Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

BUSINESSMEN ARE EATING BABIES

3 (7%)

I'm a socialist

5 (11.6%)

Businesses need heavier regulation, and social programs should be expanded

12 (27.9%)

Businesses need heavier regulation, but current social programs are too expensive

1 (2.3%)

Regulation is stifling growth, but we should expand social programs

1 (2.3%)

Regulation is stifling growth, and current social programs are too expensive.

4 (9.3%)

Regulation is stifling growth, but current social programs are working well.

0 (0%)

Current regulation is fine, but we should expand social programs.

0 (0%)

Current regulation is fine, but current social programs are too expensive.

2 (4.7%)

Businesses need heavier regulation, but current social programs are working well.

0 (0%)

Both current regulation and social programs are working fine.

2 (4.7%)

I'm a libertarian.

4 (9.3%)

I'm heavily conservative.

1 (2.3%)

LIBERALS ARE EATING BABIES

1 (2.3%)

I'm a communist

3 (7%)

I'm a fascist

4 (9.3%)

Total Members Voted: 43

[FearfulJesuit]

Almost everybody in the free world believes in democracy, and social politics are multi-faceted, but I'm interested in how people here think economically, so I made a poll.

[Bauglir]

Voted for option 3, although interestingly, in terms of my axioms and all that, I consider myself libertarian (I am often dumbfounded by how wildly at variance my own opinions are with those of the party). I suppose we have different definitions of freedom (and/or place different values upon economic vs social freedoms).

[Burnt Pies]

I'm a socialist, through and through. Hell, I'm so socialist I live off the state on my Disability Benefit.

[Vector]

Option 1, but not taken literally.

Yeah, I am really paranoid about Big Business right now.

[ein]

Voted for option 3, although interestingly, in terms of my axioms and all that, I consider myself libertarian (I am often dumbfounded by how wildly at variance my own opinions are with those of the party). I suppose we have different definitions of freedom (and/or place different values upon economic vs social freedoms).

I'm kinda the same.
On the political spectrum, I fall heavily under the libertarian left corner.
Almost voted for 1 as a joke though. :b

[MetalSlimeHunt]

This poll does not have enough baby eater accusations. We won't be doing economics right untill everyone in any position possible is accused of being a baby eater out to kill people instead of their stated goal of helping them and turn the nations of the world into fascist dictatorships for no stated reason.

Anyway, I voted for option 3. Big Business is literally an amoral (that's lacking morals altogether, not evil) concept, and it's better to risk a few parasites than risk leting some of those who are genuinely in need suffer.

[knaveofstaves]

It's hard to have this conversation in this forum, isn't it? I mean, we're all from different nations and different backgrounds. I'm pretty sure businessmen are eating babies here in the U.S., but who knows about other places...

In any event, why did I vote for businessmen as baby-eaters? Well, we collect 1.3% of GDP as corporate taxes, while other developed nations collect twice as much. The corporations, and their wholly owned subsidiary Congressmen, still bitch about how high the corporate tax rate is. The topline rate really is high, yes, but after all the deductions and exemptions nobody pays that rate. So it's not a "lie" lie, just a "bullshit" lie, which is acceptable in American political discourse.

For example General Electric claims so many exemptions it gets a rebate. That's right, American taxpayer, you are paying the second largest company in the world for being just so awesome. And ExxonMobil, number four on that list? Pay taxes? $39 million. On profits of $2.6 billion.

If you're in the mood for more constructive discussion, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has some suggestions for what the corporate tax code should look like.

[Criptfeind]

In something that will come as no surprise to anyone I have ever argued politics with, I went for four.

[Lagslayer]

I went with option #5. It's not to say that businesses should be completely unregulated, but the regulations and exemptions now are tilted too heavily towards political favoritism. Also, the old argument that something big like the federal government tends to be very inefficient with fine details, and that high taxes are inhibitive to economic growth.

[Strife26]

I went with three, but honestly I'm more for "Businesses need more regulation AND we need less social services"


Capitalism works, but it's got to be regulated properly by the government. I'm one of the crazy types for redoing the tax code more like it was back in the olden days.

[Leafsnail]

I went with 2.  I don't believe in businessmen being malicious, just that a lot of them are very, very greedy and sometimes willing to harm others in the pursuit of that greed.

[nenjin]

I'm close to a #1, but I try to be a realist. People are in business to make money, if they aren't make it, they don't go into business. The question is how much they make and at what cost. My issue with business is the pervasive attitude that you make your buck now, however you can and screw the long-term repercussions, and that sustainable growth isn't "real growth." I'm about reforming western business ideology as I am forcing them to be fairer with consumers via regulation.

[scriver]

I refuse to vote until there is the option of LIBERAL BUSINESSMEN ARE EATING BABIES!

On the other hand, I'm pretty much a liberal socialisy, or a very socialistic liberal. That is, I believe freedom can only be achieved if people show solidarity with each other, which means that there has to be a large state making sure no asshole takes advantage of the individual people. Of course, I don't believe it is for the government to control everything, so I'm not sure whether I should vote 2 or 3. Probably 3. Definitely 3 if we're talking about the US. For Sweden I guess it would be more like 4, as I mostly want to change non-directly economical shit and grow the government a new spine.

I'm one of the crazy types for redoing the tax code more like it was back in the olden days.

Wheat, skins and sheep, you mean?

[Phmcw]

I don't see myself as a socialist. By Belgian standards I'm somewhere center left. I don't trust either government or business.
By American standards I'm far left : the state of their public services never cease to amaze me. Compared to Belgium or France, it's those of a third world country. And let's not compare them to those of Sweden and Norway.

But France and Belgium are plagued with clientelism and need more efficient administration. Most of the people are aware of this fact but given that all parties are equally bad, they can't do anything. Hence unrest.
Oh, and Europe definitely need a better army. We can't come crying to America anytime we want a few tank destroyed.

[RedKing]

I voted for #3, although there should be an option for "Bankers are eating babies (and charging the parents a fee)". Industry (i.e. people who actually make things) needs to be regulated. The financial sector (i.e. people who make insane amounts of money by creatively juggling other people's money) needs to be put up against the wall and made an example of. I'm thinking there's some good reasons that a number of religions ban usury.