11 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by generalissimoIt's one on other threads I saw, but my results are different,it seems I'm a bit more libertarian than you about people's individual rights and freedoms to do as they wish.
thats mine.
Economic Left/Right: 2.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.03
It seems we agree on free markets.
I'm at the free market extreme and slight liberarianism like Milton Friedman according to that site.
Good find you guys have in the general thread, thought I'd bring it to debate since it's a good source of debate.
After all, you would think people would have learned by now the importance of free markets in the long-term material gains of people.
11 Apr 09
Originally posted by eljefejesusGiven what has happened to the world economy because of the "free market" in mortgage "backed" securities, you'd think that some people would realize that unregulated free markets can easily lead to disaster. But right wingers never learn.
It's one on other threads I saw, but my results are different,it seems I'm a bit more libertarian than you about people's individual rights and freedoms to do as they wish.
It seems we agree on free markets.
I'm at the free market extreme and slight liberarianism like Milton Friedman according to that site.
Good find you guys have in the gener ...[text shortened]... e learned by now the importance of free markets in the long-term material gains of people.
I'm - 6.38 and - 6.46 BTW.
11 Apr 09
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderFree market is good, it has worked well in the past.
Given what has happened to the world economy because of the "free market" in mortgage "backed" securities, you'd think that some people would realize that unregulated free markets can easily lead to disaster. But right wingers never learn.
I'm - 6.38 and - 6.46 BTW.
It does need some regulation, thats all.
countries where the means of production are socialized are not as prosperous as those where the means of production are under private control.
"any kind of income sharing reduces individual incentives to work, and therefore incomes should be individualized as much as possible".
State ownership over the means of production, impedes technological progress due to competition being stifled.
Left-wingers never learn.
11 Apr 09
Two old Debates threads about this:
Thread 17788
Thread 28956
As mentioned in the thread in General, my (most recent) results are
Economic Left/Right: -6.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.03
11 Apr 09
Originally posted by NordlysInteresting. In 3 1/2 years I've gotten a little more left on Economic issues and a little less on Social issues.
Two old Debates threads about this:
Thread 17788
Thread 28956
As mentioned in the thread in General, my (most recent) results are
Economic Left/Right: -6.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.03
11 Apr 09
Originally posted by eljefejesusReally? And what do you think our deregulatory "free market" idea has led to since, say, 2005?
After all, you would think people would have learned by now the importance of free markets in the long-term material gains of people.
Don't know about you, but most people have lost at least 35% or more of their "long-term material gains."
All do to the "freedom" of markets to be manipulated by incompetent, greedy people without proper regulatory oversight.
Of course, if you haven't spent 35 years in the workforce, then you might not understand on a visceral level how it feels to lose more than 10 years of accumulated savings while not being able to look forward to a "long-term" recovery of those losses.
Clearly, none of us is quite as dumb as all of us.
12 Apr 09
Originally posted by no1marauderhttp://politicalcompass.org/test
Given what has happened to the world economy because of the "free market" in mortgage "backed" securities, you'd think that some people would realize that unregulated free markets can easily lead to disaster. But right wingers never learn.
I'm - 6.38 and - 6.46 BTW.
Economic Left/Right: 2.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.59
Hence the phrase "LONG-TERM."
Right-winger for economics purposes indicates mainly plain and simple following of basic economic sciences about how large deficits make nations depend on financing these deficits (i.e. credit markets), realizationg that savings, investments,and technology are the primary drivers of economic growth in the long term.
Why choose a timespan of 10 years?
Is it not obvious to you that a person that cannot wait more than 20 years should not be investing most of their money in stock markets,nor should the retirement funds that they invest in allocate such high percentages during times of high price-to-earnings ratios? However, if you are young and believe that times like these stocks are oversold, then you have every right to buy stock in carpitalist markets. Do you really believe that socialist economies are not affected by the market at all? Their inefficies and drags on growth do not even isolate them from the wrold economy.
