Quote:robkelk wrote:

---

Being a civil servant who's on the eligibility list for a possible promotion, I think I should sit this one out...

TheTwisted1 Wrote:So, I guess I'm an outlier, since here's mine: Economic Left/Right: 1.38, Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 4.00.

However, some of the questions are problematic. For example, "Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold." Agreeing with this likely fits one more to the left-wing, as opposed to right-wing free market support. However, what about someone who agrees because they believe land should be entailed? I don't see how supporting hereditary aristocracy can be considered left-wing. In general, most of these tests that equate the "right" with support for free markets thus fail to distingush between left-wing anti-market postions and reactionary anti-market postions.

--The Twisted One

ordnance11 Wrote:

Quote:robkelk wrote:Being a civil servant who's on the eligibility list for a possible promotion, I think I should sit this one out...

My congratulations if you get it. Or should it be my condolences? And would you have to move? I already have a career path charted out and unfortunately that will require moving around the country.

Quote:This is a US election that defies logic and brings the nation closer
towards a one-party state masquerading as a two-party state.

The Democratic incumbent has surrounded himself with conservative
advisors and key figures — many from previous administrations, and an
unprecedented number from the Trilateral Commission. He also appointed a
former Monsanto executive as Senior Advisor to the FDA. He has extended
Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, presided over a spiralling rich-poor gap
and sacrificed further American jobs with recent free trade deals.
Trade union rights have also eroded under his watch. He has expanded
Bush defence spending, droned civilians, failed to close Guantanamo,
supported the NDAA which effectively legalises martial law, allowed
drilling and adopted a soft-touch position towards the banks that is to
the right of European Conservative leaders. Taking office during the
financial meltdown, Obama appointed its principle architects to top
economic positions. We list these because many of Obama's detractors
absurdly portray him as either a radical liberal or a socialist, while
his apologists, equally absurdly, continue to view him as a
well-intentioned progressive, tragically thwarted by overwhelming
pressures. 2008's yes-we-can
chanters, dazzled by pigment rather than policy detail, forgot to ask
can what? Between 1998 and the last election, Obama amassed $37.6million from the financial services industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.
While 2008 presidential candidate Obama appeared to champion universal
health care, his first choice for Secretary of Health was a man who had
spent years lobbying on behalf of the pharmaceutical industry against
that very concept. Hey! You don't promise a successful pub, and then
appoint the Salvation Army to run it. This time around, the
honey-tongued President makes populist references to economic justice,
while simultaneously appointing as his new Chief of Staff a former
Citigroup executive concerned with hedge funds that bet on the housing
market to collapse. Obama poses something of a challenge to The
Political Compass, because he's a man of so few fixed principles.

As outrageous as it may appear, civil libertarians and human rights
supporters would have actually fared better under a Republican
administration. Had a Bush or McCain presidency permitted extrajudicial
executions virtually anywhere in the world ( www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR51/047/2012/en
), expanded drone strikes and introduced the NDAA, the Democratic Party
would have howled from the rooftops. Senator Obama the Constitutional
lawyer would have been one of the most vocal objectors. Under a
Democratic administration however, these far-reaching developments have
received scant opposition and a disgraceful absence of mainstream media
coverage.

Quote:The only social responsibility of a company should be to deliver a profit to its shareholders.

Quote:It's more that on something like one-third of the questions, I want to mark a radio button labeled "It's complicated".