So Moose told me I am not a centrist and Jerry said he does not need labels, so I stayed up much too late combining some of my past diagrams from... G2A Political Self Awareness and G2A How to Boil a Frog I will need to look at it when I am not so bleary eyed. Thoughts?
Remember that if you click the image it will get bigger.
Remember that if you click the image it will get bigger.
For your info I did a self check here and they say I am more of a Libertarian than I thought... I keep wondering why Liberals mistake me for a Conservative... :-)
And here we go again... And no I am not trying to fool the quizzes.
Over the years I have landed in this area every time.
66 comments:
You are correct. I don't like it, but I value the attempt and will comment later, after church and volunteer work.
I further complicated and/or clarified it... It is quite the eye chart.
There you go. The third time was the charm !!!
Though it still contains a LOT of concepts / info in one place...
you are so funny creating your charts to show that you are moderate. I think if you asked people is cutting gov spending by 20-25% a moderate thing to do the answer would be nearly 100% no. I think most people would label that position as radical.
I think my view to keep spending about the same as we have currently as much more moderate.
Laurie,
Let's get back to facts and data. The US Total Spend vs GDP is at ~37%.
I want it it reduced to 33% and this can be done by:
- growing the GDP while slowing spending increases.
- reducing spending by ~10% and limit it's growth to match GDP growth.
- Or some combination of these.
Now for what people want... Anyone who supports government taking over healthcare is looking to increase the percentage from 37% to ~46% assuming that the private sector is half of the US healthcare industry.
BI Healthcare up to 17.8% of GDP.
All this chart does is show what I have been saying all along.
The Conservatives have not changed. They have always wanted to encourage people to have freedom and personal responsibility to live their own lives.
It is the Liberals who seem to have a nearly insatiable to desire to empower government and to make them responsible for all consequences by increasing our tax load, regulation load and limiting our choices / freedom.
Now whether this slide from personal towards government control / responsibility is good or bad is in the eye of the beholder.
Liberals think it would be great if we delegated many of these choices, control & responsibilities to the government. There is no denying this.
Just look at the history:
In 1916 citizens got to keep ~90% of the GDP to do with as they felt was best for their families. The government politicians and bureaucrats were given ~10% of the GDP to keep citizens safe and to run the country.
In 1966 citizens got to keep ~75% of the GDP to do with as they felt was best for their families. The government politicians and bureaucrats were given ~25% of the GDP to keep citizens safe, to run the country and to help the truly needy.
In 2016 citizens get to keep ~68% of the GDP to do with as they feel is best for their families. The government politicians and bureaucrats are given ~37% of the GDP to keep citizens safe, to run the country, to help the truly needy and to ???
This corresponds with the growth of forced insurance / tax / funding payments to cover retirement, college, healthcare, unemployment, disability, etc.
Laurie,
So in summary, you may be at the far Left of Moderate and I may be at the Far Right of Moderate... But if you truly want to grow the government's funding and control of:
- Higher Education (ie free college)
- Healthcare (universal coverage)
- Medicare and Social Security
- Universal Minimum Incomes
I am guessing you are in the center Liberal section of the chart. Only you can answer that question.
If you really want to complicate your chart, you will include spots for descriptions like the "common sense conservative" and "wacko liberal." But the problem with such nuance is that you're attempting a rigid classification. Even among conservatives we recognize at least 3 flavors, and each flavor may "stray" w.r.t. the other two kinds. What I really like is to take each person on an issue by issue basis. I may call their /idea/ "liberal" as a shorthand indication of why it doesn't make sense to me, and I suppose I should admit that after a time I expect a certain response on a new issue from certain people. But I'm always both open to being pleasantly surprised or, in the rare case, to some minds being changed.
I don't desire to add judgments (ie whacko, common sense, etc), the facts and data will be fine.
What I find interesting is that the Liberals and Conservatives were likely pretty well aligned 60+ years ago. I mean there were people who truly needed help, and social security, medicaid, medicare, unemployment and even limited welfare made sense.
I doubt they foresaw the devastating results of the "War on Poverty". The broken families, the increased the dependency, the addicted people, etc.
Then I assume the Conservatives started to see the negative consequences of ever increasing government and programs that supported dependency and bad choices rather than personal responsibility.
So the Conservatives started to want to put on the brakes and maybe go in reverse some. Where as the Liberals continued to want to double down on big government.
The problem is that most of the people in this country have no perspective as to how much government costs now vs then, and the trend...
