Scott

edit: wow, they really worked hard compiling that list. (its new to me.)

[sbw]

And how many people get wealthy without some kind of exploitation and/or economic coercion?

I wasnt even saying he was wrong--just pointing out the (apparent) contradiction in terms.

and, depending upon where you choose to derive your definition of 'exploitation' and 'coercion', plenty.

Scott

[panda]

thank you, but I'm not sufficiently knowlegeable as to pull it off as described.
Oh.

Fanboy (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/fanboy.htm)

Ideologue (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ideologue.htm)

[Dirty-American-Devil]

Libertarian, but I already knew this, I would also be so brave to say that I am probably a Socialist Libertarian.

My family of hard core Republicans resent the fact that I describe myself as an "Socialist Libertarian", with out even researching the defination first.

While I don't want others to stop getting rich, I do believe its silly that while the workers are scraping to make last months rent, the CEO is chilling in his Spring House down in the South somewhere, while he enjoys his numerious golfing trips.

I also think if you declare bankruptcy more then once, then the government needs to handle your paychecks, because apparently, you're not responsible enough to take care of money.

I scored
70% Personnel
100% Economic

[sbw]

Oh.

Fanboy (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/fanboy.htm)

warmer...


Ideologue (http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/warriorshtm/ideologue.htm)

colder.

Scott

[panda]

Hey, I'm not judging.

[Stoic]

I wasnt even saying he was wrong--just pointing out the (apparent) contradiction in terms.

and, depending upon where you choose to derive your definition of 'exploitation' and 'coercion', plenty.

Scott

Well, I disagree that there was a real contradiction in terms. A 'socialist libertarian' would borrow some dynamcs from libertarianism and some from socialism, ideally. There is suppose to be some contradictions when you mesh two terms together.

Also, I'd like to see a common scenario where someone gets wealth without taking part in any exploitation or economic coercion, under any definition.

[Stoic]

Libertarian, but I already knew this, I would also be so brave to say that I am probably a Socialist Libertarian.

My family of hard core Republicans resent the fact that I describe myself as an "Socialist Libertarian", with out even researching the defination first.

While I don't want others to stop getting rich, I do believe its silly that while the workers are scraping to make last months rent, the CEO is chilling in his Spring House down in the South somewhere, while he enjoys his numerious golfing trips.

I also think if you declare bankruptcy more then once, then the government needs to handle your paychecks, because apparently, you're not responsible enough to take care of money.

I scored
70% Personnel
100% Economic


How do you feel about environmental protection?

[Dr. Haight]

I wasnt even saying he was wrong--just pointing out the (apparent) contradiction in terms.

I usually don't link to Wikipedia for obvious reasons - or any other sites for that matter - but I read through their description of Libertarian Socialism and it's a good elementary description. So if you are really interested, then here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

[macr0]

progressive/capitalist/libertarian

[macr0]

I usually don't link to Wikipedia for obvious reasons - or any other sites for that matter - but I read through their description of Libertarian Socialism and it's a good elementary description. So if you are really interested, then here you go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_socialism

Mmm. I just read a little bit of that, but I wonder what libertarian socialism's answer is to the tragedy of the commons.

[Nighthawk]

Libertarian.

[abweichend]

Democratic Socialist

[Dark Razor]

That (rather limited) test defined me as "Liberal", more European-style tests would probably have defined me as "Socialist" or "Liberal Democratic Socialist".

My political views:
I am opposed to unregulated business and privatization of governmental services. I believe that all industries that are essential to the survivall of the state, like extraction of ressources, transportation, energy and water services, telecomunication and banking, need to be nationalized. Im also opposed to the concept of a "legal entity" in the form of a company or corporation. I believe that "the economy" is not a seperate entity, but a means of the state, or govenment, to further the wellbeing of its' people, and that it needs to be regulated and optimized to serve this purpose only.

I do recognize though that there is a need for a certain hierarchy in society, so I would not argue that everyone needs to have an equal share of societys' wealth. I believe though that everyone should be provided with his basic needs through public welfare, whether he "deserves" it or not, whether he works for it or not. I also believe that there need to be limits on how much wealth and private property one is allowed to possess and private enterprise should be limited to small shops ect..

I believe that the state should not otherwise interfere with the private maters of it's people. I support gay marriage, legalization of marihuna etc.. I support free speech in all it's forms as long as it does not insult other people. (with insult I dont mean *offend*)

Well, I probably provided more than what was asked for, but I refuse to describe myself with one or two words.

[Rajah]

You fall exactly on the border of two political philosophies...


LIBERAL
LIBERTARIAN

LIBERALS usually embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but tend to support significant government control of the economy. They generally support a government-funded "safety net" to help the disadvantaged, and advocate strict regulation of business. Liberals tend to favor environmental regulations, defend civil liberties and free expression, support government action to promote equality, and tolerate diverse lifestyles.

LIBERTARIANS support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes,
promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.


Your PERSONAL issues Score is 90%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 50%.

[Pooja]

You fall exactly on the border of two political philosophies...


