By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Where are you on the political compass?

Soleron said:
EdHieron said:

...


It would be paid for by reducing the strict adherance that the companies have towards maintaining their profit margins

That is literally the function of a company. If you don't want that (and the market efficiency it brings), then regulate for the things it doesn't do well (e.g. environmental protection). But simply asking companies to do it themselves will not work.

and on the rule that company higher-ups must be paid an ungodly sum of money and extravagant bonuses in comparison to their employees.

This is because they are worth that much to the company. Supply and demand. How many good CEOs exist with the skills to turn around a failing multinational company? Not many. So those who do exist can demand millions. If they do a bad job for increasing profit, they get fired by the board.

Also, those people wouldn't be receiving those things for free.  They are giving up at least 40 hours per week  of their valuable time to those a-hole corporations.

And that 40 hours of a low-skill job is at present worth minimum wage. In order to be paid more they have to be worth more to the company.

You are asking people to be paid more than the market has determined they are worth. Who is going to pay the extra and why?

Costco seems to do quite well while treating their employees far better than many other places.

If it was a profit-increasing strategy, another company would have done it.




Who has determined that the higher-ups in the company should be paid what they're worth?  Whose determined that the Walton kids deserve billions for doing nothing?



Around the Network
EdHieron said:

...


Who has determined that the higher-ups in the company should be paid what they're worth?  Whose determined that the Walton kids deserve billions for doing nothing?

The market for CEOs is a free market. Thus it will find the optimal price between supply and demand for CEOs. What part do you disagree with?

The Walton kids were given the money by the person who earned it. Do you not think people should be able to spend their money how they want?



Male 

22 Years Old

Canadian

My result: Right wing Libertarian

Consider myself: Libertarian

 

 



FL (like the tower)

French Male

33 - Pro-EU / Progressive Values / Liberal Economy 

 



Kasz216 said:
Vikki said:
Kasz216 said:
Leadified said:
SocialistSlayer said:
Vikki said:
SocialistSlayer said:
 

 

 

 



 


I wouldn't bet on it.   Europeon countries are more rightwing then the US in a LOT of areas.

They just aren't areas we focus on.

For example... just about everything the Patriot Act did already exists in europe.

Various bannings of specific religious faiths, laws designed to make europe less hospitable.  (or in France's case.  laws be damned).

Sexual Harrassment, in most european countries only "Sleep with me or your fired" counts as sexual harassment more or less.

Europe is more conservative in a number of ways, which i could break down by pages, espeically going into specific cases...

 

Espiecally France, holy shit.  France is so right wing it's scary, yet everyone ignores it because they like to tax rich people.

Go north of France to countires like the Netherlands, Belgium, the whole of Scandanavia, the UK and Obama would be laughed out of parliament if he called himself left leaning.

Ok, so it's gone from "All of euopre" to like... maybe 1/4th of Europe at this point.  (I didn't even bring up Eastern Europe... which gez.)

So, i've already more then proven my point i'd think, if we're using "Europe" as the bar to measure American politcians.   Which seems weirdly anglocentric personnally.   

 


The flaw in your analysis comes from the ideology definition and confusion of means and purpose.

France for example may seem right-wing to you because it actively introduces values into society (social solidarity, concept of womanhood, and freedom from religion for example) but those are natural derivates of a strong state.

Fichte was the first to define a strong state and since the concept has been used for both progressism and conservatism. Just as a small state (US) is compatible with both conservatists and progressive policies.

And if a strong state may seem authoritarian to you it is because, again, there is a confusion. A legitimate government, which properly represents the majority while respecting the minorities, is the opposite of authoritarian.



Around the Network

Name: You can see my nickname to the left, and I'm not telling you anything else.

Age: 22

Gender: Male

What do you consider yourself: I have no idea.

Your political compass results:



Name: sc94597

Age: 20

Gender: Male

Country: Pennsylvania, United States

What do you consider yourself: libertarian morally, minarchist politically

Your political compass results:



Age: 19

Country : Lebanon

What i consider myself: Have no idea what to put :P 

The way i would run the world, i would put a council that has total power like dictators, council members are not elected by the people, they elect themselves. Democracy is wrong when you give the voting power to countless retards. 



Soleron said:
EdHieron said:

...


Who has determined that the higher-ups in the company should be paid what they're worth?  Whose determined that the Walton kids deserve billions for doing nothing?

The market for CEOs is a free market. Thus it will find the optimal price between supply and demand for CEOs. What part do you disagree with?

The Walton kids were given the money by the person who earned it. Do you not think people should be able to spend their money how they want?


The truth of the matter is that during the Obama years the Wealthy White Capitalists have done a good job of shifting the animosity and disaffection of the poor white working class onto the black President.  However, there have been times in American History when the poor workers haven't been content to just be passive sheep accepting whatever scraps the wealthy elite have pushed their way ie. during the Union Member / Coal Mine Owners Wars or in the 1930s when people like Bonnie and Clyde, Pretty Boy Floyd, and John Dillenger became folk heroes to many poor and disaffected people and FDR had to be elected and pass the New Deal Social Measures to pacify many people.

There are signs that America is headed towards another similar time.  The popularity of Occupy Wallstreet for one and more recently the growth in popularity of campaigns like the Wal~Mart 1% and the fast food restaurant workers strikes are indications of that and I'm pretty sure the fervor will continue to grow over the next few years until something does come out of it like it did during the Coal Mine Wars or the 1930s and it's not going to be the poor workers that lose because as history shows, they always win those struggles.



EdHieron said:
..

The market for CEOs is a free market. Thus it will find the optimal price between supply and demand for CEOs. What part do you disagree with?

The Walton kids were given the money by the person who earned it. Do you not think people should be able to spend their money how they want?


The truth of the matter is that during the Obama years the Wealthy White Capitalists have done a good job of shifting the animosity and disaffection of the poor white working class onto the black President.  

You are deflecting. Please answer the question. It was nothing to do with race or class.

However, there have been times in American History when the poor workers haven't been content to just be passive sheep accepting whatever scraps the wealthy elite have pushed their way ie. during the Union Member / Coal Mine Owners Wars or in the 1930s when people like Bonnie and Clyde, Pretty Boy Floyd, and John Dillenger became folk heroes to many poor and disaffected people and FDR had to be elected and pass the New Deal Social Measures to pacify many people.

How does that have anything to do with the questions I asked.

There are signs that America is headed towards another similar time.  The popularity of Occupy Wallstreet for one and more recently the growth in popularity of campaigns like the Wal~Mart 1% and the fast food restaurant workers strikes are indications of that and I'm pretty sure the fervor will continue to grow over the next few years until something does come out of it like it did during the Coal Mine Wars or the 1930s and it's not going to be the poor workers that lose because as history shows, they always win those struggles.

Those campaigns cannot overturn economic reality. Not everyone in America can be given free healthcare and spending money and a nice car and holidays.

Let me inform you that you sound just as incoherent as the American Right who you probably despise. Also the world does not revolve around America. You're basically impossible to debate. I consider myself left-wing but also a realist.