Over the last couple years, I've really grown to dislike both political parties and feel pretty isolated. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but it just feels like both sides aren't really interested in solving issues and just want to pander to their bases even if their ideas don't make any sense. Anyone else?
WSO Virtual BootcampsSee all
Career Advancement Opportunities
March 2023万博app网页版
Overall Employee Satisfaction
March 2023万博app网页版
Professional Growth Opportunities
March 2023万博app网页版
Total Avg Compensation
March 2023万博app网页版
Career Resources
LeaderboardSee all
| 1 |
|
99.2 |
| 2 |
|
99.0 |
| 3 |
|
99.0 |
| 4 |
|
99.0 |
| 5 |
|
99.0 |
| 6 |
|
98.9 |
| 7 |
|
98.9 |
| 8 |
|
98.9 |
| 9 |
|
98.9 |
| 10 |
|
98.9 |
Get instant access to lessons taught by experienced private equity pros and bulge bracket investment bankers including financial statement modeling, DCF, M&A, LBO, Comps and Excel Modeling.
Comments (47)
Circa 2021:WSO发现独立政党
我不喜欢双方，但在某些方面，我也更不喜欢独立人.....不是一个流行的看法。我觉得如果您在中间，您真的不相信任何事情，也没有明确的政治指导原则。一些民主党人向您出售您喜欢的政策，您以这种方式投票。有些共和党人将不再以这种方式向您出售东西。我宁愿代表某事，不断地投票，而不仅仅是吹风。
One year a Republican sells you a new tax cut, so you vote for them. Then, another year, the Dems have a spending plan that helps your niche or interest group and you vote for them....kind of a shitty transactional form of politics.
我同意这就是为什么我总是犹豫将自己标记为独立的原因。我得到了整个“对你的聚会的好处”的事情，但感觉就像每个聚会的不良方面都在越来越难以忽视。
As a registered independent with the following candidate preferences/voting:
Trump (R) - Presidential Election 2020
Paffrath（D） - 加利福尼亚召回选举
Youngkin（R） - 弗吉尼亚州长种族
Adams (D) -NYCMayoral race
I can say that this is nonsense. Being in the middle means by and large that you understand that solutions to problems are nuanced and complex and often require pieces from both sides of the aisle. Let me explain just a few quick examples to get my point across:
税收 - 我强烈不同意税收是盗窃的想法，并认为人们并没有真正考虑他们在这么说时喜欢的公共部门服务，但是正如我在对Drumpfy下面的回应中所解释的那样，我反对毛毯税manbetx 2.0下载公司费率。同时，超财富的高税收需要合理 - 扣除额70％是可笑的。
Policing - I don't support defunding the police at all, and am against blanket removals of qualified immunity. At the same time when bad apples like the Floyd or Arbery incidents happens (clear reckless behavior), there has to be a system of accountability in place. Based on this I thought Adams was a better fit for the job to strike this balance compared to Sliwa.
大批
"Stand for something" generally just means create false dichotomies and refusing to see the world probabilistically and without nuance. Conviction is strongly overrated and should be properly categorized as overconfidence.
I think the issue is that we have solved most of the major problems that we (both parties) agree about. The only problems that seem to exist today have conflicting moral and cultural issues that neither side can negotiate between (ex abortion).
Honestly, George Washington warned us to avoid political parties and look where we are now. BipartisanBSmaking things like Covid-19 political.
I get what you're saying, but I actually don't think that abortion is one of these issues. In my opinion, what's missing in that issue is that both sides are talking past each other and that there is a general lack of scientific education in the population regarding the maturation of a fetus.
One side keeps talking about women's rights and the other side keep's talking about ending a life. Where this conversation needs to go is a scientific and philosophical discussion on when life begins done by a group of individuals who understand the development of a human fetus at 20 weeks. If the conversation headed in this direction and people became more educated on the scientific facts, I don't think that you would have a 50/50 split of opinion in the country.
Z世代已变得更加绿色，这在很大程度上是由于关注环境的教育。我认为现在是科学课程包括更好的人类发展教育，并在堕胎背景下特别出现的时候。老实说，在我的整个高中和大学教育中，我认为我花了半个星期的时间研究七年级的胎儿的成长，而在简短的讨论中，甚至没有提到胎儿可以合法终止的阶段。
Almost every liberal "pro-choice" person, I've spoken to knows that the fetus is a baby once the heart beat is detected As [Memberberries] intelligently commented once, there's a reason why abortion is talked about as "a difficult decision" even by the "pro-choice" crowd. Challenge a liberal and first they'll start out by arguing the baby can't feel pain, can't see etc. and once you point out that there are disabled people who are alive who lack these qualities, you'll eventually whittle down the argument to something about how having the baby is inconvenient.
大批
Democrats make a lot more sense to me. We can afford childcare, paid leave, and better roads and bridges if corporations pay a 15% taxminimumand the government can better drug prices. That's a pretty fair policy, which is why even West Virginians support it.
你有没有停下来,想知道为什么几乎所有the big execs in tech, Wall Street, and F20 are Democrat donors? Because increased regulation and taxes kills out the competition in the mid-cap/regional business range. Tax rate is a meaningless metric because due to deductions and a bloated tax code, ultrawealthy and rich corporations aided with an army of HNW lawyers can weasel out of tax codes in a way that regional corporations can't. Also an equivalent tax % hits poorer people harder than wealthy. Imagine a 0 deduction tax code (obviously inaccurate but for simplicity). Suppose you a tech guy make a salary of $200K in Manhattan and now your taxes go from 20% a year to 30%. Now let's assume the same for someone who makes $2M. Who do you think is going to face the impact of that 10% tax raise more. You or the $2M guy? So a blanket raise on corporate taxes is a policy that hurts small and medium sized corporations more, which is exactly what we don't want because oligopolistic competition leads to a whole host of other issues (which I'm happy to get into if you want). A similar argument exists for minimum wage, except it gets even worse because large corporations will look to either automate away the job or outsource to factories with poor working conditions overseas.
Unless we have regulations and taxes that progressively increase基于市值with a non-deductible tax rate, corporations willgain more market shareand leverage.
Now, before you think I'm arguing in an abstract sense, think about the pandemic. With lockdowns, reduced capacity, curfews, etc. (all forms of business regulation). who gained and who lost? Which sized businesses permanently closed and which sized businesses are booming?
大批
是15％minimumcorporate tax rate. That means no matter what kind of deductions they use, they have to pay 15%. Small or big, it doesn't matter. Right now some companies pay zero dollars. That's got to stop.
And Biden is pushing global consensus on it too. Recently there's been a race to the bottom, where countries continually lower their corporate taxes. Capitalism was just fine when companies paid more, so let's do it!
Both parties are so polarized and extreme that I think both have awful takes-
Take abortion for example. I think abortion is morally questionable and would personally never want a woman I got pregnant to get one, but I think it makes sense in cases of rape or where the mothers life is on the line. I'd also rather someone get an abortion than have a kid they can't afford that ends up on welfare/the streets/etc. So I think abortion should be legal, but I also don't want my tax dollars funneled into planned parenthood/abortion clinics or encouraging abortions at all. However, republics take is generally "no abortions whatsoever" and democrats is "let's use tax dollars to fund abortions". Where is the nuanced take of "abortions are obviously terrible but occasionally are a necessary option and should be available"?
You can do the same thing with guns, taxes, or any other issue- the parties are both just idiotically extreme on either side. How hard is it to find a candidate that believes some taxes are necessary to pay for society but we shouldn't have a 50%+ marginal tax rate, some societal safety nets/minimum wage need to exist but we shouldn't be handing out free money to everyone who asks, climate change is a real concern but that doesn't mean we can immediately stop using oil, we should have background checks on gun sales but shouldn't make guns illegal, etc etc.
The main problem is that candidates have to win their primary first before running in a general election, so those candidates often end up being further to the left or right than where the middle 40-50% of this country actually is. I don't know what the best away around this is.
大批
One of the problems is that this is sort of a black and white issue in some regards. If it's wrong to kill a fetus, then it's wrong whether that fetus is born to a billionaire mother or a crackhead.
On the rape case, on an ideological level, I think hard-core Republicans would say it's still an innocent life. From a realistic point of view, if you told Republicans that the Left is willing to settle on abortion for only cases of rape, 95% of Republicans would sign up for that right away. Republicans would love that deal so I don't think you can say that there is really a party against that as a compromise. In fact, if that was the law of the land, Republicans would be doing backflips in excitement.
I wouldn't say I hate both parties, but I don't feel like my viewpoints are holistically represented by either party. I also don't like being framed as being "in the middle," because that makes it seem like I'm just taking an average of the spectrum of views as opposed to arriving at a position based on a consistent ideology. I have strongly held positions that I believe are aligned with a consistent worldview, and yet I often find the outcome of those positions is that I'm all over the place on most measures of the modern political spectrum.
Someone can look at a particular issue (or law, or bill) through a few different (and very valid) frameworks and arrive at different answers. I most often hear peers using the "does the outcome of this law/argument/vote benefit me personally" or the "does the outcome of this l/a/v benefit society as a whole," and we could have a long discussion about the merits of both; I wish I heard about more people using the "is this l/a/v an appropriate expression of the powers of government as they currently stand" or the "is this l/a/v a theoretically appropriate expression of the powers of government at this level of society" frameworks, because those are important too.
换句话说，您可以喜欢法律的结果（因为它使您受益，还是整个社会或两者兼而有之），并且仍然认为这是一个坏主意，因为这是不适当地使用政府对其选民的权力。
All of this to say that I'm often disappointed in the theatrics of modern politics. Ever read the Federalist Papers? They were incredibly thoughtful, nuanced, passionate arguments about the design of government and its interaction with society. And they were in newspapers! Public debate! What a concept.
I understand your point, but it's laughable to think that politics hasn't been theatrics since the invention of government. The founding fathers were no less politicians than the people we have today.
I kind of find it funny that a few commentators keep mentioning the need for a party that doesn't tax too much but still spends......not sure if anyone has noticed, but that's basically the Republican Party.
我可以指出很多共和党政府降低税收，但没有削减支出。也许，他们在军队上花费了太多，但他们还是基础设施，医疗保险，保存社会保障等的粉丝。
As a libertarian, I acutally don't think Republicans are radical enough. But if you can see past the rhetoric in the media and you want a party that taxes less but still spends, seriously vote Republican.....not the way I would want to go but if that's what you're looking for, the option is available at the ballot box.
我对共和党人的问题是他们降低税收，继续支出并增加赤字。看看总统的赤字，所有的共和党人都破坏了我们的预算。我宁愿一个民主党人，他只拥有支出和征税，而不是民主党人，他只是将债务加上债务而在全国范围内乱扔。
Build back better and Obamacare are paid for. Trump and Bush tax cuts weren't. That says something about the "party of fiscal responsibility".
这是我对美国政治结构的最大抓地力之一，对我来说，一个只有这个国家只有两个真正的政党，或者更准确地建立一个选举制度，导致如此巨大和不同的两极分化。例如，如果总体上还有更多的聚会，我觉得，例如，AOC可以开始自己的胡说八道共产党，或者其他人对她的关注更少，因为联盟不一定需要她的支持 -建筑物，因为我认为大多数选民将在通常更温和的政党（中左/权利等）之间进行分配。
I'm not a political scientist, but I think having some kind of ranked choice voting system would help, if only for electing less extreme members from both parties in the short-term. I know this method is becoming more popular in some states (Maine started or is about to start electing their US senators this way), but I'd be curious if it actually leads to less-polarizing candidates getting elected as the theory would suggest.
Quant(ˈkwänt)n: An expert, someone who knows more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing.
作为一名前坦桑尼亚总统尼雷尔一旦问uiipped, "The US is also a 1 party state but with typical American extravagance, they have 2 of them."
Technically AOC, Bernie, etc.arepart of their own party , the democratic socialists of America. The only thing is they haven't actually split from the Democratic Party, because that would give Republicans the most votes among the three parties in several elections.
大批
我知道,但是你知道我的意思。你然后something like neo-constitutionalist/libertarians, center right, Christian fundamentalist, etc.
Quant(ˈkwänt)n: An expert, someone who knows more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing.
我曾经有同样的感觉。双方都没有有效地使用资金。他们的极端基地很多。
Strongly believe in women's rights and gun control. But also believe in less taxes, less social programs, more police, strong military.
But after trump and how the right did nothing to stop his ridiculousness, I feel as a non-white person I have no choice but to vote left in the near future.
我是一个来自灰烬国家的穆斯林移民，我可以告诉你左边是蝙蝠狗屎疯了，他们把羊毛拉到了你的眼睛上。他们的政策彻底适得其反，对美国的长期生存能力有害。像西斯玛（Sistema）或曼钦（Manchin）这样的中心左派人物是可以忍受的，但双方的极端势不可挡和危险，恐怕左边的钟形曲线有一个较胖的尾巴，左边的人有很多社会主义者和共产主义者是社会主义者和共产主义者比目前还没有。
Manchin refused a billionaire tax, of which his state has zero (0) but supports a payroll tax on West Virginians who earn less than 25k a year on average.
Manchin keeps fighting for subsidies (yay, socialism!) to keep the obsolete coal industry alive, while West Virginians foot the bill and in some cases pay more for energy than they do for their homes.
How is that tolerable at all? His philosophy is simple: make life worse for working people.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/19/politics/west-virginia-coal-rates-manchi…
Quos nisi occaecati assumenda quaerat id illo quisquam. Laudantium enim ut corrupti totam velit. Explicabo ea vitae neque pariatur velit et laboriosam. Quisquam error ut facilis debitis. Vero laudantium expedita ullam id eius. Nobis commodi nisi delectus quia.
Dicta non eos perferendis eligendi ipsam sunt ipsum. Et exercitationem quasi reprehenderit eaque enim. Cumque aut quia quo illum asperiores hic.
Eos ab ex modi quibusdam officiis. Dolores itaque consequatur culpa.
Deserunt architecto laudantium adipisci voluptatem. Qui laboriosam debitis et tenetur dolore molestiae. Distinctio iusto et temporibus. Illo error rem consectetur numquam est voluptas nemo.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus:6 financial modeling lessons free($199 value)
或者Unlockwith your social account...
Quant(ˈkwänt)n: An expert, someone who knows more and more about less and less until they know everything about nothing.
Ut recusandae placeat minima quibusdam autem. Reprehenderit ipsa beatae expedita. Consectetur minus aperiam ut ipsum necessitatibus facilis quis dolores. Soluta eius sed reprehenderit magnam non.