LIBERAL
LIBERTARIAN

LIBERALS usually embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but tend to support significant government control of the economy. They generally support a government-funded "safety net" to help the disadvantaged, and advocate strict regulation of business. Liberals tend to favor environmental regulations, defend civil liberties and free expression, support government action to promote equality, and tolerate diverse lifestyles.

LIBERTARIANS support maximum liberty in both personal and economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence. Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose government bureaucracy and taxes,
promote private charity, tolerate diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.


Your PERSONAL issues Score is 90%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 50%.

I just took the test, and scored almost identically (only difference, was that my personal score was a 92%)

[Conan]

http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=6471

Mine's better because it lets you choose leftist. And you get to read madrigal going off on how communism is not statist. And its the original, baby.

But Ill vote again anyways.
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/draw.php?p=8&e=10

[Lee]

Libertarian Socialist.I have no idea how you hope to resolve those two ideologies. You might as well be a anarcho-totalitarian.

[booyalab]

libertarian, but I don't like being associated with the social libertarians that chose the same option as me in the poll. If you can't understand the economic folly of your socialist leanings, dont call yourself this:


LIBERTARIANS support maximum liberty in both personal and
economic matters. They advocate a much smaller government; one
that is limited to protecting individuals from coercion and violence.
Libertarians tend to embrace individual responsibility, oppose
government bureaucracy and taxes, promote private charity, tolerate
diverse lifestyles, support the free market, and defend civil liberties.



my result:
Your PERSONAL issues Score is 70%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 100%.

[Lee]

I'm a classical liberal. Two reasons:

1) It's morally superior to all other ideologies.
2) It's the best way to organise economic activity.

All other idealogies are corrupted by one delusion or more, particularly socialism.

[booyalab]

http://forums.intpcentral.com/showthread.php?t=6471

Mine's better because it lets you choose leftist. And you get to read madrigal going off on how communism is not statist. And its the original, baby.


funny, I picked centrist in that poll. Must've been a Right/Libertarian result.

[Rajah]

All other idealogies are corrupted by one delusion or more, particularly socialism.

Change that to all ideologies, and I'm inclined to agree.

[Lee]

Change that to all ideologies, and I'm inclined to agree.Then isn't the best ideology the one least infected with such delusions? If you think there is an error in some particular theory of morality or how socieities work, then try to eliminate that error. Because we are all bounded to to do something, the choice is simply for the least deluded option from the alternatives available.

[omnirook]

I want to see if INTPs land on a specific group more often than others.

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

Example result (not mine):
http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz-score/draw.php?p=5&e=5

Your poll choices do not quite match the test results. You have R/conservative, but no L/liberal - instead, you have Statist/Big Government ... Are you being judgemental? I mean, that's how corrupt polls are taken all the time, how they're "fixed" to ensure that the desired answer comes back before they are published as an "indication of the people's will."

"Are you for bloated big government that wastes tons and tons of your hard-earned tax dollars?" versus "Do you believe that the government should have programs that help the disadvantaged?" The same people will answer "no" to the former and "yes" to the latter.

[euterpenc]

Libertarian...

"hands off" governement should only be involved as is absolutely necessary for the survival and competency of the nation relative to other nations of comparable size and composition.

[ajblaise]

Social democrat (See: The places with the highest quality of life in the world)

Libertarianism is alright, but how far are you willing to take it? I doubt many of you (besides libertarianjim) are all out libertarians.

[Tayshaun]

Socio-Democrat.

Apart from a few inconsistencies, living in Sweden has been an eye-opener. It's wonderful to see that socialist governments can yield social and economical improvements while keeping an overwhelming majority of the population satisfied.

[AMDG]

This is a better way (http://www.politicalcompass.org/) of doing this sort of thing. Sorry if someone's already mentioned it - I don't have time to look at all the responses atm...

[Lee]

Social democrat (See: The places with the highest quality of life in the world)

Libertarianism is alright, but how far are you willing to take it? I doubt many of you (besides libertarianjim) are all out libertarians.bah, libertarianjim is a moderate.

[Dark Razor]

This is a better way[/URL] of doing this sort of thing. Sorry if someone's already mentioned it - I don't have time to look at all the responses atm...

Yea that one is better, here we go:
Economic Left/Right: -6.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.00

lol, I cant resist online-quizes.

[SilverFalcon]

I am in the conservative-leaning part of the centrists, although I agree with the liberal side on enviromentalist issues. I agree with conservatives on government spending issues, with the exception of scientific research (That's th scientist part of me speaking) and millitary spending (WAY too much money.)

50% personal issues
70% economic issues

[aether]

I am a centrist.

[MasterMerk]

I have no idea how you hope to resolve those two ideologies. You might as well be a anarcho-totalitarian.

socialism -> egalitarianism

libertarianism -> absence of all coercion, be it state or capitalist in origin.

The basic idea is that you can't have one without the other. "Freedom without Socialism is privilege and injustice and Socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality."

Anarchist here.

[FranG]

I took the first test which was kinda simplistic but hereare my results:

LIBERTARIAN


Your PERSONAL issues Score is 100%.
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 80%.

