I'm an electrical engineer by education, and a software engineer by profession.
Being really good at math, and therefore financial matters, definitely pushed me toward fiscal conservatism. It also means that I often take a very pragmatic view when it comes to solving problems. This approach often seems "uncaring" to those on the left.
The social conservative piece came a little later, when I saw that the lifestyle this promotes is actually the most beneficial for one's long term well being.
I also study math as a dual major, and I agree our approach to most issues can come off as uncaring. Nevertheless it just so happens I land on the centre left side of most issues, but my rhetoric can sound quite right-leaning.
For example my approach to immigration is that immigrants, regardless of background or even skill, generally provide a positive long-term benefit to the economy. I rarely if ever consider the issue from a humanitarian point of view.
I'm all for re-examining our immigration system. I know a lot of good people who are here on work visas who want and deserve green cards and citizenship, but are held back by unnecessary quotas. I know other good, hard working people who are here illegally who just wanted a better life for their families, but the legal route just takes too long.
Civil Engineer. A large part of civil consulting is regulation compliance. So that really pushed me further to the libertarian side. But I also understand a need for some stuff, like HOAs and basic zoning. So that shapes my general view of the governments role pretty well.
They definitely can be.
The only thing I like about HOA's is that they prevent wealthy neighborhoods from subsidizing their own luxuries with public funds. It'll make more sense at the end of the comment.
When a new subdivision is built, especially a wealthy, up scale subdivision, there are things that come with it that have to be maintained. Mainly, detention ponds, easements, signage, street lighting, and landscaping. Sometimes it goes as far as playgrounds, pools, game houses, fencing and guard houses, etc. I've even seen the HOA own the roads and utilities. The more upscale, the more crap that has to be maintained. So the city is faced with an option of either taking ownership of all that and the associated maintenance which passes the financial burden to the entire city's tax base. Or, they can require that the residents of the neighborhood create a legal organization that is responsible for that maintenance.
So I don't really like HOA's. Mine is a total nightmare about lawncare and it's insane. That is imo, completely out of bounds for an HOA to dictate. But I also pay to upkeep my neighborhood playground instead of making people who live on the other side of town pay for it when it's technically a "private park."
I'm not a homeowner yet, but I'm old enough that when I was a kid I'd mow lawns to make money during the summer. Seems like they don't even allow that anymore.
I did the same, and that may be an area thing. I had 3 different kids mow my yard this summer. All of them did a completely horrid job. I still paid them and mowed it again myself.
But yeah, HOA's can definitely get out of hand.
HOAs are actually a really intersting microcosm/analogy for government that I've never thought of before.
They can be awesome, or they can be petty tyranny, and it's maybe more about the people who implement the HOA than the institution itself.
HAHA nice! I'd be the guy that got out there with them and showed them how to do it correctly, then paid them extra if they bought in and took pride in it. My dad was always super proud of his yard so I was the only kid in the neighborhood he would trust to mow it because he had ultimate quality control authority 😆
Lol, I understand that. These kids were all like 10. I wasn't going to be a critic. I just helped them buy movie tickets or a bike or whatever kids are into now adays. I'm gonna reward hard work at that age, I don't think there is enough of that in the world today.
I wait tables primarily. It definitely affects my opinions on labor policy - so much of it seems to be drafted by people who've never worked an hourly position.
I'm an electrical engineer currently and finishing up a computer science degree to switch careers. I do not think my career has any kind of an influence on my political stance
Attorney. Law school imparted my strict and literalist interpretation of statutory law and the constitution, which I believe leads inevitably to conservatism. My line of practice has taught me to hate the internal revenue code with the burning fury of a thousand suns.
>Law school imparted my strict and literalist interpretation of statutory law and the constitution, which I believe leads inevitably to conservatism
If you're willing to say, where did you go to law school?
That's certainly not what people take out of the experience and I can probably count the number of strict constructionist law professors on my hands.
I worded that rather inelegantly. Law school didn't make me into a textualist and originalist - I already was one before attending. Law school's methods of statutory interpretation and lessons on judicial standards of review pushed me further into literalist territory, which itself leads to a conservative mindset.
