More RWE survey questions
POSTED BY: dreamtrove
UPDATED: Thursday, August 24, 2006 17:30
VIEWED: 2847
PAGE 1 of 3
The future is safer in the hands of (goverment, corporations)?
Which ideal is more important (Universal Equality, Preservation of a way of life)?
Society is best run by a set of rules which are a (rigidly enforced, guiding hand)?
To each according to his needs, or Let them eat cake? ie. Benefits in a society should be based mainly on (need, merit)?
Should society have (one way of doing things, or are there many equally valid ways,) ie. Variety is (spice of bad,spice of life)?
Positions of employment (supplied by the system, available to skilled workers)?
Which is more important (security, freedom)?
The world is better as (A global one world govt., a collection of smaller nations)?
The best long term effective way to settle disagreements is (military conflict, diplomacy)?
It's more important that we (protect the people, conserve the environment)?
The economy is better served by (Large all-purpose institutions, a large number of smaller ones)?
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)?
Land should belong to (the people who were there first, the people who there are more of)?
The world needs more bigger weapons, or should we try to cut back?
Negotiation should be settled by compromise, or my way or the highway?
My ideas are internally consistant, or I have some issues to work out?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Whee, survey! Opining is fun. *g*
The future is safer in the hands of (goverment, corporations)? government. At least it's theoretically not just out for profits.
Which ideal is more important (Universal Equality, Preservation of a way of life)? Done to extremes both are harmful, but equality first.
Society is best run by a set of rules which are a (rigidly enforced, guiding hand)? A few rigidly enforced rules.
To each according to his needs, or Let them eat cake? ie. Benefits in a society should be based mainly on (need, merit)? Both? Mainly need, though. Merit-type benefit should be private or business, not governmental.
Should society have (one way of doing things, or are there many equally valid ways,) ie. Variety is (spice of bad,spice of life)? This is too vague. Depends entirely on context. Gut reaction: variety.
Positions of employment (supplied by the system, available to skilled workers)? Supplied by the system, if that means it's the natural offer/demand thing.
Which is more important (security, freedom)? Freedom, freedom, freedom. The kind that ends where another's begins.
The world is better as (A global one world govt., a collection of smaller nations)? We haven't tried the first one, yet, have we, and the second has been volatile in past centuries. War war war. Time will tell.
The best long term effective way to settle disagreements is (military conflict, diplomacy)? Diplomacy.
It's more important that we (protect the people, conserve the environment)? How is this either/or? The second serves the first.
The economy is better served by (Large all-purpose institutions, a large number of smaller ones)? The less bureaucracy the better, so large all-purpose? ETA: I thought this applied to regulating bodies, but apparently it's the actual participating companies, so I change my answer to many small ones.
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)? If there's a better one, I haven't seen it yet.
Land should belong to (the people who were there first, the people who there are more of)? Again, entirely context-dependent. Generally, the people who were there first.
The world needs more bigger weapons, or should we try to cut back? Cut back, everyone. More space programs, dammit! *g*
Negotiation should be settled by compromise, or my way or the highway? By definition, negotiation aims for compromise, no?
My ideas are internally consistant, or I have some issues to work out? Mostly consistent. I think.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
The future is safer in the hands of (goverment, corporations)?
Yes, and people too.
Quote:
Which ideal is more important (Universal Equality, Preservation of a way of life)?
Yes.
Quote:
Society is best run by a set of rules which are a (rigidly enforced, guiding hand)?
So long as I am that hand...ok.
Quote:
To each according to his needs, or Let them eat cake? ie. Benefits in a society should be based mainly on (need, merit)?
Both, after all communism don't work. Or I should say, needs based economics does not work. If I have my need met regardless, there is no incentive for hard work (or any work) and no incentive for innovation.
Quote:
Should society has (one way of doing things, or are there many equally valid ways,) ie. Variety is (spice of bad,spice of life)?
Variety is both good and bad. For example, the military relies on uniform disipline and rigd adherance to doctrine, yet success on the battlefield is often an a measure of improvisation and initiative. The same applies in court where everyone follows rigid rules, yet applies creative endeavor to make their arguments.
Quote:
Positions of employment (supplied by the system, available to skilled workers)?
This question doesn't make sense. What about skilled positions working for the government?
Quote:
Which is more important (security, freedom)?
You can't have one without the other.
Quote:
The world is better as (A global one world govt., a collection of smaller nations)?
Both. How about a collection of soveriegn states joined in a common government...like the United States.
Quote:
The best long term effective way to settle disagreements is (military conflict, diplomacy)?