[garak]

Socially liberal but fiscally conservative. So basically, libertarian. But I tend to be libertarian leaning a little toward US democrat. Less and less so, though, I think.

I think that government is mostly bad, and thus we should have as little of it as possible. The US was a fantastic creation. Now we're fat, lazy, and domineering. We're like a belligerent alcoholic.

[FranG]

Socially liberal but fiscally conservative. So basically, libertarian. But I tend to be libertarian leaning a little toward US democrat. Less and less so, though, I think.

I think that government is mostly bad, and thus we should have as little of it as possible. The US was a fantastic creation. Now we're fat, lazy, and domineering. We're like a belligerent alcoholic.

LOL yep. Unhealthy both mentality, physically, and spiritually

[jpdenke]

Use to be libertarian, now I am a Democrat (social freedom, regulated business). Lazzei-faire is not fair.

As an aside, I would like to see a consumption tax imposed. That would hit the rich pretty hard.

[Krill]

As an aside, I would like to see a consumption tax imposed. That would hit the rich pretty hard.


Errrrrrr, sales tax?

:think:

[jpdenke]

Any time they aquire assets, they are taxed.

[ajblaise]

Now we're fat, lazy, and domineering.

Do you think the free-market consumer culture that you support has anything to do with that?

I always wondered what the conservatives and libertarians that dislike that aspect of American culture thought about that.

[Krill]

Any time they aquire assets, they are taxed.

Aside from any vendetta against the rich, how would this help? What positive effects would hitting "the rich pretty hard" have?

[jpdenke]

Redistribution of wealth essentially. The people who pay the most taxes are the middle class and the poor. They essentially tax you for being broke (your bank for example). The rich are able to escape most of these taxes through tax exempt ventures and maneuvering the tax laws (through things like trusts and spousal donations). We need to close the loopholes and even out the system.

[Krill]

Redistribution of wealth essentially. The people who pay the most taxes are the middle class and the poor. They essentially tax you for being broke (your bank for example). The rich are able to escape most of these taxes through tax exempt ventures and maneuvering the tax laws (through things like trusts and spousal donations). We need to close the loopholes and even out the system.

The loopholes I'm in agreement with, but the progressive tax is already pretty tough on the wealthy.

Top 1% of income pay approximately 20% of income taxes, the top 20% pay approximately 60% of income taxes. I could only find rudimentary statistics in relation to income, but not the overall tax burden (I'd appreciate any statistics you could give me).

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61178-2004Aug12.html

[jpdenke]

I would say that much of the money being made is escaping a tax altogether. The percentages are off because they do not take into account how much money the rich are keeping tax free. They may pay 20% of the overall taxes, but they are also making away with a lot more money that we don't know about tax free. I guess that's how it works in those higher circles.

[Krill]

I would say that much of the money being made is escaping a tax altogether. The percentages are off because they do not take into account how much money the rich are keeping tax free. They may pay 20% of the overall taxes, but they are also making away with a lot more money that we don't know about tax free. I guess that's how it works in those higher circles.

I see. Thanks for clarifying your thoughts on the matter.

[ajblaise]

Top 1% of income pay approximately 20% of income taxes

They also control approximately 40% of the wealth.

[Krill]

They also control approximately 40% of the wealth.

Oh ho ho ho, thanks for putting that into perspective. :)

[garak]

Do you think the free-market consumer culture that you support has anything to do with that?

I always wondered what the conservatives and libertarians that dislike that aspect of American culture thought about that.

Sure, it's a clear reflection of it. And it reinforces it, but I don't think it was a cause, or the cause. And I'm not sure how supporting freedom (and free markets as a result) means supporting consumer culture. Consumerism bothers me a lot. I think collective living could be very nice. Just NOT when it's pushed on you by force from the government.

[cryokinetic]

Centrist bordering on libertarian

[Locomotive Breath]

Sorry, I'm not "experienced" enough to post a link.

This idea that in the Rich get rich on the backs of the poor or "working man" is completly false.

Or to think of wealth as a pie and that there is only so much money to go around. Folks need to realize that the pie is getting bigger.

[ajblaise]

Sorry, I'm not "experienced" enough to post a link.

This idea that in the Rich get rich on the backs of the poor or "working man" is completly false.

Or to think of wealth as a pie and that there is only so much money to go around. Folks need to realize that the pie is getting bigger.

The top 5% control something like 95% of the wealth. I'll try and find the link.

In other words, you gotta be kiddin me.

[zhang_bob]

I swear Lee's political ideology should come with a health warning, after reading this (http://www.intpcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15570) thread and this (http://www.intpcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=15949) one I think I got hypertension. I have decided in the unlikely event he becomes Prime Minister of the United Kingdom I am not going to terminate life, as I have thought of a better idea. I am going to lock him underground in this (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2382831.stm) until he agrees to step down. I told you I would be a prepossessing dictator.:devil:

Back on topic, this test (http://www.moral-politics.com/xpolitics.aspx?menu=Home&action=Test&choice=Long) describes my political stance well.
http://www.intpcentral.com/uploads/politicaltest121.JPG