What philosophy do you hold?

[Avocado]

I am personally a Social Democrat. That means I am a Capitalist who believes in some redistrubution of wealth as well as some public services to ensure economic opportunity. In the United States, that is a far left idea, and is technically what Bernie Sanders ran on (though he incorrectly labeled himself a Democratic Socialist, which is a little further left and wants to get rid of capitalism democratically). Globally, my position is a centrist one.

 

[Blacksheep2017]

That means I am a Capitalist who believes in some redistrubution of wealth as well as some public services to ensure economic opportunity.

Can you elaborate? In what ways do you believe in redistribution of wealth and public services? As in expansion of earned income tax credits or doctors providing free care to low income individuals?

 

[Avocado]

Can you elaborate? In what ways do you believe in redistribution of wealth and public services? As in expansion of earned income tax credits or doctors providing free care to low income individuals?

Both of those things, and a well funded social safety net so that if you try to better yourself and fail, your life isn't horrible. Of course, no system is perfect and even under my best-case system some people still wouldn't work who could work, but I believe a Social Democratic system would best solve our issues.

 

[Blacksheep2017]

Both of those things, and a well funded social safety net so that if you try to better yourself and fail, your life isn't horrible. Of course, no system is perfect and even under my best-case system some people still wouldn't work who could work, but I believe a Social Democratic system would best solve our issues.

Well, the only issue I see with that system, is that it takes out the incentive for anyone to excel or aspire for anything. Not everyone thinks of others before themselves. If we lived in a totally selfless society, then sure, it may work. But it's an unrealistic expectation of humanity. I mean, if doctors had to go through 8 years of college plus 2-4 year residencies just to provide free health care, would you go through the trouble? Probably not. It's also sort of modern day slavery to force people of higher education and occupation to give away their services just because there's a low income class. The choice to volunteer is theirs. And I believe a lot of them do. It shouldn't be required of them. They have student loans to repay, they have families too. Why should you or the leader of this country decide how they live and serve? Keep in mind, that some people in that low income class are there by choice.

Is it difficult to escape poverty? Hell yeah. I've been trying to get out of it for years and change my family's future. I want my children and their children to never have to experience the difficulties of poverty. I came from a family who simply didn't care about bettering themselves. They took their government aid and pretty much wasted their lives. I was just never meant for that life. I didn't get a dime for college. I owe $104k for a bachelors degree. I did end up purchasing a nice home in a desirable neighborhood and I own a business that is doing fairly well. I did all of that on my own. And it's hard to sell your ideology to people like me.

One of the greatest things about our country, is that anyone (with enough hard work) can accomplish most of the things they want to. Do we have an issue with corporate and political corruption? Absolutely! The 1% in this country are stomping all over the working citizens and totally benefiting from their misfortune. The problem is policy. These people have been able to avoid paying a fair share of taxes. There's legal tax loopholes that allow them to get away with this. Hell, I think my business tax percentage is higher than some of these multibillion dollar corps. My tax percentage is about 30% of my income. That's crazy! I'm literally taking money out of my daughter's future to give more back to fellow Americans. I personally believe that everyone should pay the same tax percentage. A flat tax rate. That way, if you're low income, you can still afford your share. And billionaires, well, they'd finally have to pay up. If you walk on these sidewalks, drive in these streets, flush your crap down a public plumbing system...you should have to contribute like everyone else.

There's a lot of problems in our society. But we have to stop treating the symptoms and actually cure the cause. Taking money from one person's pocket to give to another is not the answer. Socialism only works as long as someone is paying for it. When that money runs out, it fails. And honestly, who would want to aspire for greatness in a socialistic society? Our healthcare quality would decline because people would simply stop fulfilling those positions. I do believe, however, that healthcare should be a right. If you don't have your health, you have nothing. But so much corruption engulfs the government that it will take a very long time to clean house. Libertarianism is my cup of tea.

 

[Avocado]

Well, the only issue I see with that system, is that it takes out the incentive for anyone to excel or aspire for anything. Not everyone thinks of others before themselves. If we lived in a totally selfless society, then sure, it may work. But it's an unrealistic expectation of humanity. I mean, if doctors had to go through 8 years of college plus 2-4 year residencies just to provide free health care, would you go through the trouble? Probably not. It's also sort of modern day slavery to force people of higher education and occupation to give away their services just because there's a low income class. The choice to volunteer is theirs. And I believe a lot of them do. It shouldn't be required of them. They have student loans to repay, they have families too. Why should you or the leader of this country decide how they live and serve? Keep in mind, that some people in that low income class are there by choice.