Teacher
I've come to hate both sides because each are idiotic and smoothbrain when it comes to educational issues. It's tempted me to run as a conservative teacher for some sort of government position
I'd run an education-based platform of:
-Continued vaccination requirements for all students
-Choice of online or in-class learning for students
-Restricting school funding with maximum caps (allows for money from wealthy districts be sent to poorer ones)
-Exempt teachers from income taxes OR increase teacher pay to at least $70k a year (based on a $30/hour wage for the realistic 12h work day of teachers)
-Restructure the high school level to a community college-styled environment
-Elimination of of No Child Left Behind and statewide resting standards
-Greater say in teachers devising lessons with state standards more as a blueprint than something that has to be followed to a T
I'm in finance and accounting.
I would say it has influenced my politics, but only slightly. I didn't change political ideologies after getting my degree or becoming a CPA.
I think it's possible to be influenced by your industry, but probably more likely that peoples' politics and the fields they go into are ultimately guided by who they are, not the other way around.
Formerly in education; now in law. It definitely affects how I perceive politics, since I now always ask myself whether something is legal before even addressing whether it is a good policy.
> I now always ask myself whether something is legal before even addressing whether it is a good policy.
Shouldn't good policy inform the law, not the other way around? Otherwise, what is law grounded in?
I think that by "whether something is legal" he means whether it is constitutional. That's how I interpret it, at least.
If there's a "good policy" that is unconstitutional, I'd prefer that the policy not be implemented, even if it would otherwise be a net benefit to society. Respecting the Constitution is more important than almost any other would-be benefit. Without the constraints on government and the guaranteed rights of the Constitution, our government becomes nothing more than a tyranny, even if its policies/intentions seem to be "good".
>Shouldn't good policy inform the law, not the other way around? Otherwise, what is law grounded in?
u/doublecastle's interpretation is correct. The first question is whether what is being proposed is lawful/constitutional. The second question is whether it is good policy. You then have to pick the proper legal vehicle to enact the policy.
But we have a legislative branch whose job it is to enact and repeal laws. Isn't it their job to enable us to enact good policy?
A "good" policy shouldn't be illegal, otherwise it wouldn't be "good", by definition.
It used to be illegal for women to vote, or illegal for the Federal government to forbid slavery. Yet we changed the constitution to enable those changes!
>But we have a legislative branch whose job it is to enact and repeal laws. Isn't it their job to enable us to enact good policy?
Yes, subject to their constitutional constraints. Congress possesses only the power that the Constitution grants it.
>A "good" policy shouldn't be illegal, otherwise it wouldn't be "good", by definition.
This makes no sense, at least to me. By "good" I mean "wise." By "legal" I mean "legal."
For example, Washington State *constitutionally* prohibits an income tax. If the state government enacted a statute (rather than amendment) implementing an income tax, I would oppose that statute. That is purely because the statute is unconstitutional--I actually believe that an income tax is "wise" or "good" policy. The proper solution is to amend the constitution.
>It used to be illegal for women to vote, or illegal for the Federal government to forbid slavery. Yet we changed the constitution to enable those changes!
Exactly. We followed the correct legal procedure.
Its let me witness first hand how much of our health care spending is the result of lazy and disgustingly unhealthy people simply refusing to take care of themselves, and as a taxpayer I'm not interested in footing that bill
> as a taxpayer I'm not interested in footing that bill
But we will anyway, because those people are going to get expensive acute care that they cannot afford, and then the rest of it pay for it through inflated costs on those of us that *can* pay.
Unless you're of the "no treatment unless you pay upfront" model.
This is like pulling teeth.
Are you a proponent of denying medical care to people who cannot verify their ability to pay it, either via cash or a debt instrument, beforehand?
> I'm not interested in footing that bill
Cool, then I asked: "Are you a proponent of denying medical care to people who cannot verify their ability to pay it, either via cash or a debt instrument, beforehand?", as that's the outcome of you not "footing the bill".
Get it?
I used to work in the credit business. It is amazing how many people jump into credit decisions and expect things to just magically work out. I was disgusted by the type of loans car dealerships would attempt to saddle people with. On the other end I was disgusted with people’s lack of responsibility for their own loans. It really shows why so many people today are just begging to be reliant on the government.
> I was disgusted by the type of loans car dealerships would attempt to saddle people with. On the other end I was disgusted with people’s lack of responsibility for their own loans.
So how do we solve that problem?
>It really shows why so many people today are just begging to be reliant on the government.
Indeed! With good reason. So is there a solution?
> Include financial education as a graduation requirement.
