How have your political views changed due to the politics forum?

[ojc02]

[ QUOTE ]
If anything, prolonged exposure to rabid ACers makes me even more disinclined to look favorably upon their views.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see you posted in the modding thread, which means I assume you read it. Isn't this the kind of name-calling reply that everyone agrees is ruining the forum?

[MayorHerb]

[ QUOTE ]
I was a liberal and still am.

[/ QUOTE ]

Same here...

[Mickey Brausch]

The threshold of indifference for any Poll is approximately 4 or 5 choices. Beyond that, interest quickly disappears and the Poll loses its appeal whether it's 10 or 20 choices.

Just my two cents.

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
The threshold of indifference for any Poll is approximately 4 or 5 choices. Beyond that, interest quickly disappears and the Poll loses its appeal whether it's 10 or 20 choices.

Just my two cents.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Mickey Brausch]

[ QUOTE ]
Free hookers, blow and ponies?




[/ QUOTE ]Now that's a poll.

[ojc02]

[ QUOTE ]
The threshold of indifference for any Poll is approximately 4 or 5 choices. Beyond that, interest quickly disappears and the Poll loses its appeal whether it's 10 or 20 choices.

Just my two cents.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I think it's more that people become indifferent if the number of questions is too high. This is only one question and I wanted to provide an option for everyone in order to be complete and to avoid the inevitable: "I am XYZ, you didn't include that option."

[AngusThermopyle]

I once was lost, but now am found
Was blind, but now I see.

[ConstantineX]

I was quite a deep liberal when I started lurking and reading this board in June 2006. As a young college student, this is probably a given.

Many of hmkpoker's thought experiments, along with many of the examples of capitalism at work changed me to become alot more conservative. Also pvn's step by step refutations of some posts helped, as well as reading Borodog's "On Capitalism." I've changed from a hardcore liberal to a hardcore libertarian, almost minarchist. This also probably resulted from learning alot of economics from good professors (good university) and exposure to more diverse new sources and blogs, like the WSJ, National Review, Mankiw's blog.

However, I still have qualms about taking the plunge to full blown ACism. While I've seen the merits of a more self-organizing society, combined with the mathematical appeal of libertarian negative rights combined with capitalism, I still question whether humans in general are rational enough for full-blown ACism to work. While posts like hmkpoker's "Are we really that dumb?" have helped that misgiving, I still partially question whether information problems can exist in an economy. As well, I explicitly reject the "let's-wait-and-see" argument about welfare; as Poofler pointed out, I want some empirical evidence that the poorest and most helpless people will be provided for in AC society, as well as current standards allow.

I guess you could say this forum has most changed my views on the morality of capitalism and highlighted the importance of government deregulation and the failures of democracy in general.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]

However, I still have qualms about taking the plunge to full blown ACism. While I've seen the merits of a more self-organizing society, combined with the mathematical appeal of libertarian negative rights combined with capitalism, I still question whether humans in general are rational enough for full-blown ACism to work.

[/ QUOTE ]

I converted to AC from libertarian after coming here and IMO humans are not civil enough to have it work at this time. This situation is, as I understand it, that enough humans would have to believe in and want AC for it to happen. A critical mass would have to convert from demorepublicanism for it to happen. Count me as converted.

[hmkpoker]

[ QUOTE ]
However, I still have qualms about taking the plunge to full blown ACism. While I've seen the merits of a more self-organizing society, combined with the mathematical appeal of libertarian negative rights combined with capitalism, I still question whether humans in general are rational enough for full-blown ACism to work. While posts like hmkpoker's "Are we really that dumb?" have helped that misgiving, I still partially question whether information problems can exist in an economy. As well, I explicitly reject the "let's-wait-and-see" argument about welfare; as Poofler pointed out, I want some empirical evidence that the poorest and most helpless people will be provided for in AC society, as well as current standards allow.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't express it as human beings not being rational enough. Given their circumstances, they are plenty rational. The problem (as I would express it) is that their time preferences are too high. When time preferences are high, risks are avoided and despots come to power. We are seeing this with Venezuela right now, where very poor people are making a desperate decision to socialize, and in so doing cannibalize their resources as quickly as possible.