Is it difficult to escape poverty? Hell yeah. I've been trying to get out of it for years and change my family's future. I want my children and their children to never have to experience the difficulties of poverty. I came from a family who simply didn't care about bettering themselves. They took their government aid and pretty much wasted their lives. I was just never meant for that life. I didn't get a dime for college. I owe $104k for a bachelors degree. I did end up purchasing a nice home in a desirable neighborhood and I own a business that is doing fairly well. I did all of that on my own. And it's hard to sell your ideology to people like me.

One of the greatest things about our country, is that anyone (with enough hard work) can accomplish most of the things they want to. Do we have an issue with corporate and political corruption? Absolutely! The 1% in this country are stomping all over the working citizens and totally benefiting from their misfortune. The problem is policy. These people have been able to avoid paying a fair share of taxes. There's legal tax loopholes that allow them to get away with this. Hell, I think my business tax percentage is higher than some of these multibillion dollar corps. My tax percentage is about 30% of my income. That's crazy! I'm literally taking money out of my daughter's future to give more back to fellow Americans. I personally believe that everyone should pay the same tax percentage. A flat tax rate. That way, if you're low income, you can still afford your share. And billionaires, well, they'd finally have to pay up. If you walk on these sidewalks, drive in these streets, flush your crap down a public plumbing system...you should have to contribute like everyone else.

There's a lot of problems in our society. But we have to stop treating the symptoms and actually cure the cause. Taking money from one person's pocket to give to another is not the answer. Socialism only works as long as someone is paying for it. When that money runs out, it fails. And honestly, who would want to aspire for greatness in a socialistic society? Our healthcare quality would decline because people would simply stop fulfilling those positions. I do believe, however, that healthcare should be a right. If you don't have your health, you have nothing. But so much corruption engulfs the government that it will take a very long time to clean house. Libertarianism is my cup of tea.

I will take some time to read through this more carefully and give you a better response. You cover a lot of good points. I am an ENFP and suffer from both a draw to discuss BIG ISSUES and a very short attention span at the same time. I will say this before I start typing up my second response to this, though--I am sympathetic to Libertarianism, even if I cannot call myself a true Libertarian. In my experience, Libertarians offer the best critiques of my ideas, so I like to keep them around.

 

[Typh0n]

I am a classical liberal. I could say libertarian but NOT anarchist. I am basically a libertarian of the lesser extreme variety, as I believe the state is legitimate, just that it's role should mainly be defense, courts, the law and police. Everything else is secondary and could be provided by private services. Though I am not for cutting all other public services overnight, as that would lead to a revolution...it is my hope that people will learn to rely less on government for most services, and would see that government is not the only thing that can provide these types of services. I think it is possible to change society in this regard, but not overnight. People themselves have to want it, and understand why it's better.

I wouldn't classify my stance as right wing or left wing, but I understand that you mean just economics. It's kinda hard to come up with a perfect model when it comes to politics, especially for the enitre world...

 

[Typh0n]

Well, the only issue I see with that system, is that it takes out the incentive for anyone to excel or aspire for anything. Not everyone thinks of others before themselves. If we lived in a totally selfless society, then sure, it may work. But it's an unrealistic expectation of humanity. I mean, if doctors had to go through 8 years of college plus 2-4 year residencies just to provide free health care, would you go through the trouble? Probably not. It's also sort of modern day slavery to force people of higher education and occupation to give away their services just because there's a low income class. The choice to volunteer is theirs. And I believe a lot of them do. It shouldn't be required of them. They have student loans to repay, they have families too. Why should you or the leader of this country decide how they live and serve? Keep in mind, that some people in that low income class are there by choice.

Is it difficult to escape poverty? Hell yeah. I've been trying to get out of it for years and change my family's future. I want my children and their children to never have to experience the difficulties of poverty. I came from a family who simply didn't care about bettering themselves. They took their government aid and pretty much wasted their lives. I was just never meant for that life. I didn't get a dime for college. I owe $104k for a bachelors degree. I did end up purchasing a nice home in a desirable neighborhood and I own a business that is doing fairly well. I did all of that on my own. And it's hard to sell your ideology to people like me.