Military Conflict. I believe Mr. Heinlen and I agree that more issues have been resolved with violence then by any other means. Perhaps we can hear from one of our fellows in Carthage for a different opinion. Or look at Isreal v. Lebanon-Hezbollah (Lezbollah?) and you see that the diplomatic solution has merely prolonged the conflict by forcing a conclusion without settling the issue. Had the war continued one side would have won and it would have been much more settled then it is now.
Quote:
It's more important that we (protect the people, conserve the environment)?
People and their works are as natural as geese and their works so promoting the interests of people does serve the enviroment. In other words people are natural.
Quote:
The economy is better served by (Large all-purpose institutions, a large number of smaller ones)?
Both, because the economy is best served by competition.
Quote:
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)?
Benevolant monarchy (or a philospher king with absolute power) is the best possible system, but it has a fatal flaw in that such enlightened dicatorship cannot be sustained and gives way to corruption and tyranny. That leaves American Democracy (not Western, cause clearly Europe would be completely non-functional if America wasn't around to help out) as the second best and better then all the rest.
Quote:
Land should belong to (the people who were there first, the people who there are more of)?
How about the people who own it? I was born in a house in West Virginia...but I don't have some kind of clain to that land just because I was there before the present owners. And would you really give up your house to some family that comes along now and says, we have ten children and you have none, so your house belongs to us now? I think not.
Quote:
The world needs more bigger weapons, or should we try to cut back?
Tell you what. If everybody else disarms, then we will disarm too (mostly).
Quote:
Negotiation should be settled by compromise, or my way or the highway?
[
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:Quote:
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)?
That leaves American Democracy (not Western, cause clearly Europe would be completely non-functional if America wasn't around to help out) as the second best and better then all the rest.
Excuuuuse me ever so much. Since you see it necessary to include insults in your answers, how's about explaining what that is supposed to mean?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Actually, although counting down to a flame war (we all see if coming, and yet cross our fingers in the hopes that we are wrong) these threads DO show that even those most diverse and willing to bang heads together, there is still common ground somewhere.
Ergo, in hopes that we can all find at least ONE thing that we agree with someone else on, and thus common ground enough to get along, by all means continue.
To the questions...
The future is safer in the hands of(goverment, corporations)?
Children, and better children we have not destroyed all that is good and decent in and turned into warped and bitter adults who will in turn warp their own kids.
Which ideal is more important (Universal Equality, Preservation of a way of life)?
I do not understand the question, each society would find an appropriate balance, wouldn't it ?
Society is best run by a set of rules which are(rigidly enforced, guiding hand)?
Nonexistent, the moment you make rules, someone abuses them, and the cycle continues - unspoken common sense is best.
To each according to his needs, or Let them eat cake? ie. Benefits in a society should be based mainly on (need, merit)?
Need, within reason, I would give up some of my luxuries to feed a starving divorcees children, sure, but it should be a choice, not an order.
Should society has (one way of doing things, or are there many equally valid ways,) ie. Variety is (spice of bad,spice of life)?
Erk - man you phrased that badly... erm, There is no "One Right Path", never was, never will be, each to their needs and desires at the limit of infringing others.
Positions of employment (supplied by the system, available to skilled workers)?
Crush outsourcing and this problem goes away.
Which is more important (security, freedom)?
Freedom, true security is impossible - if your time has come, it's come.
The world is better as (A global one world govt., a collection of smaller nations)?
Confederacy of societies, nations are governments, and that's ALWAYS trouble.
The best long term effective way to settle disagreements is (military conflict, diplomacy)?
Personal Vendetta, it limits the scale - with Diplomacy as an option at any time.
It's more important that we (protect the people, conserve the environment)?
Kind of a non-issue, if we make this place uninhabitable.
The economy is better served by (Large all-purpose institutions, a large number of smaller ones)?
Monopolization leads to exploitation, competition breeds diversity and ingeniuty.
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)?
And you ask an Anarchist such a thing ?
Land should belong to (the people who were there first, the people who there are more of)?
The people on it, but historically folks have always bungled co-existance with the natives of any land they tried to settle on.
The world needs more bigger weapons, or should we try to cut back?
I'm all for the elimination of anything that isn't personally portable, but I dun see it happening.
Negotiation should be settled by compromise, or my way or the highway?
Only when the other party is willing to compromise, negotiation is always preferred.
My ideas are internally consistant, or I have some issues to work out?
There is no "One Right Way" for anything, show a better or different one, and let people make their own decisions about it.