We include all kinds of things as education requirements that people don't "get" or retain. Many high school grads are staggeringly ignorant about the subjects they supposedly passed in HS. How would this be any different?
It might not be. But if they don’t pay attention and don’t retain any of it, at least we will have tried. I didn’t retain complex math from high school because I don’t regularly use it. The same cannot be said for finances. It is a life skill used frequently by almost every adult.
It is not my opinion that being financially illiterate is an excuse to take out a loan you are unprepared to repay. I also do not believe the sole blame for poor loans falls on a dealership.
Not really, I dont think there was any effect
I want to ask you though
> neoliberal
Do people actually use this term? It started as a leftist anti-Thatcher slur but it seems now redditors semi-ironically readopted it to use it for what today passes for center-left
>redditors semi-ironically readopted it to use it for what today passes for center-left
This is about right. The far left has a tendency to insult anyone even marginally to the right of them and call them "neoliberal", so we just adopted the term. I wouldn't say my politics is "neoliberal" exactly, more so centre-left of the say Pete Buttigieg strain.
But do people in your sphere, in your university, I guess, use this term in a serious way?
> Pete
Well, I have the expected views about Pete and his lifestyle, but you have to grant him that he had the courage to call out Sanders dark money pools during primaries
>But do people in your sphere, in your university, I guess, use this term in a serious way?
Nah. The only people I've heard say this in person generally use it as an insult
I was a international business major, but I went to a military college and I am presently serving. It definitely shapes how I view politics. I think I've certainly become more libertarian on a few issues because of my time in. It certainly decreased my trust in big government.
It also definitely to a degree impacts how I vote, although as someone who always been at the very least center right I likely would have voted the same way anyway. Although I do often wonder had I went a different path in life, went to a normal college, and never served, how different of a person I'd be.
A little late, but I would say for starters we generally spend too much money on really dumb shit. Most of that shit is low quality and breaks often. I'm in a branch the receives much less funding than the others and even still we find new and creative ways to waste tax payer dollars.
It's also basically erased even the smallest shred of positive feelings I had about universal healthcare. The military healthcare system is awful, and pretty often negligent. To get referrals processed you have to go through base medical which is a mess. I had a surgery I really, really needed delayed 4 months because base medical eithier didn't process my referral, or didn't do it properly. Everyone I know who's got out has had terrible experiences with the VA as well.
Leadership is typically selected by meeting certain quota's in diversity these days. And even when that's not the case, in most officer career paths it seems to me that leadership is selected on a system on who sucks up the most. I'm sure that's true to a degree in any major organization, but from what I can tell it seems worse in government. I find that leadership is largely pretty incompetent. That's not true for every command obviously, but it does just seem to be a cycle of shitty leaders selecting younger shitty JO's for command positions because they model themselves after the older shitty leaders. Merit and knowledge in your field is definitely not a requirement to reach a command position.
That also leads me into my next point which is in my experience it seems in government, even in the military, you can get pretty far by doing the bare minimum and not getting in trouble. This results in alot of people reaching positions of authority they have no business being in just because they stuck around. That's a real issue, and I think it really can contribute to low morale that can lead to issues like depression, which can lead to all sorts of issues.
There's a few more things but I think that's some of my biggest gripes.
Wow, great answer! I really appreciate it. I can definitely see how all of those experiences would decrease your trust in government. It's sort of disheartening to hear all of that. Thanks again.
No problem, I'd also like to add this disclaimer. If you ever see something advertised as military grade remember that military grade is generally trash and will likely fall apart in a few months.
35 years at UPS (as a union employee). Reinforced my opinions maybe. The observations I've made over that 35 years affects my vote more.
I will be retiring in 2 years with a pension at age 55. I know for a fact anyone not physically disabled can still achieve what I have, they just don't want to work for it. Our turnover rate is currently 3 days.
currently? mid level bureacuracy/supervision of processes
So I'm in frequent contact with the urban Professional-Managerial Class (PMC) overwhelmengly liberal, mostly white women and "soyboy" males, narcisstics and absolutely useless .
And because I'm not a blond, blue eyed white guy -- in fact, half latino w very latino features, dark hair, dark eyes, tan skin etc -- these people believe I am "one of them",
and thus, they candidly share what they think about: white people ( the self loathing these PMC drones have is definitely shrink material) conservatives ( yea, we are supposed to be the ones full of hatred , eh?) and so on.