As Laurie said, "I think my view to keep spending about the same as we have currently as much more moderate'. Or as Jerry said, "What I really like is to take each person on an issue by issue basis."
Without a map and your current location, you are arguing which way to go with no idea where you are.
And worse yet is that the Liberals can keep saying that the Conservatives have moved Far Right over the past 50 years where as the diagram clearly shows that it is the Liberals who continue to strive to pull our country to the Left.
I wonder how many Americans have any idea how much of our economy the Government / Bureaucrats control now vs 100 years ago? If they were made aware would they be happy or concerned? Why or why not?
I disagree. I find no need for your chart to know "where I stand" on any given issue. I take them on an issue by issue basis as I believe most people do. Moreover, the vast majority of folks are "not paying attention" and showing them this chart would be unlikely to help them, especially on an issue-by-issue basis. Trying to find their place on the chart when none of us is that categorically ideological would just be work. Rather, if they were actually paying attention, they would develop that sense inductively, by repeated agreement with one "side" of multiple issues. And of course that is made more difficult by the increasing lack of civil (and rational) discourse but that may be another issue. For example, Republicans seek to reduce the harm of Obamacare, and before the legislation is even presented Democrats say, "Republicans want 20 million people to lose access to health care." We can (and have) debated that issue here, but the vast majority of folks are either pre-disposed to one side or the other based on experience, and/or swayed by the biased [often irrational, and liberal] media presentation of the issue.
I think the Pro / Anti Government Healthcare is an Excellent example of how well the diagram works.
If you had your way government would get out of healthcare policy, funding, regulations, enforcement, etc. You think people can make better choices, take care of themselves and that private charity will take care of everyone else. You want to minimize government control of the lives of the citizens because you distrust them and think they screw it up more often than they get it right.. (ie your confirmation bias)
Also, you want to get government spending down to <20% by privatizing SS / Medicare... Because again you distrust government and truly believe that people will do better. With these few facts it is easy to pretty much guarantee where you will land on any issue that is discussed. Far to the fiscal Right.
Since you do support many personal freedoms and are nearly phobic regarding government regulation, I assume you would be above the horizontal line. You would be higher though you were a bit reluctant to let LGBT people marry.
G2A Diagram
You can see if I am correct...
Nolan Quiz 1
Here is another one... It put me closer to the center...
Where are you folks landing? Any surprises?
Does it bother you if you score far to the Right, Left, Top or Bottom?
Or does it feel about correct?
It doesn't bother me. It is sort of interesting, but is not very helpful, especially when the "right" answers, IMHO, were not offered in many cases, even with 8 or 10 choices. So, if "Radical right" has the coordinates 5,0, I'm at 3, 0.75-- slightly libertarian. Anything up to 2,1 is still a centrist, according to the diagram.
Actually this site calls you an.
Economic Conservative
"Description: You want significantly less meddling by government in economic affairs, but a bit more government meddling in other matters. You fit in the Reagan-Goldwater wing of the Republican party. So, you probably approve of half or so of the Republicans in office, while you might consider others to be RINOs (Republicans in Name Only). "
And I am supposedly a Small Government Centrist... Seems about right...
"Description: You want the government a bit smaller overall than what we have not, but not a whole lot smaller. Usually you could get what you want with a nearly equal mix of Democrats and Republican, if they are the correct Democrats and Republicans. A random selection of each leads to bigger government. Be choosy.
Or you could add a few Libertarians to that equal mix of Democrats and Republicans. "
Man... I think these folks no me... :-)
The way he "pigeonholes" me as an "economic conservative" doesn't make sense, according to his description. And reading his prescriptions on other issues tells me WHY it doesn't make sense, because most of the rest don't make sense, either. Maybe that also explains why I didn't find the correct "solutions" among the many answers on the quiz.
I will give you this: I consider myself a social conservative, an economic conservative, and a national security conservative. Those were the three "legs" of Ronald Reagan's "stool of support." Now, what that means in terms of goals and how those goals can best be reached via policy are, unfortunately, not formulaically derived directly from those pigeonhole positions, and must be discussed on an issue-by-issue basis.
For example, tax reform via the FAIR tax would insure that illegal immigrants and drug dealers pay taxes, but would it also make them eligible for the prebate, so that illegal immigrants got taxpayer "subsidies" just to live here? That's one of the author's suggestions.
Jerry,
The other options in that area.
Radical Conservative
Social Conservative
After years of writing back and forth with you... I think you are about where these 3 types of Conservative come together.
Now I am also curious where Laurie, Sean and Moose fit into this diagram... Hiram always puzzles me so I do not even know where to start.