One of the greatest things about our country, is that anyone (with enough hard work) can accomplish most of the things they want to. Do we have an issue with corporate and political corruption? Absolutely! The 1% in this country are stomping all over the working citizens and totally benefiting from their misfortune. The problem is policy. These people have been able to avoid paying a fair share of taxes. There's legal tax loopholes that allow them to get away with this. Hell, I think my business tax percentage is higher than some of these multibillion dollar corps. My tax percentage is about 30% of my income. That's crazy! I'm literally taking money out of my daughter's future to give more back to fellow Americans. I personally believe that everyone should pay the same tax percentage. A flat tax rate. That way, if you're low income, you can still afford your share. And billionaires, well, they'd finally have to pay up. If you walk on these sidewalks, drive in these streets, flush your crap down a public plumbing system...you should have to contribute like everyone else.

There's a lot of problems in our society. But we have to stop treating the symptoms and actually cure the cause. Taking money from one person's pocket to give to another is not the answer. Socialism only works as long as someone is paying for it. When that money runs out, it fails. And honestly, who would want to aspire for greatness in a socialistic society? Our healthcare quality would decline because people would simply stop fulfilling those positions. I do believe, however, that healthcare should be a right. If you don't have your health, you have nothing. But so much corruption engulfs the government that it will take a very long time to clean house. Libertarianism is my cup of tea.

I think like you, I don't think wealth redistribution and social democracy is actually good for the poor.

I live in Belgium, and when it comes to poverty I have known many people who spoil their lives with no motivation and just get checks from the government every month and smoke pot in their spare time. Yet, there is no threat of homelessness, just no possibility to climb the ladder either. There are no economic oppurtunities, despite the country being fairly wealthy. The wealth of the country stays with the same people. There is no mobility. Yet there is redistribution, but it serves no purpose because it is creation of wealth, not division of wealth, that allows people to change their lot in life. I have known some people out here in Belgium who have gone from being on welfare to getting jobs, but nothing extraodrinary; it won't allow them to buy a house anytime soon. If I choose to stay in Belgium, I can't realize my dreams even taking advantage of every loophope in the system, and I'm definitely not a cheater.

I grew up in America and economic oppurtunities are abundant there. Not sure how I feel about healthcare, but I understand that people can get cancer, need heart surgey etc, so I can see a good arguement for government aid in those situations. But overrall, I am very much against wealth redistribution, because I feel it doesn't truly benefit the poor. It only benefits them short-term, but like Bastiat said, a good economist has to look at the long-term effect of an economic policy, not just the short-term.

Don't get me wrong Belgium is ok to live in, I mean you have your basic liberal freedoms and all that, it's not a dictatorship, but the economic oppurtunities are not what they in the States.

 

[Dreamer]

I am a classical liberal. I could say libertarian but NOT anarchist. I am basically a libertarian of the lesser extreme variety, as I believe the state is legitimate, just that it's role should mainly be defense, courts, the law and police. Everything else is secondary and could be provided by private services. Though I am not for cutting all other public services overnight, as that would lead to a revolution...it is hope that people will learn to rely less on government for most services, and would see that government is not the only thing that can provide these types of services. I think it is possible to change society in this regard, but not overnight. People themselves have to want it, and understand why it's better.

I wouldn't classify my stance as right wing or left wing, but I understand that you mean just economics. It's kinda hard to come up with a perfect model when it comes to politics, especially for the enitre world...

My thoughts essentially align directly with yours. The point about people wanting change enough to enact it themselves is also so critical as you point out. Handouts just don't work, whether that comes from the government or from a local church. I see them more as "band-aid" solutions. They'll stop minor bleeding, like if someone is temporarily in a tight pinch financially, but they won't do a thing to solve larger issues. There absolutely HAS to be that personal, internal drive and motivation to want to do better, for any external aid to actually be effective in the long run.

This is actually where I run into the biggest (sorry, about to take this train on another rail and will no longer relate to your post Typh0n, just thought I'd throw a disclaimer haha) issue with trying to understand the logic behind grand socialist experiments and these idealistic utopian ideas some people seem to be infatuated with. I'm sure some elements within those lines are highly plausible, but to me, such grandeur is only ever possible WITHOUT involving actual people into the mix. If everyone all thought the same and had very similar ideals, then sure, but we just don't. Now, apply this critique to the extreme opposite end, with no government, and that doesn't work either, and in different ways, though ultimately the same, that model too, disregards actual human participation.

