[careinke]

Hey Preston! Why don't you take the test? Perhaps you already did and don't like the results??? I'd guess your score is a lot closer to Hitler than mine.

[chris89]

I think collectivist might be a better term than authoritarian.

Consider that the vast majority of human (pre)history has been spent living in tribes. By comparison with modern societies, these were tiny bands of people who lived together in a collectivist way which wasn't enforced through authoritarianism. Would we call tribes that survive in the modern world authoritarian? No way, they're incredibly egalitarian. Collectivist? Yes, very.

Interal co-operation is simply more effective than interal competition. Of course, tribes compete with other tribes a lot. Probably, this tribal good-will is lost in the vastness of civilised society, where even our neighbour is felt to be from "another tribe", and hence competition seems natural and inevitable.

But in terms of what human society is - or at least has virtually ALWAYS been - we are innate collectivists. I think capitalism (which would be more bluntly called "wealthism" or "moneyism") is a perversion of human society which could only exist in the weird state of events we find ourselves in.

[SeaGypsy]

That's a nice fantasy Chris89. Having lived in extremely remote and still tribal areas of Australia, as well as effectively lawless parts of Asia, authoritarianism exists at any scale. It seems to work better in the mode described by Tanada, where authorities do not micro-meddle, but do carry a mighty big stick for when they need it. Tribal authority can be horribly petty and vicious.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '
')I think the right tells themselves a story about just how exceptional they are and of course the recent "I built that" hubristic gas cloud is the perfect example. It is embarrassing to me to see people so full of themselves that they choose to ignore the sacrifices of the past that gave them their chances.

[SeaGypsy]

Pretty spot on idea/ approach OS.

[Pops]

My score on that last quiz puts me pretty anti authority and somewhat left of center economically which is pretty close to how I see myself. I like the "is this important" button.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'E')conomic score: -3.23
Social score: -6.09Note your scores and Login to your Atlas Account to Save your Scores

Your score pegs you as economically moderately leftist and socially libertarian.

Moderate economic leftists generally support regulation of free trade and business to assure that workers are fairly treated and prices remain stable.

Social libertarians generally believe that the government should not judge morality, and are generally against the illegalization of things that do not directly affect other people in a negative way.

[Outcast_Searcher]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', '
')But to eliminate deductions just to make the tax system simpler is silly in my opinion. We can't talk about soc sec problems on the one hand and then turn round and eliminate the IRA break. Well I guess we can do anything but it doesn't make sense. And as well, the knee jerk of "eliminate lots of programs" just because we imagine all those programs are for immigrant welfare mothers on drugs is also simplistic.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Tanada, I'd just like to say THANKS for this thread, and the tone you presented your initial idea in. It has prompted some thoughtful discussion.

It's too bad we don't see the clowns on Capitol Hill having these types of discussions. THAT IS THEIR JOB, after all. Even if they try SOMETHING and it doesn't work -- it could be adjusted if needed.

It's ironic. In my opinion, the only really good policy idea the much maligned GWB put out there was an ATTEMPT to start a discussion about fixing Social Security. Of course, such a discussion never happened, because instead of offering CONSTRUCTIVE criticism and a THOUGHTFUL counterproposal (the way intelligent adults should negotiate, by the way) -- we had a giant attack and obfuscation wave from the other side so vitriolic -- that the discussion was just shut down.

Absolutely brilliant. So here we are with the clock ticking, and no real solutions in sight. (Well, unless you count eventual QE hyperinflation (if the can just keeps getting kicked long enough) as a "solution").

**Sigh**...

[chris89]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('SeaGypsy', 'T')hat's a nice fantasy Chris89. Having lived in extremely remote and still tribal areas of Australia, as well as effectively lawless parts of Asia, authoritarianism exists at any scale. It seems to work better in the mode described by Tanada, where authorities do not micro-meddle, but do carry a mighty big stick for when they need it. Tribal authority can be horribly petty and vicious.

[ralfy]

Reminds me of an earlier test shared back when BBSes were used. The results were often bottom-left.

[SeaGypsy]

The reason I go with OS' proposal is that there is very significant government waste in these 'Churning' redistributive mechanisms. In Australia this process is estimated to cost up to 8% of the amount churned; but the process itself produces nothing except some thousands of cushy government jobs.

