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

Forums - Politics - Do you consider yourself more left or right wing?

 

I am...

More left leaning 52 61.90%
 
More right leaning 32 38.10%
 
Total:84

Let's remember what democracy means: the power of the people. Now of course we all know that there needs to be somebody to lead. Someone voted from inside the group as their representative. And we all know that this task is demanding and therefore a certain level of bonus is accepted. Now whenever the representative stops representing the people and prefers to act in his very own favor, the people should have the power to stop this person and find a replacement. 

Transfer to the real world: Some current leaders like Trump and Putin (also wannabe leaders like the AfD in Germany) bend and break the rules wherever they can to stay in power despite leading their countries into shit. Why are they doing this? Because they profit off it directly. They don't care at all about the fact that millions of people suffer. What combines these douchebags? They are all considered right-wingers. The rights believe that it's okay to live under a few powerful people. They're gonna be nice to us eventually, aren't they? Let's keep hoping. 

However, this is not exclusive to top-level politicians, but to company boards as well (and basically everywhere where a power distance can be observed). Most right-wing executives fear nothing more than to give up their power, even a tiny fraction. Their power gives them the ability to profit off every situation, good or bad, and at the same time the ability to avoid most repercussions from foul-play. Like someone said a few hours ago: no matter what happens, the board always gets the money. So why is this even possible at all? 

Obviously the system is rigged in favor of the rich and powerful. The imbalance of power is clearly visible. No society ever benefits in any way if the majority of wealth is shared between a few rich people. Money, influence and power need much better distributions. There need to be much stricter rules against tax evasion as well as against passing cost escalations onto the consumers. 



Around the Network
Chrkeller said:
curl-6 said:

As Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn once said, "Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free." 

Exactly.

Most things in life are just trade offs.

Low freedom<>low risk / High freedom<>high risk

Low risk<>low rewards / High risk<>high rewards

Low rewards<>high equality / High rewards<>low equality

Low equality<>high freedom / High equality<>low freedom

Therefore:

High equality = low freedom = low risk = low rewards

Low equality = high freedom = high risk = high rewards

Last edited by EricHiggin - on 05 September 2025

PS1   - ! - We must build a console that can alert our enemies.

PS2  - @- We must build a console that offers online living room gaming.

PS3   - #- We must build a console that’s powerful, social, costs and does everything.

PS4   - $- We must build a console that’s affordable, charges for services, and pumps out exclusives.

PRO  -%-We must build a console that's VR ready, checkerboard upscales, and sells but a fraction of the money printer.

PS5   - ^ -We must build a console that’s a generational cross product, with RT lighting, and price hiking.

PRO  -&- We must build a console that Super Res upscales and continues the cost increases.

A manager, a worker and an immigrant sit at a table in a bar. The bartender brings a plate with 20 cookies. The manager instantly grabs 19 and whispers to the worker: watch out, that immigrant is eyeing your cookie. 



bdbdbd said:
sc94597 said:

Race is a social construct. Currently existing racial groups do not align with the genetic data on human population structure. 

If I show you this phylogenetic tree -- which groups in the tree are "Black"? For example, why do we group a Khwe person with a South Bantu person as "Black" when a Eurasian person and a South Bantu person have more recent common ancestry than either do with a Khwe person? The common "races" of "white", "black", "asian", etc are paraphyletic from the start, which means it is difficult to talk about them as representing actual historical genetic populations. And of course things get even more complicated when we consider mixing both in the pre-Colombian and post-Colombian periods. Humans are essentially one population group (in the genetic sense) in 2025, but this was also largely true before colonialism as well.

There has been pretty much constant gene-flow for the last hundred thousands years in all human populations. At best, what we call "races" are really just convergent eco-types.



Here is when those populations split. Also notice that there is mixing in all of these groups, and these splits represent non-existent "pure" populations. 

Consider another scenario. If in the United States most white people came from Italy and the Southern Balkans, and most Black people came from the Horn of Africa the common association of sickled-cell anemia being a "Black disease" would actually be reversed. 

This is why we can be pretty confident that "race", as we use it, is gibberish in a biological population sense. It doesn't align with what we know about human population genetics and phylogeny. 

But culture is definitely socially constructed. And culture can run along racial lines as borders. Nothing surprising about that. And cultures are different of course. This would have to mean that some are better at some things and worse at other things. I think this can easyily have a messurable effect on things like education.

Sure, but when we suggest culture is the source of the problem we have to explain the historical and current social forces that shape that culture. 

This "race" obsession is pretty much a US-specific thing. In a way it's understandable based on historical and cultural aspects.