Trying to find that sweet spot though, that's the holy grail.

I'm interested in returning to this thread later to see where the discussion goes, but I'm at work now and shouldn't be on my phone, whoops!

 

[ilikeitlikethat]

I'm one of Mama Kin's children.

"Mama Kin" is Steven Tyler's idea of a spiritual force that drives creativity and pleasure. "Keep in touch with Mama Kin" means remembering the desires that drive you to excel.
Mama Kin by Aerosmith Songfacts

 

[Obfuscate]

why not include other as an option? none of the options are accurate for me...

 

[Avocado]

My thoughts essentially align directly with yours. The point about people wanting change enough to enact it themselves is also so critical as you point out. Handouts just don't work, whether that comes from the government or from a local church. I see them more as "band-aid" solutions. They'll stop minor bleeding, like if someone is temporarily in a tight pinch financially, but they won't do a thing to solve larger issues. There absolutely HAS to be that personal, internal drive and motivation to want to do better, for any external aid to actually be effective in the long run.

This is actually where I run into the biggest (sorry, about to take this train on another rail and will no longer relate to your post Typh0n, just thought I'd throw a disclaimer haha) issue with trying to understand the logic behind grand socialist experiments and these idealistic utopian ideas some people seem to be infatuated with. I'm sure some elements within those lines are highly plausible, but to me, such grandeur is only ever possible WITHOUT involving actual people into the mix. If everyone all thought the same and had very similar ideals, then sure, but we just don't. Now, apply this critique to the extreme opposite end, with no government, and that doesn't work either, and in different ways, though ultimately the same, that model too, disregards actual human participation.

Trying to find that sweet spot though, that's the holy grail.

I'm interested in returning to this thread later to see where the discussion goes, but I'm at work now and shouldn't be on my phone, whoops!

The best I've found is Milton Friedman's begative income tax. Look it up. Milton Friedman is even on youtube where he describes it in 1968.

 

[Dreamer]

The best I've found is Milton Friedman's begative income tax. Look it up. Milton Friedman is even on youtube where he describes it in 1968.

Will do, thanks!

 

[Gunboat Diplomat]

Can America 2017 be classified as centre, or even centre-right?

 

[Wunjo]

None. I have never entitled myself to a philosophical foundation, for I think at some point every man and woman has their own paths towards the way of forming themselves and no philosophy can be a substitute for the own self-reflexive thought that grows through this process. The philosophies that we mostly adopt, or integrate in our beings are the self-reflexive thoughts of others, I am not denying the fact that they can be very helpful, but I see no point in endorsing one or denying another since when they are out of their helpfulness, they'll only prevent human beings from developing their own set of thoughts. No philosophy is stable enough in the face of chaos.

...

Oh, the thread was about politics? Bummer. Politics are a bore, for a moment I thought we were talking about philosophy.

Besides, a moderator should move the thread imo, apparently it does not belong here.

 

[Siúil a Rúin]

I don't personally believe in any one "ideology" in the political realm because I see each ideology as taking on a different form when overlaid onto an existing culture. There are some cultures where Libertarianism works best, some where Socialism works best. Each ideology takes on a fundamentally different nature based on the values, the ideals, the family structures, the social assumptions of a culture.

There are more core values that I believe can apply to humanity, but the application of these can be quite different based on the culture and needs of a given society. I value freedom as important for human beings to become fully who they are. People have a right to make their own mistakes. People should be entitled to their own bodies and choices to define who they are. I believe in compassion for the vulnerable and for the innocent. I believe that cruelty towards innocent beings must be stopped. Reverence for life is important for all beings.

 

[wool]

Besides, a moderator should move the thread imo, apparently it does not belong here.

Why would a philosophy thread not belong in the philosophy forum?

 

[Wunjo]

Why would a philosophy thread not belong in the philosophy forum?

Comparing quantity, the political content is much more heavier than the philosophical one, that's why.

 

[wool]

Comparing quantity, the political content is much more heavier than the philosophical one, that's why.

Political philosophy is not philosophy?

 

[Wunjo]

Political philosophy is not philosophy?

Politics and political philosophy are two different things, I am not talking about political philosophy, I am talking about politics. If I was talking about political philosophy, I'd not leave it in the fog.

The content relies more on politics and economics, rather than a philosophy of an ideology or a political stance.

 

[Doctor Cringelord]

other