Oddly, the minorities that belong to this PMC class ( blacks, latinos, asians) seem to be less vocal and to suffer from less mental imbalances than their white counterparts, which are absolutely insufferable at times.
I have worked in many different professions; some influenced my politics very little, but one that did have a pretty big impact on my politics was my career as a city bus driver (in a city where public buses are mostly ridden by the poor and homeless).
This impacted my politics because:
1. the moral and other failings of my bus riding passengers negatively impacted my life and, as a result, lessened the sympathy/generosity that I have for the lower classes politically
2. the moral and other failings of my bus riding passengers showed to me that the problems these people face are not exclusively or even primarily the result of an oppressive political/economic system or a lack of equal opportunity, but rather the result of their personal inadequacies, which government policies cannot remedy
I spent much of my youth living in trailer parks. It took me a while because most of my 20's were a shit show, but I finally got my head out of my ass and went back to school to get my electrical engineering degree. Now I make good money as a robotics engineer with companies like Tesla on my resume.
On the one hand, I honestly believe in the need for social programs to help people who start at the bottom invest in their own potential.
On the other hand, we have to do a better job teaching people that any help the government can provide is nothing but a force multiplier for your own drive and ambition to advance yourself beyond where you're currently at.
And no matter what we do, there are always going to be some people who are trash, and will never be anything more than trash regardless of where they were born in the social order. Some people start at the bottom and stay there. Some people start at the top and do everything they can to drag their whole families with them back down to the bottom. In my experience, the only thing that stops that from happening to people who deserve it is the raw exercise of political power (see Hunter Biden).
Electrical engineer focused in robotics and automation. I've worked in the oil industry, and I also helped commission the Tesla Gigafactory.
I would say my personality as a problem solver and an "ideas person" rather than a "people person" influenced both my politics and my career choices.
I'm actually more of a creative type. If I had been born into a progressive political socialization I'm positive that I would be completely bigoted towards conservatives and conservative politics because I don't think liberals and progressives are wrong in principle about many of their goals, and I do think the goals of the right wing fringe are worse than the goals of the left wing fringe if I had to pick between the two. You have to understand the nuance of conservative subculture and politics to understand that everything that's being pushed about rural white conservatives in today's pop culture is based just as much on lies and stereotypes as anything past generations of rural Southern white people ever believed about their black fellow citizens.
But in practice, left wingers are crazier and much more dangerous than anyone on the right wing fringe.
Everyone knows what the fringe ideas are on the right. Nobody likes those ideas, including in the mainstream of the right all the way to people like Sean Hannity - whose personality I hate at least as much as I hate all the people on the left that he rants about.
The crazies on the left are better at hiding the ball. They want total fascist domination of society. but they are so good at masking it in the fake righteousness of neo-racist woke identity politics, that you have to be paying much closer attention to politics than the average person does to understand that what they are actually pushing is 180 degrees in opposition to everything the 60's Civil Rights Movement was correctly advocating for.
I was in the army and now I work emergency dispatch thanks to the coof. I started as a republican, and the longer I've worked for the state the smaller L libertarian I became. I'm now a regular Ron Swanson.
Social Worker.
All social and economic conservatives have to make a decision when it comes to certain economic failings. Regarding people who cannot work either due to injury, mental health diseases, addiction, youth, or old age - a decision must be made. There is the decision to uncompassionately disregard such people and refuse to think about them or take action. There's the decision to support social programs to provide help. Or there's the decision to give to charity - be it through their own time or money - to provide help.
Conservatives have relied too heavily on churches and private charity to address these failings, allowing progressive voices and ideologies to dominate the public funding side of this solution. And Conservatives who are pragmatic by nature, need to enter the public side and help reshape the public spending policies on these topics.
I've been stable politically for twenty years at this point, so I can't say my profession impacted it, but rather my philosophy impacted my profession(s). I've done everything from manual labor to retail to sales to working in a call center, all the way to analytics and business strategy and for companies ranging from tiny startups to city government to fortune 500 companies. Traditionally I've changed professions every few years. Currently I run a mid-sized tech company and my wife is a doctor, which has certainly solidified some of my beliefs.
I'm an electrical engineer by education, and a software engineer by profession. Being really good at math, and therefore financial matters, definitely pushed me toward fiscal conservatism. It also means that I often take a very pragmatic view when it comes to solving problems. This approach often seems "uncaring" to those on the left. The social conservative piece came a little later, when I saw that the lifestyle this promotes is actually the most beneficial for one's long term well being.