As a peron considered "rigth" on the economy, I would have to break it to you that I saw the credit crisis coming, which is just another type of bubble bursting in the medium term, and one which does not leave the US poorer than socialist countries. You argue against unregulated free markets in your post, but who was arguing FOR unregulated free markets? Despite my believes in better (ot more or less) regulation, I am still considered: Economic Left/Right: 2.38 by the survey, and I would agree. Being for better regulation of new financial innovations is obvious to me, as the market allows for a learning curve. What was also obvious to me and other of my friends and co-horts who understand basic economic principles was the the US regulators were stupidly allowing companies to boost short-term profits by catering to poor credit-risk applicants. The over-expansion of credit is a prelude to the reversal of excess. Regulations should prevent extreme forms of over-extension of credit and reduce through negative incentives other bad loans while maintaining strong capital requirements.
In other words, this mess was not the fault of the free markets, it was a natural occurence which instead of being minimized by the bush government and congress was magnified through decreased lending standards back to pre-great depression era policies, an attempt to minimize the 9/11 / post-tech-bubble crash, and overextension of credit with poorly supervised financial innovations.
Yet amazing that these innovations can be more appropriately regulated in the future within the free-market economy that created them.
Also amazing that the US remains richer than most of the same critical world even during the home-grown crisis! The crisis is not what makes students in the US fall behind the Scandanavian countries in math and science, it is other policies, not those for the free markets. Plus the US sucks up too much of its engineering talent in projects for and within the millitary.
All this in hopes that some-left-wingers eventually can and do learn as they grow older and wiser.
12 Apr 09
Originally posted by Scriabinhttp://politicalcompass.org/test
Really? And what do you think our deregulatory "free market" idea has led to since, say, 2005?
Don't know about you, but most people have lost at least 35% or more of their "long-term material gains."
All do to the "freedom" of markets to be manipulated by incompetent, greedy people without proper regulatory oversight.
Of course, if you haven' ...[text shortened]... -term" recovery of those losses.
Clearly, none of us is quite as dumb as all of us.
Economic Left/Right: 2.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.59
Hence the phrase "LONG-TERM."
Right-winger for economics purposes indicates mainly plain and simple following of basic economic sciences about how large deficits make nations depend on financing these deficits (i.e. credit markets), realizationg that savings, investments,and technology are the primary drivers of economic growth in the long term.
Why choose a timespan of 10 years?
Is it not obvious to you that a person that cannot wait more than 20 years should not be investing most of their money in stock markets,nor should the retirement funds that they invest in allocate such high percentages during times of high price-to-earnings ratios? However, if you are young and believe that times like these stocks are oversold, then you have every right to buy stock in carpitalist markets. Do you really believe that socialist economies are not affected by the market at all? Their inefficies and drags on growth do not even isolate them from the wrold economy.
As a peron considered "rigth" on the economy, I would have to break it to you that I saw the credit crisis coming, which is just another type of bubble bursting in the medium term, and one which does not leave the US poorer than socialist countries. You argue against unregulated free markets in your post, but who was arguing FOR unregulated free markets? Despite my believes in better (ot more or less) regulation, I am still considered: Economic Left/Right: 2.38 by the survey, and I would agree. Being for better regulation of new financial innovations is obvious to me, as the market allows for a learning curve. What was also obvious to me and other of my friends and co-horts who understand basic economic principles was the the US regulators were stupidly allowing companies to boost short-term profits by catering to poor credit-risk applicants. The over-expansion of credit is a prelude to the reversal of excess. Regulations should prevent extreme forms of over-extension of credit and reduce through negative incentives other bad loans while maintaining strong capital requirements.
In other words, this mess was not the fault of the free markets, it was a natural occurence which instead of being minimized by the bush government and congress was magnified through decreased lending standards back to pre-great depression era policies, an attempt to minimize the 9/11 / post-tech-bubble crash, and overextension of credit with poorly supervised financial innovations.
Yet amazing that these innovations can be more appropriately regulated in the future within the free-market economy that created them.
Also amazing that the US remains richer than most of the same critical world even during the home-grown crisis! The crisis is not what makes students in the US fall behind the Scandanavian countries in math and science, it is other policies, not those for the free markets. Plus the US sucks up too much of its engineering talent in projects for and within the millitary.
All this in hopes that some-left-wingers eventually can and do learn as they grow older and wiser.