Yeah as a non-American, the extent to which the US seems to obsess over race seems downright bizarre to me.

It's like they see absolutely everything and everyone through the lens of skin colour, as if this one trait alone defines us.

Doesn't seem very healthy either, as it just seems to promote division, conflict, and hate.



GoOnKid said:

A manager, a worker and an immigrant sit at a table in a bar. The bartender brings a plate with 20 cookies. The manager instantly grabs 19 and whispers to the worker: watch out, that immigrant is eyeing your cookie. 

The other version is they order a plate of cookies for $20.  The manager pays $19.50, the worker pays 0.50 and complains the manager isn't paying a fair share.  

*top 10% already pay 72% of taxes



i7-13700k

Vengeance 32 gb

RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC

Switch OLED

Around the Network
Chrkeller said:
GoOnKid said:

A manager, a worker and an immigrant sit at a table in a bar. The bartender brings a plate with 20 cookies. The manager instantly grabs 19 and whispers to the worker: watch out, that immigrant is eyeing your cookie. 

The other version is they order a plate of cookies for $20.  The manager pays $19.50, the worker pays 0.50 and complains the manager isn't paying a fair share.  

*top 10% already pay 72% of taxes

Also the communist version



curl-6 said:
Chrkeller said:

The other version is they order a plate of cookies for $20.  The manager pays $19.50, the worker pays 0.50 and complains the manager isn't paying a fair share.  

*top 10% already pay 72% of taxes

Also the communist version

Nice find.  And very accurate. 



i7-13700k

Vengeance 32 gb

RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC

Switch OLED

Chrkeller said:
GoOnKid said:

A manager, a worker and an immigrant sit at a table in a bar. The bartender brings a plate with 20 cookies. The manager instantly grabs 19 and whispers to the worker: watch out, that immigrant is eyeing your cookie. 

The other version is they order a plate of cookies for $20.  The manager pays $19.50, the worker pays 0.50 and complains the manager isn't paying a fair share.  

*top 10% already pay 72% of taxes

Source, please? Even if true, it should still be higher. The top10% can easily afford it.

I don't know much about your country, however, wikipedia says the the Total effective federal tax rate (includes corporate income and excise taxes) for that top 10% has been between 21.6% and 29.4% in 2010. I don't know if these numbers grew a lot until now, I can't imagine they did. 

The top tax rate in Germany is 45%, by the way, and even that is way too low. 



GoOnKid said:
Chrkeller said:

The other version is they order a plate of cookies for $20.  The manager pays $19.50, the worker pays 0.50 and complains the manager isn't paying a fair share.  

*top 10% already pay 72% of taxes

Source, please? Even if true, it should still be higher. The top10% can easily afford it.

I don't know much about your country, however, wikipedia says the the Total effective federal tax rate (includes corporate income and excise taxes) for that top 10% has been between 21.6% and 29.4% in 2010. I don't know if these numbers grew a lot until now, I can't imagine they did. 

The top tax rate in Germany is 45%, by the way, and even that is way too low. 

https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/

72% is of all taxes, not tax rate.  

I also think your post is exactly what is wrong with left think.  Love how you volunteer other people's money and decide for them.  Lol.  

How about your worry about your money and not mine?

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”

Last edited by Chrkeller - on 06 September 2025

i7-13700k

Vengeance 32 gb

RTX 4090 Ventus 3x E OC

Switch OLED

Chrkeller said:
GoOnKid said:

Source, please? Even if true, it should still be higher. The top10% can easily afford it.

I don't know much about your country, however, wikipedia says the the Total effective federal tax rate (includes corporate income and excise taxes) for that top 10% has been between 21.6% and 29.4% in 2010. I don't know if these numbers grew a lot until now, I can't imagine they did. 

The top tax rate in Germany is 45%, by the way, and even that is way too low. 

https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/

72% is of all taxes, not tax rate.  

I also think your post is exactly what is wrong with left think.  Love how you volunteer other people's money and decide for them.  Lol.  

How about your worry about your money and not mine?

“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”

For clarifictaion, I don't want to make rich people poor. They can stay rich, that's fine, but the extent of it is what's wrong. The top 10% can pay even more taxes and it wouldn't hurt them at all, meanwhile the lowest 10% would benefit massively. The imbalance should be countered to a certain degree, not totally, but a little bit. The government would be able to provide better public services -> a win for everyone. Improved wealth distribution would lead to less crime -> another win for everyone. Tell me how that is a bad thing. 

But millionaire xyz maybe wouldn't afford his 20th appartment, yes. That's the sacrifice.