Hey guys, I'm new to this forum. I hail from Hong Kong and Norway but I identify more with American values in general.
What kind of opinions do I have?
I'm an economic centrist, that is I believe in both the right to own property (extended to its logical conclusion of owning islands-planets-galaxies) but also in the need to fund programs to allow everyone the chance to achieve prosperity (that is, I am VERY pro-work (I believe in extremely well funded programs to allow everything from gifted to retarded children become useful, contributing members of society).
I am a warhawk, though apparently the political thingamajiggies say I'm just a neo-conservative, but that's probably because they didn't pose more radical questions.
The difficult part of my equation is I am both a social conservative and a liberal. Both my parents are lifelong missionaries, and my social values are conservative, for example I believe that if a Church branch or the Boy Scouts want to keep out homosexuals than that is their choice, but vice versa that banning other Churches from allowing them in or even not allowing them to have civil unions is horrible discrimination. Another example is I believe Affirmative Action is evil because it takes from specific people rather than society at large. MLK suggested a one-off compensation of 50billion USD so I believe that adjusting for inflation that'd be a nice way to put it behind America permanently (of course pro-work and training programs for all (including the rich (it is an insult to tax some more than others and then not even allow them the use of such programs, should we set aside specific roads for poor people?) should take the place of racist poverty alleviation). I believe that guns, drugs, public nakedness, etc. should all be allowed - but this is a opinion I hold that is tempered to a strong degree by utilitarianism (a stronger version of realism/realpolitik) under the condition that such behavior not be taken to harmful degrees.
I believe in a simple, flat taxation system as we have in Hong Kong, but at a much higher rate than we have here. I think a 30% flat tax on personal income, no VAT, no corporate tax, no tolls, no this no that (doesn't the US spend like ca. 3% of its GDP on tax annually?). Some will think this would favor the rich, but I believe that the majority of those 30% should be spent on programs that are available to everyone, including the rich, but many of which are aimed towards the poor.
For example food prices or college education could be pushed way down, and this would benefit the poor more than the rich, but the symbolic importance of not discriminating the rich by allowing them the same benefits is important I believe.
Another thing that'd be great I think is a set citizen's salary (in addition to such essential spending as defense, road building, utilities, etc.) instead of such programs as above, this is an idea from the Centrist party 'Venstre' in Norway (which means 'left' literally, but it's an ancient party, it's considered 'social burgoise' these days) in which all social support is wiped clean off the slate, saving a load of money, and instead being used to give everyone, even adolescents of majority a set amount of money to dispose off as they wish (in Norway it'd be a pretty high sum, but that's because we're 'filthy' rich with resources
. Once again this would be available to the rich as well. I know it screams communist but it really is very centrist, at least in a European sense... for those Republicans who'll scream blue murder, you'd never have to pay for Medicare and Medicaid again, there'd just be a flat tax, some of which is spent on essential, state-run projects (not that I'm saying contractors don't do a lot of good for the military, they're definitely better than allied troops who sit and smoke and drink while others are fighting) like roads and the military and utilities and some of it is redistributed in a social manner... but giving everyone responsibility beyond that.
So basically I'm a socially conservative liberal warhawk who believes in a flat tax of 30% and a simplified welfare system (I have to agree the current one is a ponzi scheme, but only because it started off the wrong way, paying out immediately rather than paying out investments).
Regulation? Eh, well... I believe in being responsible for what we do, and that includes corporations, but sometimes the state needs to intervene to stop stupidity happening, but then again stupidity is often the domain of the state... guess I'm a moderate there as well.
Oh right, why am I a warhawk?
I believe war is very often just. And that it can also be profitable. I believe that if it was politically possible it'd be a kind act for example of the US for example to invade Cuba and Venezuela and integrate them into the US and re-educate them into good citizens (not as hard as some people might think if it's done with overwhelming force and cleverly and with patience). It'd solve the growth and outsourcing program. Of course they'd probably still vote too far to the left... yes, I am also not a firm believer in universal democracy. I think Singapore, while going too far with their fascism, has a good system. I've often described myself as a semi-fascist.
The problem with fascism is of course that it is abused far more often than democracy is, but authoritarianism (while I believe in many liberal values) CAN be VERY efficient, of course most of the time the wrong people end up in charge. If you chop down the forest of laws that guard the country both the Lord and the Devil can get to you real fast after all, lol.
To quote Heinlein, these days every human with a pulse may vote, but then again I agree not letting them vote is their right to political self-determination.
So I guess I'm really more of a democrat with some fascist influences. But most people are, fascism is a pejorative these days but is after all only the belief that some people are better at ruling than others and that some people should be allowed to vote while other's shouldn't. In essence to deny criminals and children the right to vote is fascist.
But to get back on the war bit, I think some regimes are very evil and should be utterly and efficiently crushed and dragged kicking and screaming into the golden age of technology (that is if we get cold or hot fusion going soon (some rumours cold fusion might be available soon) or else we're running out of maritime food stocks, arable land, water resources and will face falling living standards outside of technological fields after roughly 2030. This statement does not mean I'm an enviro-nut, for example I do agree Al Gore is a liar.)
Anyway,
Sincere Regards to You All ^^ even the ones I begin quarreling with : )
Here are some interesting but only partly relevant sources/links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/apollo.htm, http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/
http://www.photius.com/rankings/gdp_...rojection.html
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstud...ature_k_4.html
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...nits=b&fy=fy11
What kind of opinions do I have?