Social Liberal
"Description:You want government out of people's personal lives, but desire more government control over people's economic activities. This puts you somewhere between the Democratic, Green and Libertarian Party positions."
Economic Liberal
"Description: You want government out of your personal life, at least to some degree. But you want more government intervention in the economy. Politically, you appear to be a solid Democrat, or beyond."
Radical Liberal
"You want government out of your personal life. On the other hand, you want more government in your economic life. This puts you closest to either the Green Party or the radical wing of the Democratic Party. You might even consider yourself a socialist, or a “true” communist (as opposed to the “state capitalists” who ran the old Soviet Union)."
And here is and interesting twist to consider.
Communitarian
"Description: The needs of society trump the whims of the individual members. At least that is what your answers indicate. Communitarianism is the norm in traditional societies, where there is agreement on community values. Where there are multiple cultures under the same government, communitarianism is rather more challenging. Whose standards do you enforce? Who gets to control the economy?
While there is no major communitarian political party in the United States, there are plenty of communitarians running under the banner of both the major parties. You just need to look at the candidates individually.
Campaign 2016
Good new for you: both major parties have nominated big government Presidential candidates! The Era of Small Government is over! (Unless a third party candidate sneaks in.) Take your pick:"
Personally I think Laurie is an Economic Liberal... She seems okay with government control as long as the government is active in redistributing wealth from the successful to the unsuccessful.
As for Sean, Moose and Hiram... I just do not know... They spend too much time criticizing me to get a good read on what they truly want and believe in. They are likely somewhere near Laurie if they all support Universal Healthcare that is managed by the government...
Two big government candidates? Have you seen Trump's budget proposal, and the screaming hissy fits it has induced with its modest reductions?
I got Left-Leaning Centrist.
"Usually you could get what you want with a nearly equal mix of Democrats and Republican, if they are the correct Democrats and Republicans. "
I'd love to hear who your "correct Democrats" are, John.
Jerry,
On the other hand he is increasing the military... The total "cost of government" is staying BIG. Just think 10 years to get to no deficit if we attain a miraculous growth rate of 3% / year for 10 years... Not good.
Sean,
Well if you float over the Representatives who are in the area near Colin Peterson on the graph, you likely have some idea who the moderate Democrats are....
For the Senate look who is in the area with Joe Donnelly apparently.
Sean,
Given that you seem to support changing Healthcare to give government more money and more power and seem to support large Light Rail investments, you must be at the far Left of that zone.
Liberal Leaning Centrist
"Your views call for roughly same amount of government and liberty that we have today, with a bit more personal liberty but more government involvement in the economy."
Just for easy comparison.
"Social Liberal: You want government out of people's personal lives, but desire more government control over people's economic activities. This puts you somewhere between the Democratic, Green and Libertarian Party positions."
Economic Liberal: You want government out of your personal life, at least to some degree. But you want more government intervention in the economy. Politically, you appear to be a solid Democrat, or beyond."
Gods, I despise categories like this. Who cares? You're usually wrong; I'm usually right. Isn't that how this goes?
Moose
"Given that you seem to support changing Healthcare to give government more money and more power and seem to support large Light Rail investments, you must be at the far Left of that zone."
I've told you what I would do in regards to health care. You don't have to guess.
Moose,
Remember my site's purpose. "Raising social involvement, self awareness and self improvement topics, because our communities are the sum of our personal beliefs, behaviors, action or inaction. Only "we" can improve our family, work place, school, city, country, etc."
Don't you have any interest in digging deeper into why you believe what you do? And contemplating if it really makes sense? Eulogy Exercise
I am mean Jerry swears that I am wrong most of the time and he is on the far other side of the diagram from you. I find this interesting.
Sean, If I remember correctly it was something like the German system. Correct?
If not please forgive and remind me, I have a hard time keeping track of each person's exact position on each topic.
Compartmentalizing isn't the same as contemplating. In fact, in some respects, it's the opposite.
Sean,
Remember that this whole post started in part because Moose told me that I was not a Centrist... Which indicated to me that they were unaware of how the citizens of America are truly distributed.
And I think many Americans are in the same boat. They hang with people similar to themselves, watch news that resonates with them, etc. So they start to see themselves as a "normal / centrist" American, when in reality they may be off to one side or the other. Being willing to truly see how one's beliefs relate to our society is a willingness to increase one's self awareness.
Just think of the number of times I have been called a Conservative by the people on the Left and a Liberal by the people on the Right.