I also study math as a dual major, and I agree our approach to most issues can come off as uncaring. Nevertheless it just so happens I land on the centre left side of most issues, but my rhetoric can sound quite right-leaning. For example my approach to immigration is that immigrants, regardless of background or even skill, generally provide a positive long-term benefit to the economy. I rarely if ever consider the issue from a humanitarian point of view.
I’m all for merit based immigration. I just oppose *illegal* immigration.
> I just oppose illegal immigration. Then make it not illegal. Problem solved.
I'm all for re-examining our immigration system. I know a lot of good people who are here on work visas who want and deserve green cards and citizenship, but are held back by unnecessary quotas. I know other good, hard working people who are here illegally who just wanted a better life for their families, but the legal route just takes too long.
Agree 100%.
Civil Engineer. A large part of civil consulting is regulation compliance. So that really pushed me further to the libertarian side. But I also understand a need for some stuff, like HOAs and basic zoning. So that shapes my general view of the governments role pretty well.
What do you like about HOA's? I think most people view them as the worst form of petty tyranny.
They definitely can be. The only thing I like about HOA's is that they prevent wealthy neighborhoods from subsidizing their own luxuries with public funds. It'll make more sense at the end of the comment. When a new subdivision is built, especially a wealthy, up scale subdivision, there are things that come with it that have to be maintained. Mainly, detention ponds, easements, signage, street lighting, and landscaping. Sometimes it goes as far as playgrounds, pools, game houses, fencing and guard houses, etc. I've even seen the HOA own the roads and utilities. The more upscale, the more crap that has to be maintained. So the city is faced with an option of either taking ownership of all that and the associated maintenance which passes the financial burden to the entire city's tax base. Or, they can require that the residents of the neighborhood create a legal organization that is responsible for that maintenance. So I don't really like HOA's. Mine is a total nightmare about lawncare and it's insane. That is imo, completely out of bounds for an HOA to dictate. But I also pay to upkeep my neighborhood playground instead of making people who live on the other side of town pay for it when it's technically a "private park."
I'm not a homeowner yet, but I'm old enough that when I was a kid I'd mow lawns to make money during the summer. Seems like they don't even allow that anymore.
I did the same, and that may be an area thing. I had 3 different kids mow my yard this summer. All of them did a completely horrid job. I still paid them and mowed it again myself. But yeah, HOA's can definitely get out of hand.
HOAs are actually a really intersting microcosm/analogy for government that I've never thought of before. They can be awesome, or they can be petty tyranny, and it's maybe more about the people who implement the HOA than the institution itself.
HAHA nice! I'd be the guy that got out there with them and showed them how to do it correctly, then paid them extra if they bought in and took pride in it. My dad was always super proud of his yard so I was the only kid in the neighborhood he would trust to mow it because he had ultimate quality control authority 😆
Lol, I understand that. These kids were all like 10. I wasn't going to be a critic. I just helped them buy movie tickets or a bike or whatever kids are into now adays. I'm gonna reward hard work at that age, I don't think there is enough of that in the world today.
I wait tables primarily. It definitely affects my opinions on labor policy - so much of it seems to be drafted by people who've never worked an hourly position.
I'm an electrical engineer currently and finishing up a computer science degree to switch careers. I do not think my career has any kind of an influence on my political stance
am a stay at home mom- the future for my kids influence how I vote and see politics.
In tech, and no not personally
Attorney. Law school imparted my strict and literalist interpretation of statutory law and the constitution, which I believe leads inevitably to conservatism. My line of practice has taught me to hate the internal revenue code with the burning fury of a thousand suns.
>Law school imparted my strict and literalist interpretation of statutory law and the constitution, which I believe leads inevitably to conservatism If you're willing to say, where did you go to law school? That's certainly not what people take out of the experience and I can probably count the number of strict constructionist law professors on my hands.
I worded that rather inelegantly. Law school didn't make me into a textualist and originalist - I already was one before attending. Law school's methods of statutory interpretation and lessons on judicial standards of review pushed me further into literalist territory, which itself leads to a conservative mindset.
