Are you an NDN Democrat?

[NDN]

Modified my views into sound bites for a game on this site. With the exception of gay marriage (which was only slightly edited), everything is the same as on there. How much do you agree with?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Edit: Changed things slightly.

[NDN]

My answers in bold.

//Abortion

Some restrictions on abortion. Ban partial birth abortions except to save mother's life.

No restrictons on abortions.  Intact dilation and extraction abortion (which has been labeled "partial birth abortion" by pro-life propagandists) is a long-standing medical procedure used to end pregnancies in scenarios where the fetus would be an unviable baby or otherwise have significant birth defects, and is a last resort.  Nowhere is it used for situations where there wouldn't be something significantly wrong with either the infant after birth or endangers the mother's life during birth.  Also, stricter enforcement of laws protecting doctors who are simply doing their job.  (Hey, I'm an ex-Planned Parenthood volunteer.  Those protestors are scary.

Not necessarily. If a fetus is extracted from the navel then has it's neck cut off, it doesn't count as intact dilation. Personally I'd prefer to restrict abortion to emergencies by the 3rd trimester because most doctors agree that the fetus begins to develop consciousness and is mostly developed by that stage.

//Balanced Budget

A large decrease in federal spending. A Balanced Budget Amendment to ensure responsible fiscal management.

Decrease in federal spending where?  The vast majority of the budget goes into three programs: Social Security, Medicare, and Defense.  The remaining discretionary spending includes many government organizations, like the FBI, FEMA, and the VA, that rightly take a significant amount of financial recourses to fulfill their legitimate functions.

I'd cut spending on defense, reduce Social Security Payments, limit subsidies, cap discretionary spending and probably institute some other cuts on various agencies.

In general, though, I oppose deficit spending (especially the incredibly reckless deficit spending of the Bush Administration), and would like to see a balanced budget, but realistically, that won't happen for a long time.

Not with the current supply side ideology, I agree.

//Business Tax

Moderate decrease in business taxation. Current rates put us at a competitive disadvantage, help small business.

You just said you wanted a balanced budget, pal.  Where are you going to offset that?  (And don't say "spending," give specifics)

Don't be so condescending.

It's a moderate decrease in corporate taxation, probably by about 5% tops. That can be offset by increases in personal income tax, carbon/emissions taxes, a surtax (for emergency spending), reforming deductions (e.g. charitable deductions), etc. Factor in some cuts in other spending such as corporate subsidies to big oil and it's not as nightmarish as you claim.

//Education

Eliminate No Child Left Behind. Increase Teacher Salaries in exchange for less job security. Some vouchers; Charter schools provide competition.

Fine...not a huge fan of vouchers, but it's not the worst solution in the world.

//Energy

Invest in alternative energy including Nuclear Power and end oil company subsidies. Cut oil use significantly by 2025.

Fine, no problem here, I'm pro-nuclear.  But what will we do about transportation (especially automobiles and airplanes)?

We should probably reduce spending on the federal high way system in favor of state or locally run rails, roads, etc.

//Environment

Work to reduce emissions and harmful toxins. Modified Kyoto.

Modified how?  Greater pressures on developing countries?  Cap-and-trade or other idea?

No, cap and trade is a terrible idea.

I'd remove 1990 as the base year for the agreement for starters. The numbers are skewed by the reality that the Soviets and other nations were at their worst, and frankly the fact that so few of the nations involved seem to be making a commitment to it to me indicates it was overly optimistic. Also the fact that it does leave China and other countries essentially off the hook is troubling if pretty much impossible to do much of anything about.

//Gun Control

Gun control is a state issue. No federal gun control.

With the exception of the preservation of the 1934 National Firearms Act, I'm in agreement.

I'm sure most people aren't going to be for letting anyone own an automatic.

//Health Care

Universal health care whether public or private. Require health insurance for every child.

Fine...but you wanted to balance the budget, didn't you?

I don't think this is that great of an expense if you repeal the bush tax cuts and institute other reforms like I said. Besides we're spending about 45% of GDP on government healthcare already (never mind per capita spending), we're just not getting much for it. Might as well go all the way, or else not bother

//Homeland Security

We must defend ourselves only if attacked. Increase some security, funding for natural disasters. Oppose Patriot Act, it erodes our rights and freedoms (e.g. probable cause).

Agree with all statements, except that I would amend, rather than repeal, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, which included several necessary procedural updates to the legal code and, if repealed in full, would cause issues.

I could agree to that, however there's so many objectionable portions that you'd essentially have to repeal at least half of it.

[NDN]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

This is directly applicable to the War on Terror. 

We need to shut down the prison camps at Guantanamo Bay, something that the Supreme Court is pushing for anyway, end all vestiges of torture, and show the world the America they once loved.

Agreed[/quote]

[NDN]

//Abortion
Agree
//Balanced Budget
Agree
//Business Tax
Agree
//Education
Disagree, the government shouldn't be involved in education at all

If the government doesn't provide education then a lot of people simply won't be able to afford the private schools or homeschooling. We'll stop being a 1st world country.

//Energy
Disagree, let consumers decide what fuel to use

Consumers can't do that if companies aren't developing it fast enough.

//Environment
Disagree, environmental protection should consist of eliminating public lands

That won't do anything.

//Gun Control
Agree
//Health Care
Disagree, the key to affordable health care is the eliminate third-party payers, not increase them

Actually I agree that would reduce the costs probably, but it would leave a lot of people without coverage.

//Homeland Security
Agree
//Immigration
Disagree, freedom of movement should not be infringed

We wouldn't be able to handle all of the people that would flock here though, and a lot of them would introduce diseases that we otherwise screen out. We're already seeing diseases like TB becoming more prevalent again.

//Iran
Disagree, diplomacy and sanctions shouldn't be necessary, Iran doesn't pose a threat to us

I agree that it's not directly threatening us, but it's a powder keg situation would could destabilize the Middle East and our economy by association.

//Iraq War
Agree
//Trade
Disagree, abolish NAFTA in favor of unrestricted free trade

Unrestricted trade would just lead to more unsafe goods and companies like Metalclad dumping toxic waste in people's drinking water.

//Personal Tax
Disagree, balance the budget by significantly cutting taxes and spending

Disagree on pragmatic and ideological grounds.

//Same Sex Marriage
Disagree, the state shouldn't be involved in marriage at all

Actually in theory I agree, it's just unlikely to ever be done that way IRL.

//Social Security
Agree
//Unions
Agree
//War on Terror
Agree

My utopia would actually be anarcho-capitalist, I just favor moderate classical liberalism because people aren't ready for that right now IMO.

[NDN]

I never considered you much of a Democrat, you'd fit better somewhere else IMHO

Other than the Reform Party I can't really think of any other group that comes close.

[NDN]

The buchananites own reform so not even there.

Not really. The party split. Still not a viable one though so...

[NDN]

I never considered you much of a Democrat, you'd fit better somewhere else IMHO

Other than the Reform Party I can't really think of any other group that comes close.

You'd do alright in the LP

No I wouldn't, they're radicals. They support stuff like abolishing the income tax and child labor laws (well at least they favored the last one at one point).

[NDN]

Disagree with both parts. The second idea in particular would be dreadful in practice, even if the theory looks nice.

I agree it's draconian, but I at this point discretionary spending, addendums, etc. have all gotten incredibly out of hand. Congress needs strong limits imposed on it's ability to spend and we need more transparency in all levels of government. Right now we are undermining the dollar and making ourselves more and more dependent on countries like China.

Also I'd allow for emergency exceptions such as natural disasters or severe recession if there was say, a 2/3rds majority approving it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They're higher overall than any other western/industrialized nation. Even Germany has cut it's corporate income tax rates. We need to streamline the tax code and cut the overall rate, the current post-Reagan trend is very anti-competitive.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'd do that through said tax cuts, loans for urban development, and other changes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't know about the UK but in the US it's generally exceedingly hard to fire incompetent (or worse) teachers. Believe me, I've encountered it.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

They're publicly funded/subsidized schools that normally have less regulations and more private school type elements.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not seeing why it's so crazy, it's certainly more abundant and cleaner in the long term (waste disposal aside) than coal or gas.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm assuming that production is generally not going to outpace demand, especially since it would take years to develop refineries or drilling in those areas anyway. Also I'd have the government at least partially own any of the oil rights so that profits could be diverted to other long-term alt energy/public transportation works.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Probably. Doesn't mean we can't make some other sort of concerted push to reduce fossil fuel use or waste with our allies. It might be easier to get this pushed as a national security measure than an environmental one.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Something similar to the Healthy Americans Act. Basically you get a choice between private care or enrollment in a government pensions plan similar to your average government worker and/or elected official. I'd also allow implement a lot of actual free market reforms like allowing people to import drugs from Canada, people to buy health insurance out of state, etc.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Alright fine, we must only use force if attacked.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm not demanding anything, I'm just suggesting more of a federation so that each individual group (theoretically) has it's own area to govern and avoid harassment from the others. It seems like the least bad option for ending such a stupid and arrogant 'war' (technically not even that).

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If there's no rational basis for a marriage ban (and IMO there clearly isn't) then they're well within their rights to rule it unconstitutional. I do agree however there's been a problem with judicial overreach in this country.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I'm still in college. How much of an ulterior motive could I have?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

We don't need to do too much more. Just ban it nationwide for teaching and discourage it through labor laws restricting it. On the other hand I'd make it harder to fire people arbitrarily with no prior warning and I'd work to protect pensions and healthcare (I'd do that first). That sounds like a reasonable trade off.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Require share holders to approve CEO severance pay and/or salary increases. Also cut corporate tax benefits if the company is paying their CEO many times more than their 'average' (median) worker if need be.