I don't care what label or compartment I fit in. I only care that I believe my positions to be moral and upright. As do you.
Moose
Actually I hope for so much more... I hope my positions:
1. push/pull people to make good responsible decisions, maximize their potential and enable them to be healthy happy independent and collaborative citizens.
2. push/pull people to be excellent responsible self disciplined caring Parents who help their children to grow into the above.
3. Ensure that the American economy stays strong, creative and vibrant so our citizens can maintain an excellent standard of living, and we have enough extra to keep helping people around the world with security and stabilization efforts.
4. Accomplishing this with the lowest amount of government "financial burden" as possible so the citizens have more to spend as they wish.
Unfortunately being moral and upright is very relative in nature. You see government / tax payers feeding the dependent healthy folks with no expectations from them as moral and upright, where as I see it as promoting generational dependency / poverty which is the cruelest thing one can do.
Not to mention that it makes achieving goals 1 - 4 nearly impossible.
Remember one of my favorite books.
Lifes Greatest Lessons by Hal Urban
Moose,
Here is a golden oldie for your consideration.
G2A G2A Beliefs, Environment and Choice
The most amusing thing about it is that Jerry tries to defend that who he is has little to do with where he was born, what his Parents believed, what his peers believed, what religion they were, etc.
By the way... Jon is now Hiram...
"Sean, If I remember correctly it was something like the German system. Correct?"
No. I think you can make some changes to the ACA to make it work much better. Here are four such changes that could make an impact right away:
* I would extend the subsidies beyond their current cutoff point to limit some of the impact on those who are being impacted by the rising individual market premiums. The current cutoff point is around $90,000 income for a family of 4, I would extend that up to $250,000 with the subsidies having less value the further you move up the scale.
* I would increase penalties on those who choose to go uninsured, or alternatively, institute automatic enrollment in Medicaid or a public option (see below).
* I would institute a public option (allow people to buy into Medicaid or Medicare) at first in areas where there is only one private insurance option and to cover those who don't purchase insurance on their own if automatic enrollment were selected.
* I would reinstate risk corridor payments in areas where there are low amounts of competition.
"The most amusing thing about it is that Jerry tries to defend that who he is has little to do with where he was born,..."
So, do I amuse you? Why should I need to "defend" the values with which I was raised, or the values I subsequently acquired, or the common sense issue positions I take simply because of what I consider good reason? It's amusing you think that matters.
I'm with Moose on this one. I am what I am.
Sean,
That sounds worthy of further discussion. Maybe in a future post.
Jerry,
You know I always find the way people think and rationalize amusing. I have no desire for you to defend your values.
I am very certain that if you had been born in a small impoverished Taliban village, you would have been a very different person with different beliefs, values, priorities, etc.
My simple point is that most of us think of ourselves as self made individuals who are open minded and rational. And the reality is that much of our perspective is based on pure luck...
I find it fascinating that a Conservative like yourself could have easily ended up a Liberal like Moose if you had lived their life.
That is of course unless you think genetics determines beliefs, behaviors, rationale, etc...
Perhaps Moose and I simply illustrate the old Churchill quote, “If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”
The desire to see the world "as it ought to be" is based on the hope for one's future, whereas the desire to see things "as they were" is based on having lived long enough to know.
Are you saying that Laurie, Sean and Hiram have "no brain". That's not very nice. :-)
The reality is that there are a lot of old smart Liberals out there and you could have been one except for some twists of luck.
Hi Moose,
Just for curiosity. If you are willing to share, what is your approx. age, sex and family status? It helps our perspective.
'Perhaps Moose and I simply illustrate the old Churchill quote, “If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart; if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”'
No. If anything, I've become more progressive and liberal as I get older and continue to watch the ways in which Conservatives and Republicans show us their contempt for the poor and working class.
Moose
Stones from the centrist? Are you saying I have no brain? Not very nice.
And Moose clearly illustrates the problem in having a rational conversation. Conservatives RESPECT the poor and working class, and consider them capable of handling freedom, and of making their own way in the world. Liberals want to "warehouse" the poor dears and make their decisions for them. And are perfectly happy forcing others to pay for their "compassion."
Sorry, I don't mean to be insulting, but that's how I have to see it.
"Conservatives RESPECT the poor and working class..."
Their budgets suggest otherwise.
You put the individual ahead of the community. Liberals believe both are equally important.
Moose
And no, I am saying that Churchill was generalizing and not necessarily correct.
And you have a brain, however it was programmed at a very young age with concepts, beliefs, logic, etc that may be correct or incorrect. And that early hard wire programming, confirmation bias and random events have built on that early programming to make you who you are today.
By the way, technically that is how you "choose" to see it.
Moose, so the only way to show compassion for the poor is to steal from the rich and redistribute wealth? How about accepting that we should be helping these folks to reach their full human dignity and potential? Good for them, better for the society as a whole.
John, the only thing I will agree with in your description is "confirmation bias," and that assumes that I have developed a viewpoint on the issues already. I cannot "choose" to see it any other way unless somebody (hint, hint) offers overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Just saying "you're an evil conservative" doesn't cut it.
"How about accepting that we should be helping these folks to reach their full human dignity and potential?"
And apparently, the only way to do that is to take away benefits from the poor, elderly, and working class and give the richest of the rich more money. Wealth redistribution is what happens in a community. If we don't all share in the community's wealth...which was created in part because of the community...then we are not a community.
Moose
Hi Moose,
"Conservatives and Republicans show us their contempt for the poor and working class"
Contempt: 1. The feeling with which a person regards anything considered mean, vile, or worthless; disdain; scorn.
The strange thing about your belief system is that most of the Conservatives and Republicans are working class citizens. It is the Democrats who have the educationally elite on their side... PEW Party ID That is why they do not support having their taxes raised in order to feed, clothe, house and provide healthcare to those who choose to not learn, work and strive to self sufficient.
Can one actually be contemptuous of oneself?
Hi Jerry,
Then I will continue to be amused... :-)
"It is the Democrats who have the educationally elite on their side..."
This becomes clearer with each passing day.
Your attempts to define everything and put everything in a box are meaningless here.
Moose
Moose,
Maybe Jerry is on to something...
Contempt: 1. The feeling with which a person regards anything considered mean, vile, or worthless; disdain; scorn.
Maybe it is the Liberals who consider the poor so worthless, that they just want to keep them fed and ignore them. Kind of like pets. Maybe they don't think they can learn, improve, make better decisions and become healthy happy independent citizens...
Maybe we should change your phrase to say... "Conservatives and Republicans show us their RESPECT for the poor and working class.
Moose,
Oh come now... Where did the quizzes put you on the charts? My curiosity is killing me...
Since I have a BS, MS and MBA degree... I have spent a lot of time with the educational elites of America and was not terribly impressed with many of them... Some of my farmer friends are much wiser in the ways that matter...
By the way, was your last comment meant to be contemptuous of the folks who are not the educationally elite? It sounded kind of that way...
"Some of my farmer friends are much wiser in the ways that matter..."
Like the Arts?
"Maybe it is the Liberals who consider the poor so worthless, that they just want to keep them fed and ignore them."
Liberals aren't the ones trying to take away the one helping hand people can get from the government (their fellow citizens).
Liberals didn't and don't fight tooth and nail to deprive people of their rights (Marriage, voting, health care...among many other things).
Liberals aren't the ones working to take away health insurance from 51 million people in the next 10 years.
Liberals aren't the ones working against municipalities being able to set minimum wage for their citizens.
Liberals aren't the ones fighting mass transit.
Liberals ARE the ones working to make sure that EVERYONE has a voice, EVERYONE is taken care of when they need to be taken care of, and that EVERYONE can either receive the health care they need or afford insurance for it.
Moose
Well we have confirmed that you are definitely on the left side of the diagram.
Keep up the good work!!!
By the way, there are some Conservatives who are power hungry and do things I disagree with. Just as there are Liberals who do the same.
Now where do you fit... It is an interesting puzzle...
"Social Liberal: You want government out of people's personal lives, but desire more government control over people's economic activities. This puts you somewhere between the Democratic, Green and Libertarian Party positions."
Economic Liberal: You want government out of your personal life, at least to some degree. But you want more government intervention in the economy. Politically, you appear to be a solid Democrat, or beyond.
Radical Liberal: You want government out of your personal life. On the other hand, you want more government in your economic life. This puts you closest to either the Green Party or the radical wing of the Democratic Party. You might even consider yourself a socialist, or a “true” communist (as opposed to the “state capitalists” who ran the old Soviet Union)."
Then again... Sean scored a Centrist Liberal and I think he would agree with many of your comments.. So who knows...
I suppose it is just a matter of magnitude... How much of our lives and control is willing to give over to the bureaucrats and politicians...
A timely interesting example.
"If we don't all share in the community's wealth..." -- Moose
Great idea, so long as we all share in PRODUCING the community's wealth.
Post a Comment