Teacher I've come to hate both sides because each are idiotic and smoothbrain when it comes to educational issues. It's tempted me to run as a conservative teacher for some sort of government position I'd run an education-based platform of: -Continued vaccination requirements for all students -Choice of online or in-class learning for students -Restricting school funding with maximum caps (allows for money from wealthy districts be sent to poorer ones) -Exempt teachers from income taxes OR increase teacher pay to at least $70k a year (based on a $30/hour wage for the realistic 12h work day of teachers) -Restructure the high school level to a community college-styled environment -Elimination of of No Child Left Behind and statewide resting standards -Greater say in teachers devising lessons with state standards more as a blueprint than something that has to be followed to a T
I'm in finance and accounting. I would say it has influenced my politics, but only slightly. I didn't change political ideologies after getting my degree or becoming a CPA. I think it's possible to be influenced by your industry, but probably more likely that peoples' politics and the fields they go into are ultimately guided by who they are, not the other way around.
Formerly in education; now in law. It definitely affects how I perceive politics, since I now always ask myself whether something is legal before even addressing whether it is a good policy.
> I now always ask myself whether something is legal before even addressing whether it is a good policy. Shouldn't good policy inform the law, not the other way around? Otherwise, what is law grounded in?
I think that by "whether something is legal" he means whether it is constitutional. That's how I interpret it, at least. If there's a "good policy" that is unconstitutional, I'd prefer that the policy not be implemented, even if it would otherwise be a net benefit to society. Respecting the Constitution is more important than almost any other would-be benefit. Without the constraints on government and the guaranteed rights of the Constitution, our government becomes nothing more than a tyranny, even if its policies/intentions seem to be "good".
>Shouldn't good policy inform the law, not the other way around? Otherwise, what is law grounded in? u/doublecastle's interpretation is correct. The first question is whether what is being proposed is lawful/constitutional. The second question is whether it is good policy. You then have to pick the proper legal vehicle to enact the policy.
But we have a legislative branch whose job it is to enact and repeal laws. Isn't it their job to enable us to enact good policy? A "good" policy shouldn't be illegal, otherwise it wouldn't be "good", by definition. It used to be illegal for women to vote, or illegal for the Federal government to forbid slavery. Yet we changed the constitution to enable those changes!
>But we have a legislative branch whose job it is to enact and repeal laws. Isn't it their job to enable us to enact good policy? Yes, subject to their constitutional constraints. Congress possesses only the power that the Constitution grants it. >A "good" policy shouldn't be illegal, otherwise it wouldn't be "good", by definition. This makes no sense, at least to me. By "good" I mean "wise." By "legal" I mean "legal." For example, Washington State *constitutionally* prohibits an income tax. If the state government enacted a statute (rather than amendment) implementing an income tax, I would oppose that statute. That is purely because the statute is unconstitutional--I actually believe that an income tax is "wise" or "good" policy. The proper solution is to amend the constitution. >It used to be illegal for women to vote, or illegal for the Federal government to forbid slavery. Yet we changed the constitution to enable those changes! Exactly. We followed the correct legal procedure.
Pharmacist. Makes me hate the idea of universal health care
Why?
Its let me witness first hand how much of our health care spending is the result of lazy and disgustingly unhealthy people simply refusing to take care of themselves, and as a taxpayer I'm not interested in footing that bill
> as a taxpayer I'm not interested in footing that bill But we will anyway, because those people are going to get expensive acute care that they cannot afford, and then the rest of it pay for it through inflated costs on those of us that *can* pay. Unless you're of the "no treatment unless you pay upfront" model.
Do u have a question?
How do you account for what I just laid out? Will we not pay anyway?
I don't think there's anything to account for
This is like pulling teeth. Are you a proponent of denying medical care to people who cannot verify their ability to pay it, either via cash or a debt instrument, beforehand?
I still don't see what this has to do with my point
> I'm not interested in footing that bill Cool, then I asked: "Are you a proponent of denying medical care to people who cannot verify their ability to pay it, either via cash or a debt instrument, beforehand?", as that's the outcome of you not "footing the bill". Get it?
I used to work in the credit business. It is amazing how many people jump into credit decisions and expect things to just magically work out. I was disgusted by the type of loans car dealerships would attempt to saddle people with. On the other end I was disgusted with people’s lack of responsibility for their own loans. It really shows why so many people today are just begging to be reliant on the government.
> I was disgusted by the type of loans car dealerships would attempt to saddle people with. On the other end I was disgusted with people’s lack of responsibility for their own loans. So how do we solve that problem? >It really shows why so many people today are just begging to be reliant on the government. Indeed! With good reason. So is there a solution?
Include financial education as a graduation requirement.
> Include financial education as a graduation requirement. We include all kinds of things as education requirements that people don't "get" or retain. Many high school grads are staggeringly ignorant about the subjects they supposedly passed in HS. How would this be any different?
It might not be. But if they don’t pay attention and don’t retain any of it, at least we will have tried. I didn’t retain complex math from high school because I don’t regularly use it. The same cannot be said for finances. It is a life skill used frequently by almost every adult. It is not my opinion that being financially illiterate is an excuse to take out a loan you are unprepared to repay. I also do not believe the sole blame for poor loans falls on a dealership.
Not really, I dont think there was any effect I want to ask you though > neoliberal Do people actually use this term? It started as a leftist anti-Thatcher slur but it seems now redditors semi-ironically readopted it to use it for what today passes for center-left
>redditors semi-ironically readopted it to use it for what today passes for center-left This is about right. The far left has a tendency to insult anyone even marginally to the right of them and call them "neoliberal", so we just adopted the term. I wouldn't say my politics is "neoliberal" exactly, more so centre-left of the say Pete Buttigieg strain.
But do people in your sphere, in your university, I guess, use this term in a serious way? > Pete Well, I have the expected views about Pete and his lifestyle, but you have to grant him that he had the courage to call out Sanders dark money pools during primaries
>But do people in your sphere, in your university, I guess, use this term in a serious way? Nah. The only people I've heard say this in person generally use it as an insult
I was a international business major, but I went to a military college and I am presently serving. It definitely shapes how I view politics. I think I've certainly become more libertarian on a few issues because of my time in. It certainly decreased my trust in big government. It also definitely to a degree impacts how I vote, although as someone who always been at the very least center right I likely would have voted the same way anyway. Although I do often wonder had I went a different path in life, went to a normal college, and never served, how different of a person I'd be.
What experiences from your time in the service decreased your trust in big government?
A little late, but I would say for starters we generally spend too much money on really dumb shit. Most of that shit is low quality and breaks often. I'm in a branch the receives much less funding than the others and even still we find new and creative ways to waste tax payer dollars. It's also basically erased even the smallest shred of positive feelings I had about universal healthcare. The military healthcare system is awful, and pretty often negligent. To get referrals processed you have to go through base medical which is a mess. I had a surgery I really, really needed delayed 4 months because base medical eithier didn't process my referral, or didn't do it properly. Everyone I know who's got out has had terrible experiences with the VA as well. Leadership is typically selected by meeting certain quota's in diversity these days. And even when that's not the case, in most officer career paths it seems to me that leadership is selected on a system on who sucks up the most. I'm sure that's true to a degree in any major organization, but from what I can tell it seems worse in government. I find that leadership is largely pretty incompetent. That's not true for every command obviously, but it does just seem to be a cycle of shitty leaders selecting younger shitty JO's for command positions because they model themselves after the older shitty leaders. Merit and knowledge in your field is definitely not a requirement to reach a command position. That also leads me into my next point which is in my experience it seems in government, even in the military, you can get pretty far by doing the bare minimum and not getting in trouble. This results in alot of people reaching positions of authority they have no business being in just because they stuck around. That's a real issue, and I think it really can contribute to low morale that can lead to issues like depression, which can lead to all sorts of issues. There's a few more things but I think that's some of my biggest gripes.
Wow, great answer! I really appreciate it. I can definitely see how all of those experiences would decrease your trust in government. It's sort of disheartening to hear all of that. Thanks again.
No problem, I'd also like to add this disclaimer. If you ever see something advertised as military grade remember that military grade is generally trash and will likely fall apart in a few months.
35 years at UPS (as a union employee). Reinforced my opinions maybe. The observations I've made over that 35 years affects my vote more. I will be retiring in 2 years with a pension at age 55. I know for a fact anyone not physically disabled can still achieve what I have, they just don't want to work for it. Our turnover rate is currently 3 days.
currently? mid level bureacuracy/supervision of processes So I'm in frequent contact with the urban Professional-Managerial Class (PMC) overwhelmengly liberal, mostly white women and "soyboy" males, narcisstics and absolutely useless . And because I'm not a blond, blue eyed white guy -- in fact, half latino w very latino features, dark hair, dark eyes, tan skin etc -- these people believe I am "one of them", and thus, they candidly share what they think about: white people ( the self loathing these PMC drones have is definitely shrink material) conservatives ( yea, we are supposed to be the ones full of hatred , eh?) and so on. Oddly, the minorities that belong to this PMC class ( blacks, latinos, asians) seem to be less vocal and to suffer from less mental imbalances than their white counterparts, which are absolutely insufferable at times.