-Frem
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
My answers to my own questions, and maybe some clarification of not-too-well-thought-out ambiguities
Each of these were meant as a priority. X is more important than y, even if y is important.
Quote:
The future is safer in the hands of (goverment, corporations)?
Corporations.
Quote:
Which ideal is more important (Universal Equality, Preservation of a way of life)?
Preservation of a way of life.
Quote:
Society is best run by a set of rules which are a (rigidly enforced, guiding hand)?
Guiding hand.
Quote:
To each according to his needs, or Let them eat cake? ie. Benefits in a society should be based mainly on (need, merit)?
I'm a let-them-eat-cake-r. Merit first.
Quote:
Should society have (one way of doing things, or are there many equally valid ways,) ie. Variety is (spice of bad,spice of life)?
spice of life
Quote:
Positions of employment (supplied by the system, available to skilled workers)?
Skilled people should work, unskilled people should learn skills, society shouldn't have to employ the unskilled. I meant this as a competition system, vs. a universal employment one. A lot of european and latin american systems aim for having everyone employed at some level.
Quote:
Which is more important (security, freedom)?
Freedom, security can go by the board for all care.
Quote:
The world is better as (A global one world govt., a collection of smaller nations)?
Smaller nations, i'm a Taft man, not a Wilson-ite.
Quote:
The best long term effective way to settle disagreements is (military conflict, diplomacy)?
Diplomacy. It may be slow, but occupations usually breed hatred.
Quote:
It's more important that we (protect the people, conserve the environment)?
Protect the Earth first. If some people don't make it, that's life.
Quote:
The economy is better served by (Large all-purpose institutions, a large number of smaller ones)?
I view large all purpose institutions as a threat to competition and the free market. Smaller ones are better. I'd probably support a size limit, depends on the specifics.
Quote:
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)?
I'm sure there are better ones. Probably that have been historically tried. Democracy created Pericles, and does so again and again.
Quote:
Land should belong to (the people who were there first, the people who there are more of)?
Whoever was there first. It's not their fault that the other people could contol their population.
Quote:
The world needs more bigger weapons, or should we try to cut back?
Cut back, we're way over-bombed.
Quote:
Negotiation should be settled by compromise, or my way or the highway?
Negotiation is always compromise, but some things can't be compromised. I think that sometimes you probably have to stick to your guns on, but you can compromise elsewhere to make up for it. I don't think "you have to do it my way" is generally an acceptable position. Except maybe "you have to stop genociding and leveling the Earth."
Quote:
My ideas are internally consistant, or I have some issues to work out?
I think I'm getting pretty consistant. It's just probably not going to be consistant with an existing political party. Maybe the GOP of several decades ago. Perhaps there's a party in some other country for me.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The future is safer in the hands of (goverment, corporations)? Power to the People!
Which ideal is more important (Universal Equality, Preservation of a way of life)? Both. Or neither.
Society is best run by a set of rules which are a (rigidly enforced, guiding hand)? Both
To each according to his needs, or Let them eat cake? ie. Benefits in a society should be based mainly on (need, merit)? Both. I think a healthy society needs a mix of capitalism and socialism.
Should society have (one way of doing things, or are there many equally valid ways,) ie. Variety is (spice of bad,spice of life)? Both
Positions of employment (supplied by the system, available to skilled workers)? Both
Which is more important (security, freedom)? Freedom
The world is better as (A global one world govt., a collection of smaller nations)? Collection of smaller nations.
The best long term effective way to settle disagreements is (military conflict, diplomacy)? Depends on who you are disagreeing with (some people you just can't reach: Cool Hand Luke).
It's more important that we (protect the people, conserve the environment)? If the people are gone, who's there to care about the environment?
The economy is better served by (Large all-purpose institutions, a large number of smaller ones)? Both
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)? Benign Dictatorship would be best, but...
Land should belong to (the people who were there first, the people who there are more of)? Ahhh, the first one, maybe the second, xylophone.
The world needs more bigger weapons, or should we try to cut back? We're gonna' kill each other anyway, the size of the explosion doesn't matter. Dead is dead.
Negotiation should be settled by compromise, or my way or the highway? Both
My ideas are internally consistant, or I have some issues to work out? Issues, issues, issues...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Opining IS fun. But these questions are worded in a way to react to DT's opining, I think. A lot of dichotomies here that don't make sense to ME.
The future is safer in the hands of (goverment, corporations)?
Neither. My future is safer in my own hands. Everyone's future would be safer in his/her own hands.
Which ideal is more important (Universal Equality, Preservation of a way of life)?
Are these mutually exclusive? What way of life do you mean? Can we have a way of life that includes equality?
Society is best run by a set of rules which are a (rigidly enforced, guiding hand)?
Depends on the rules. But generally, if you're going to have rules, then have very, very few and make them count (rigorously enforced).
To each according to his needs, or Let them eat cake? ie. Benefits in a society should be based mainly on (need, merit)?
Benefits provided should be voluntary. If benefits are voluntarily given, people giving can decide why they want to give--based on need or merit or no reason at all.
Should society have (one way of doing things, or are there many equally valid ways,) ie. Variety is (spice of bad,spice of life)?
Ways of doing what? A society does have to some some consensus to function properly. It is convenient to have everyone driving on the same side of the road. But it doesn't mean everyone needs to drive on the "same side of the road" in all other areas. Both consensus and variety have their places.
Positions of employment (supplied by the system, available to skilled workers)?
Don't understand. Why would employment be available to workers who can't do the job?
Which is more important (security, freedom)?
Freedom.
The world is better as (A global one world govt., a collection of smaller nations)?
As much anarchism as people will allow.
The best long term effective way to settle disagreements is (military conflict, diplomacy)?
It depends. Sometimes one is more effective in the long run, sometimes the other.
It's more important that we (protect the people, conserve the environment)?
Is the environment threatening to kill the people? If the environment is dangerous, we fix it--but isn't that usually called conservation? Not sure what this question means.
The economy is better served by (Large all-purpose institutions, a large number of smaller ones)?
Power is better broken down into smaller denominations. Less potential for abuse.
Western Democracy is the (best system possible, there are probably better ones)?
I personally prefer USA back when it was founded. If there is a way to keep that system from degenerating into the huge mess we have now, it would be a better system.
Land should belong to (the people who were there first, the people who there are more of)?
Land should belong to people who were there first (and didn't leave). But that never happens. It always goes to people who can take that land.
The world needs more bigger weapons, or should we try to cut back?
Not bigger weapons, better weapons. I want to see a war weapon that would assassinate heads of state first, and then down the line. Then we'll see how many wars we get into.
Negotiation should be settled by compromise, or my way or the highway?
"By definition, negotiation aims for compromise, no? " LOL. Thank you, AgentR.
My ideas are internally consistant, or I have some issues to work out?
We all think our ideas are internally consistent. Our ideas always make sense to ourselves, that is why we hold them. Am I always right? NO. Can I be corrected? Yes.
Can't Take My Gorram Sky 
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
Excuuuuse me ever so much. Since you see it necessary to include insults in your answers, how's about explaining what that is supposed to mean?
The traditional weakness of the western Democracies has many examples and case studies I could cite but I'm to busy laughing at the mighty French Army sending its crack "twelve guys in rubber boat" division to end the war in Lebanon and bring peace to us all.
European Democracies lacked the will to stand up to Hitler, the Soviets, the Serbs, the Islamafascists, and in France's case, a little blind girl with a poodle and a wheel of cheese, without the US to hide behind and protect them.
Lets face it, Europe's biggest contribution to world peace is adding "or else" to any demands made by the Security Council.
(Note: England and its really big Anglo-Saxon balls, is not a traditional Western Democracy. Mainly because of the afformentioned large balls...which odly the rest of Europe seems to lack in any size.)
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
European Democracies lacked the will to stand up to Hitler, the Soviets, the Serbs, the Islamafascists, and in France's case, a little blind girl with a poodle and a wheel of cheese, without the US to hide behind and protect them.
I find it very interesting that you seem to equate democracy with military power. (Or, hey, the concept of will with military power. Very rational.) I thought we were talking political system?
Not to mention, you conveniently seem to forget that the history of democracy in Europe is a very different one to the U.S. and its stability, yes, was fragile for a good long time. But things particular in Western Europe have been fairly stable for a good while now. You can't, for example, remotely compare the German democracy of 1918-1933 with the post-war one.
Quote:
Lets face it, Europe's biggest contribution to world peace is adding "or else" to any demands made by the Security Council.
Again I ask: How does this define the entirety of European democracy as non-functional without the aid of the US?
If we're counting world peace as the one deciding factor, then I do raise my eyebrows at why you're considering the U.S. the cream of the crop.
Quote:
(Note: England and its really big Anglo-Saxon balls, is not a traditional Western Democracy. Mainly because of the afformentioned large balls...which odly the rest of Europe seems to lack in any size.)
Oh. Forgive me. I was going to take you seriously, but apparently I missed all the obvious signs that this was a locker room contest between thirteen-year-olds.
My bad.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME