Political Compass: Question #14

[ElectionsGuy]

Disagree, but not strongly.

[TNF]

Strongly agree, and action should be taken to prevent it from happening by liquidating capitalism.

[SWE]

Very strongly agree

[Hatman 🍁]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

Strongly agree, and action should be taken to prevent it from happening by liquidating capitalism.

[Deus Naturae]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

I agree with the statement, but can you give me an example of a capitalist who fits this description?

[Hatman 🍁]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

I agree with the statement, but can you give me an example of a capitalist who fits this description?

No, I doubt there are very many who could could come up with a logical reason.

[Deus Naturae]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

I agree with the statement, but can you give me an example of a capitalist who fits this description?

No, I doubt there are very many who could could come up with a logical reason.

By "this description" I mean the statement in Question 14.

[Cassius]

This question is, as per usual, rather biased and poorly phrased. I strongly disagree with it though. I mean, how does one define 'contribution to society'? I mean, how? Besides that, I would argue that the 'manipulation of money' (by investing at the right time and then selling your shares as prices rise) is simply another part of the system that keeps the economy ticking over. Sure, people can make a killing off this without even getting off their backsides, but, at the end of the day, what is so immoral about that? There's nothing dubious about buying and selling shares; indeed, as I said before, it helps the market go round. However, back to my first point, how is one to define 'contribution to society'? Does one make a contribution to society by producing goods and services that people 'need' (a very subjective thing in of itself). I would say so, but, then again, I would argue that the buying and selling of shares does perform a useful function, and thus could be classed as a 'contribution to society'. Not to mention the fact that many people who do make money off this will plough some of it back into charitable causes, or as investment for firms. Both of these could be said to be a useful 'contribution' to society, even if, originally, the benefactors of such 'manipulation' of money could not be said to have contributed something to society in order to gain said monies.

[Hamster]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

I agree with the statement, but can you give me an example of a capitalist who fits this description?

No, I doubt there are very many who could could come up with a logical reason.

By "this description" I mean the statement in Question 14.

Carl Icahn.

[TNF]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

I agree with the statement, but can you give me an example of a capitalist who fits this description?

All of them fit the description of being parasites who live off of others' labor, if that's what you're asking here.

[Miles]

Agree.

[politicallefty]

Very strongly agree

[Gustaf]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

Sorry what? I'd say that the question is illogical. Anyone who talks about "manipulating money and not contributing to society" probably doesn't understand how the economy works. I disagree with the statement in the respect that it makes no sense to me.

[TNF]

You know you're out to lunch if you disagree with this question. Even the most ardent capitalists can't logically argue against this statement.

Sorry what? I'd say that the question is illogical. Anyone who talks about "manipulating money and not contributing to society" probably doesn't understand how the economy works. I disagree with the statement in the respect that it makes no sense to me.

On the contrary, they know precisely how the economy works: a few non-productive parasites gouging the vast majority of mankind.