Another aspect, the line on program funding, is realistic in that it confronts the looming reality of peak oil to some extent/ unlike current program policy, which generally puts program 'need' ahead of ability to realistically and sustainably fund such. Current government spending attitudes are in the realm of Magic Pudding philosophy (as above so below on this one, unfortunately for most people!).

[Pops]

OS, I said to eliminate deductions for no other reason than to make the system simpler doesn't make sense. If its just a kickback to whatever narrow special interest I agree they should be phased out.

I think the mortgage interest deduction and capital gains rollover exclusion is important for one. I reading "Why Nations Fail" right now and the one thing pointed to that has made the US more prosperous than other new world countries is ownership. Eliminating the deduction for homeowners but leaving it for landlords (interest is a legitimate business expense) stacks the deck against ownership and moves us one step closer to the rentier society of the old world.
Make the exclusion available for the first home maybe and only one per customer - no aspen chalets, maybe put a cap on the value at median home price or whatever.

Others are counter productive, exclusion of employer provided health insurance for example adds just another layer of insulation between the consumer and health care cost, which is a big reason health care costs are out of control, no one sees the cost. Neither the docs or the patients has no idea what a particular drug or procedure costs or the options - if any and the insurance company doesn't care because they just mark it up next year.

Also I don't think there should be an Earned Income Credit, it's just welfare for WalMart and whoever doesn't feel the need to pay a decent wage. Eliminate it and raise the minimum wage instead.

And of course, just as you say, the exclusion for being rich and getting richer should go away, capital gains, "carried interest", etc

That's just a couple but maybe you get my basic belief that removing restrictions on power and money doesn't make a society just, it just make power and money unrestricted.

[SeaGypsy]

I think the most weighty and key idea of OS was the 40k cap. This would take in a huge chunk of real America these days and the churning savings alone would be hundreds of millions a year at least.

[PrestonSturges]

As Eric Hoffer pointed out, every movement starts out freewheeling and egaliytarian as it recruits people. Then it gets tangled in power struggles, then the winners make it authoritarian and repressive.

An obvious example that we overlook is Christianity. Christianity gave mankind nearly a thousand years of misery and darkness. Muslims should understand that any authoritarian religion condemns its followers to darkness, squalor, and violence.

[PrestonSturges]

If you look at the GOP this election cycle you can certainly see many of the trappings of authoritarian propaganda. Right now they are on tv ranting about "action" and "results" whipping up the cult-of-action-for-the-sake-of-action.

[vision-master]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', 'A')s Eric Hoffer pointed out, every movement starts out freewheeling and egaliytarian as it recruits people. Then it gets tangled in power struggles, then the winners make it authoritarian and repressive.

An obvious example that we overlook is Christianity. Christianity gave mankind nearly a thousand years of misery and darkness. Muslims should understand that any authoritarian religion condemns its followers to darkness, squalor, and violence.

[PrestonSturges]

Authoritarians usually appeal to some ancient of cryptic text of knowledge that must be interpreted to reveal some cosmic political truth. Translations of ancient Hebrew are notoriously imprecise, but fundementalists have absolute confidence in very precise translations. In contrast, conservatives act as if the Constitution were written in Latin or something and they are a priesthood who are the only ones able to interpet it. Actually it's written in perfectly modern English and only 4300 words long. And the authoritarian "originalist" can point to a Constitution that does not mention habeas corpus or even voting.

[PrestonSturges]

It's probably telling that conservatives accuse liberals of operating from a book, Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals." How many of them even know Alinsky has been dead 40 years? I think that has more to do with the authoritarian obsession with hidden truths that must literally be decrypted.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', 'I')t's probably telling that conservatives accuse liberals of operating from a book, Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals." How many of them even know Alinsky has been dead 40 years? I think that has more to do with the authoritarian obsession with hidden truths that must literally be decrypted.

[PrestonSturges]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('PrestonSturges', 'I')t's probably telling that conservatives accuse liberals of operating from a book, Alinsky's "Rules For Radicals." How many of them even know Alinsky has been dead 40 years? I think that has more to do with the authoritarian obsession with hidden truths that must literally be decrypted.