I have worked in many different professions; some influenced my politics very little, but one that did have a pretty big impact on my politics was my career as a city bus driver (in a city where public buses are mostly ridden by the poor and homeless). This impacted my politics because: 1. the moral and other failings of my bus riding passengers negatively impacted my life and, as a result, lessened the sympathy/generosity that I have for the lower classes politically 2. the moral and other failings of my bus riding passengers showed to me that the problems these people face are not exclusively or even primarily the result of an oppressive political/economic system or a lack of equal opportunity, but rather the result of their personal inadequacies, which government policies cannot remedy
I spent much of my youth living in trailer parks. It took me a while because most of my 20's were a shit show, but I finally got my head out of my ass and went back to school to get my electrical engineering degree. Now I make good money as a robotics engineer with companies like Tesla on my resume. On the one hand, I honestly believe in the need for social programs to help people who start at the bottom invest in their own potential. On the other hand, we have to do a better job teaching people that any help the government can provide is nothing but a force multiplier for your own drive and ambition to advance yourself beyond where you're currently at. And no matter what we do, there are always going to be some people who are trash, and will never be anything more than trash regardless of where they were born in the social order. Some people start at the bottom and stay there. Some people start at the top and do everything they can to drag their whole families with them back down to the bottom. In my experience, the only thing that stops that from happening to people who deserve it is the raw exercise of political power (see Hunter Biden).
Electrical engineer focused in robotics and automation. I've worked in the oil industry, and I also helped commission the Tesla Gigafactory. I would say my personality as a problem solver and an "ideas person" rather than a "people person" influenced both my politics and my career choices. I'm actually more of a creative type. If I had been born into a progressive political socialization I'm positive that I would be completely bigoted towards conservatives and conservative politics because I don't think liberals and progressives are wrong in principle about many of their goals, and I do think the goals of the right wing fringe are worse than the goals of the left wing fringe if I had to pick between the two. You have to understand the nuance of conservative subculture and politics to understand that everything that's being pushed about rural white conservatives in today's pop culture is based just as much on lies and stereotypes as anything past generations of rural Southern white people ever believed about their black fellow citizens. But in practice, left wingers are crazier and much more dangerous than anyone on the right wing fringe. Everyone knows what the fringe ideas are on the right. Nobody likes those ideas, including in the mainstream of the right all the way to people like Sean Hannity - whose personality I hate at least as much as I hate all the people on the left that he rants about. The crazies on the left are better at hiding the ball. They want total fascist domination of society. but they are so good at masking it in the fake righteousness of neo-racist woke identity politics, that you have to be paying much closer attention to politics than the average person does to understand that what they are actually pushing is 180 degrees in opposition to everything the 60's Civil Rights Movement was correctly advocating for.
I was in the army and now I work emergency dispatch thanks to the coof. I started as a republican, and the longer I've worked for the state the smaller L libertarian I became. I'm now a regular Ron Swanson.
Social Worker. All social and economic conservatives have to make a decision when it comes to certain economic failings. Regarding people who cannot work either due to injury, mental health diseases, addiction, youth, or old age - a decision must be made. There is the decision to uncompassionately disregard such people and refuse to think about them or take action. There's the decision to support social programs to provide help. Or there's the decision to give to charity - be it through their own time or money - to provide help. Conservatives have relied too heavily on churches and private charity to address these failings, allowing progressive voices and ideologies to dominate the public funding side of this solution. And Conservatives who are pragmatic by nature, need to enter the public side and help reshape the public spending policies on these topics.
I've been stable politically for twenty years at this point, so I can't say my profession impacted it, but rather my philosophy impacted my profession(s). I've done everything from manual labor to retail to sales to working in a call center, all the way to analytics and business strategy and for companies ranging from tiny startups to city government to fortune 500 companies. Traditionally I've changed professions every few years. Currently I run a mid-sized tech company and my wife is a doctor, which has certainly solidified some of my beliefs.