To more moderate conservatives or some who deviate from the standard party line, what are some progressive views you guys hold (to you guys who are more moderate/centrist or don’t have the standard republican ideology)
I know there is a lot of anti billionaire sentiment on the left. So this is a question to the anti billionaire crowd here.
I am honestly pretty pro tech and pro billionaire wealth myself. I believe billionaires (especially in tech do provide immense value to society and truly change the world. I believe there should be no upper limit to wealth creation. I am fine with Elon becoming a trillionaire even (tho can’t stick him as a person or his politics). It is importance imo that America maintain its lead in technology and innovation.
If becoming a billionaire were illegal or effectively impossible, how would that affect incentives for entrepreneurship, innovation, and long-term company building? Many major CEOs and founders created some of their most world-changing or society-improving technologies after already reaching their first billion dollars in net worth.
How would company ownership and large-scale investment work in that system? If founders and investors were forced to cap or give up ownership beyond a certain point, would that reduce incentives to take massive risks, reinvest profits, and grow companies long term?
Plus if we outlawed “billionaire status” then wouldn’t we be effectively handing over our advantage in Big Tech to other countries, as they can set up shop elsewhere.
And how would this impact the average person’s stock portfolio, retirement accounts, pensions, and 401(k)s, since so much ordinary wealth-building is tied to the growth of large publicly traded companies?
My main concern around wealth caps is that they would stifle innovation and economic growth, while also negatively impacting the layman’s ability to build wealth through stocks and long-term investing.
I used to be more right wing when I was younger but over these last few years I changed my positions and outlook based on doing more research and current events.
I am probably similar to a third way neoliberal.
For other former right wing people what caused you guys to make the switch over?
I am pro tech, global trade, capitalism, and even billionaires but support robust safety nets, public goods, and services. I probably am a third way neoliberal.
Healthcare and education don’t function like normal consumer markets. Healthcare is relatively inelastic, patients often lack information compared to providers, and society generally agrees people shouldn’t go bankrupt or die because they can’t afford treatment. Education also has massive long-term benefits for society and the economy, which is why many countries view it as an investment rather than just a private good.
They are positive investments for society and we already pay taxes towards them (more so than some of the countries that have better access to them), so the problem seems like allocation and set up of the systems.
Are there any case studies of nationwide successful free market healthcare or education initiatives?
Even market-oriented countries like Sweden, Norway, Germany, and others still maintain large public involvement in healthcare and education while remaining capitalist economies. So the real debate doesn’t seem to be “markets vs socialism,” but rather what balance of markets and public systems creates the best outcomes.
My autism essentially prevents me from coming off confident and charismatic. When I try to be more that way it just makes me look weirder people say and trying too hard.
What should I do dating wise?
I’m not good at masking. I make strange faces in photos, have an odd voice, not sure how to respond to jokes, repeat things, ppl say “I seem off”, and get visibly nervous.
The doctors say this is basically innate and lifelong at this point.
I’m starting to warm up to some of his policies. I still disagree with a lot of his broader ideology, but I do think he deserves some credit for balancing the budget under difficult circumstances.
I understand the criticism, that he received support from Hochul and delayed certain expenses. When a city is facing a major deficit, some tradeoffs are inevitable. Every leader has to make difficult decisions in that situation.
Also, from the state’s perspective, New York City is such a major economic engine that investing in its stability and recovery is strategically important for New York as a whole.
I am not a New Yorker and I admit I was (and still am) a bit skeptical about his platform.
I don’t consider myself a deeply conservative person or that right wing. I am close to classical liberal or neoliberal and am an atheist.
If our government was more efficient and not as riddled with bureaucracy, administrative bloat, excessive military and foreign spending, debt, and regulatory burden I would be a greater supporter of the left. If my tax dollars went toward more tangible public benefits such as improving healthcare access, education, infrastructure, and public services — while reducing the regulatory and administrative bloat we see today — I would probably lean more left politically. I feel that is part of being America first or prioritizing the interests of the country.
I believe a strong free market can coexist with efficient safety nets and targeted public investment, as long as the system is run competently and responsibly. I do theoretically support greater safety nets, but I recognize the pitfalls and struggles our system faces and that it’s difficult for the American government to deliver on those.
Most thriving nations have strong public services/investments and safety nets coupled with a strong free market capitalistic system.
If the left was stricter on immigration, and had a stronger delivery regarding social programs I would probably support their platform and candidates in America.