I side with

[Kuya]

Same thing could be said about government.

It looks like you've stumbled into something profound, guartz.

[Kryssan]

http://imgs.isidewith.com/results-image/35458261.jpg

Hm.

[guartz]

I tried answering like a idiot religious redneck and got 98 romney.


God damn the gays and the liberals.

[guartz]

It looks like you've stumbled into something profound, guartz.

Ah sarcasm. What would Kuya say if you never existed?

[hey]

I tried answering like a idiot religious redneck and got 98 romney.


God damn the gays and the liberals.

Was

Do you believe the theory of Evolution?
Mitt Romney: Yes, and I believe it is a part of Creationism

That the one you differed on?

[hey]

Wow, this site is really terrible at telling if you actually agree with someone, if you don't give exactly the same answer.

Should the government require health insurance companies to provide free birth control? Barack Obama: Yes, but exempt religious organizations or charities
Your similar answer: Yes

Gonna have to disagree with Obama on that one.

How should the U.S. deal with Iran? Barack Obama: Isolate through trade embargoes
Your similar answer: Maintain diplomacy while discouraging use of nuclear weapons

That's not even close.

Do you support affirmative action programs? Barack Obama: Yes
Your similar answer: No, but we should offer social programs to address poverty regardless of race or ethnicity

ITT: No and yes are similar answers.

Should we expand our offshore oil drilling? Barack Obama: Incentivize the private sector to develop alternative forms of energy
You: No

That sounds like a fancy way of saying no to me.

Are you in favor of decriminalizing all drugs? Jill Stein: Yes, but not all drugs
Your similar answer: Yes, and retroactively reduce sentences for those already serving time for drug use

The question specifically says all drugs, so "yes but not all of them" means no.

Should the U.S. have bailed out the major banks during the financial crisis of 2008? Jill Stein: Yes
You: Yes, and nationalize all big banks

This is at least closer to an agreement than not.

Should abortion be outlawed in the United States? Gary Johnson: Let each state decide
Your similar answer: No

Really?

[Moss]

Yeah... they should have included degrees of agreement with the fancy answers

[ringthree]

It looks like you've stumbled into something profound, guartz.

Except it is not. While "government" isn't perfect, it does a hell of a lot better job at protecting the people than unrestrained capitalism.

Do they not teach "The Jungle" in high school anymore?

[Ahh, you were being sarcastic. I am still trying to get everyone's underlying motives in this forum. Pardon my lack of knowledge.]

[ringthree]

Should abortion be outlawed in the United States? Gary Johnson: Let each state decide
Your similar answer: No

I just wanted to point out that this is not a Libertarian position at all. Letting a state decide would be just like letting the national government decide. It would be government imposing it's will upon the people.

Libertarian's are now strict federalists? That is news to Nozick.

[Kurokikaze]

Always assume Kuya is being sarcastic.

[guartz]

Except it is not. While "government" isn't perfect, it does a hell of a lot better job at protecting the people than unrestrained capitalism.

Do they not teach "The Jungle" in high school anymore?

[Ahh, you were being sarcastic. I am still trying to get everyone's underlying motives in this forum. Pardon my lack of knowledge.]

That's a good observation, and I love talking about this but I think you are wrong. Let's delve a little deeper into this topic, maybe you can find a flaw in my reasoning here.

At it's core, corporations and governments are virtually identical. They both consist of just people. Now when you say "government" does a better job of protecting people
then "corporations" what you really are saying is that people in "government" category have more incentive and are more inclined to be supportive then, let's say, selfish.

You can probably understand why I disagree now. I say most people have similar selfish motivations, regardless of their category. So what you suggest, at it's core,
is flawed reasoning, because it suggests, quite naively, that high caliber of morally conscious people work for the government versus corporations.

[Churchill]

I was going to respond to that with books of governments taking advantage of people but then I realized, hey, this guy just used a book as the keystone to his argument.

[hey]

So what you suggest, at it's core,
is flawed reasoning, because it suggests, quite naively, that high caliber of morally conscious people work for the government versus corporations.

No, just slightly higher caliber, with less incentive to destroy the world.

[Dantrag]

That's a good observation, and I love talking about this but I think you are wrong. Let's delve a little deeper into this topic, maybe you can find a flaw in my reasoning here.

At it's core, corporations and governments are virtually identical. They both consist of just people. Now when you say "government" does a better job of protecting people
then "corporations" what you really are saying is that people in "government" category have more incentive and are more inclined to be supportive then, let's say, selfish.

You can probably understand why I disagree now. I say most people have similar selfish motivations, regardless of their category. So what you suggest, at it's core,
is flawed reasoning, because it suggests, quite naively, that high caliber of morally conscious people work for the government versus corporations.

Except once you toss in the "for profit" margin that corporations always aim for, they will do whatever it takes.

[Tweek]

That's a good observation, and I love talking about this but I think you are wrong. Let's delve a little deeper into this topic, maybe you can find a flaw in my reasoning here.

At it's core, corporations and governments are virtually identical. They both consist of just people. Now when you say "government" does a better job of protecting people
then "corporations" what you really are saying is that people in "government" category have more incentive and are more inclined to be supportive then, let's say, selfish.

You can probably understand why I disagree now. I say most people have similar selfish motivations, regardless of their category. So what you suggest, at it's core,
is flawed reasoning, because it suggests, quite naively, that high caliber of morally conscious people work for the government versus corporations.

He obviously has not done business with many Government branches or departments vs doing business with the private sector.. the difference is night and day. It's not always the Government workers fault due to red tape handcuffing but that takes it's toll on the people who work there for years.

[Churchill]

What?

Government employees are just as lazy as everyone else.

I would argue more lazy, because I fucking hate them, but I don't really have much to compare them to. I just know they are fucking lazy and disgust me in every possible way, moreso than fat people. (They are usually fat though)

[Tweek]

Government employees are just as lazy as everyone else.

I would argue more lazy

yeah, that is what i'm saying.

[guartz]

Except once you toss in the "for profit" margin that corporations always aim for, they will do whatever it takes.

Governments will do whatever it takes if you toss in "the national defense". What's your point? People will go to extreme lengths to justify their actions? What is it?

Why is it so hard to accept that people who work for the government have the same personal incentives that people who work for corporations do?

[archibaldcrane]

Corporations and Governments have different goals, which is why one is "better for the everyman" than the other.

This isn't rocket science, you aren't being profound or clever with your comoparison here guartz.

[RKenshin]

This method of analysis completely ignores the fact that a government system is structured and ran completely different from a corporate system.

Yes, the people that participate in and have rolls of power in each are likely the exact same (as far as selfishness, motivation, etc), but that being true in a vacuum doesn’t mean that corporations = government. The jobs, responsibilities, how people attain positions of power, how they’re held accountable, the ideals and laws that govern them, and how they keep their job are completely different.

We don't directly elect who runs corporations. We don't vote in the CEOs. We don't nominate the 'board of trustees.' A corporation isn't run to serve the best interests of the people; they're run for profit.

I can feel the ‘you vote with your wallet’ response coming, but I can’t seriously equate the two as being equal. In theory perhaps, but not in practice. There’s far less of a degree of control and choice between ‘either give them your money or keep it for yourself’, and ‘vote for whoever you believe will serve your best interests.’