I'm an economic centrist, that is I believe in both the right to own property (extended to its logical conclusion of owning islands-planets-galaxies) but also in the need to fund programs to allow everyone the chance to achieve prosperity (that is, I am VERY pro-work (I believe in extremely well funded programs to allow everything from gifted to retarded children become useful, contributing members of society).
I am a warhawk, though apparently the political thingamajiggies say I'm just a neo-conservative, but that's probably because they didn't pose more radical questions.
The difficult part of my equation is I am both a social conservative and a liberal. Both my parents are lifelong missionaries, and my social values are conservative, for example I believe that if a Church branch or the Boy Scouts want to keep out homosexuals than that is their choice, but vice versa that banning other Churches from allowing them in or even not allowing them to have civil unions is horrible discrimination. Another example is I believe Affirmative Action is evil because it takes from specific people rather than society at large. MLK suggested a one-off compensation of 50billion USD so I believe that adjusting for inflation that'd be a nice way to put it behind America permanently (of course pro-work and training programs for all (including the rich (it is an insult to tax some more than others and then not even allow them the use of such programs, should we set aside specific roads for poor people?) should take the place of racist poverty alleviation). I believe that guns, drugs, public nakedness, etc. should all be allowed - but this is a opinion I hold that is tempered to a strong degree by utilitarianism (a stronger version of realism/realpolitik) under the condition that such behavior not be taken to harmful degrees.
I believe in a simple, flat taxation system as we have in Hong Kong, but at a much higher rate than we have here. I think a 30% flat tax on personal income, no VAT, no corporate tax, no tolls, no this no that (doesn't the US spend like ca. 3% of its GDP on tax annually?). Some will think this would favor the rich, but I believe that the majority of those 30% should be spent on programs that are available to everyone, including the rich, but many of which are aimed towards the poor.
For example food prices or college education could be pushed way down, and this would benefit the poor more than the rich, but the symbolic importance of not discriminating the rich by allowing them the same benefits is important I believe.
Another thing that'd be great I think is a set citizen's salary (in addition to such essential spending as defense, road building, utilities, etc.) instead of such programs as above, this is an idea from the Centrist party 'Venstre' in Norway (which means 'left' literally, but it's an ancient party, it's considered 'social burgoise' these days) in which all social support is wiped clean off the slate, saving a load of money, and instead being used to give everyone, even adolescents of majority a set amount of money to dispose off as they wish (in Norway it'd be a pretty high sum, but that's because we're 'filthy' rich with resources
. Once again this would be available to the rich as well. I know it screams communist but it really is very centrist, at least in a European sense... for those Republicans who'll scream blue murder, you'd never have to pay for Medicare and Medicaid again, there'd just be a flat tax, some of which is spent on essential, state-run projects (not that I'm saying contractors don't do a lot of good for the military, they're definitely better than allied troops who sit and smoke and drink while others are fighting) like roads and the military and utilities and some of it is redistributed in a social manner... but giving everyone responsibility beyond that.So basically I'm a socially conservative liberal warhawk who believes in a flat tax of 30% and a simplified welfare system (I have to agree the current one is a ponzi scheme, but only because it started off the wrong way, paying out immediately rather than paying out investments).
Regulation? Eh, well... I believe in being responsible for what we do, and that includes corporations, but sometimes the state needs to intervene to stop stupidity happening, but then again stupidity is often the domain of the state... guess I'm a moderate there as well.
Oh right, why am I a warhawk?
I believe war is very often just. And that it can also be profitable. I believe that if it was politically possible it'd be a kind act for example of the US for example to invade Cuba and Venezuela and integrate them into the US and re-educate them into good citizens (not as hard as some people might think if it's done with overwhelming force and cleverly and with patience). It'd solve the growth and outsourcing program. Of course they'd probably still vote too far to the left... yes, I am also not a firm believer in universal democracy. I think Singapore, while going too far with their fascism, has a good system. I've often described myself as a semi-fascist.
The problem with fascism is of course that it is abused far more often than democracy is, but authoritarianism (while I believe in many liberal values) CAN be VERY efficient, of course most of the time the wrong people end up in charge. If you chop down the forest of laws that guard the country both the Lord and the Devil can get to you real fast after all, lol.
To quote Heinlein, these days every human with a pulse may vote, but then again I agree not letting them vote is their right to political self-determination.
So I guess I'm really more of a democrat with some fascist influences. But most people are, fascism is a pejorative these days but is after all only the belief that some people are better at ruling than others and that some people should be allowed to vote while other's shouldn't. In essence to deny criminals and children the right to vote is fascist.
But to get back on the war bit, I think some regimes are very evil and should be utterly and efficiently crushed and dragged kicking and screaming into the golden age of technology (that is if we get cold or hot fusion going soon (some rumours cold fusion might be available soon) or else we're running out of maritime food stocks, arable land, water resources and will face falling living standards outside of technological fields after roughly 2030. This statement does not mean I'm an enviro-nut, for example I do agree Al Gore is a liar.)
Anyway,
Sincere Regards to You All ^^ even the ones I begin quarreling with : )
Here are some interesting but only partly relevant sources/links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...y_expenditures
http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/apollo.htm, http://www.sti.nasa.gov/tto/
http://www.photius.com/rankings/gdp_...rojection.html
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstud...ature_k_4.html
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...nits=b&fy=fy11
Last edited:
