While "Progressive" is the closest label (that I know of) that might describe my stances, I don't actually DO anything, belong to any Progressive groups, keep up on what's going on, etc. [...]
Originally Posted by anndelise
A co-signer is someone who has sufficient income/resources to qualify to pay for not only their own place, but also the new place to be rented. This means that if the primary renter doesn't have enough income to make the rent, then the owner can go after the co-signer to pay it. An example, my daughter doesn't make enough money to qualify for the cheapest rental here, even though she works full time at minimum wage. So my husband has had to co-sign her rental agreement; which means that if my daughter can't make the payments, or damages the property, the owner can force my husband to cover the costs.
Lemme backtrack. So I don't understand: what was your problem with "co-signing" in 2016? The extra "red tape" work or that the minimum wage wasn't enough for a proper studio flat?
May I tease you a bit further? The following is the direct continuation of the first quote:
Originally Posted by anndelise
[...] On facebook I share/like some memes, and sometimes I share/like more than I wish I had, lol.[...]
As an "Sx/Sp" and a "progressive".... how "socially blind" and how progressive is to share more memes than you wished for on social media?
1) Pregnancy can happen whether you want it to or not.
2) I didn't know I was pregnant until 5 months along, so it was too late to abort.
3) I've only ever had the one child.
4) And finally, the decision to have or not have children is far more complex than one's political associations.
I'm only catching up now... so you're an ENFP in the MBTI, that means you're socially blind but you're an extrovert? ENFPs usually don't have Enneagram 6, except 7w6. I guess not having noticed your pregnancy sooner could be put down to inferior Si? How is keeping a child that could have been euthanized even at 5 months old less libertarian than your "libertarian e837 SLE older brother" that you piss off with memes? Yes, it's a complex decision... but is it complex in terms of rationality?
Lemme backtrack. So I don't understand: what was your problem with "co-signing" in 2016? The extra "red tape" work or that the minimum wage wasn't enough for a proper studio flat?
My problem with cosigning is that it means that the cost of rent here is way too high for a full time worker to be able to get even the cheapest and crappiest one bedroom apartment.
But it's not just the monthly cost of the apartment, my daughter could cover that by careful budgeting as I had. The problem is the demands that a renter must have an income that is 3 times the amount of the rent. Which then means that there must be two people working to get a studio or one bedroom apartment, and at least 3 people working full time to get a two bedroom apartment.
This means, in turn, that there are fewer choices and fewer options for workers and families today than there were when I was in my late teens and early 20s.
It influences whether or not a worker can go to school to improve their job prospects, or even to be looking for another job. More specifically for me, it means my daughter will be stuck in her dead-end job with nearly zero chances of upward mobility which could provide greater economic security, and significantly greater changes of even further downward mobility which would give way to even greater economical insecurity.
It also is a major reason why we have more homeless people than ever before. College students and single workers living in their cars.
And I worry about what will happen to my daughter when there's no one who can cosign for her. She'll become homeless as well. So I have to find ways of teaching her how to do that and be safe and well.
(and this doesn't even cover the climate change effects on economic security)
May I tease you a bit further? The following is the direct continuation of the first quote:
As an "Sx/Sp" and a "progressive".... how "socially blind" and how progressive is to share more memes than you wished for on social media?
I don't understand this question.
There are better ways of spending my time than sitting at a desk on the internet watching cute animal and political videos.
Also, I'm in a perpetual back and forth between Transmitting mode (Sx) (the liking and sharing of posts/memes/etc) vs a more Self-Preserving mode (Sp) (taking care of my nest, and preparing for times of insecurity).
None of this itself has to do with "progressive" label. Only the types of political shares.
I'm only catching up now... so you're an ENFP in the MBTI, that means you're socially blind but you're an extrovert? ENFPs usually don't have Enneagram 6, except 7w6. I guess not having noticed your pregnancy sooner could be put down to inferior Si? How is keeping a child that could have been euthanized even at 5 months old less libertarian than your "libertarian e837 SLE older brother" that you piss off with memes? Yes, it's a complex decision... but is it complex in terms of rationality?
Regarding my typing:
No, I'm NeFi in Socionics.
In MBTI I'm xNfx. (x means that I'm really close to the border of the two choices and it would switch depending on circumstances, lowercase f means I leaned more F than T, and Capital N means there was no doubt/borderingness)
Regarding NeFi and e6:
Enneagram 6 is a head fixation type, dealing with the aversive emotion of fear.
So take a socionics NeFi with their ability to look at things from differing even conflicting perspectives...
...add a very high propensity for Neuroticism, and very low propensity for Conscientiousness...
...add a bunch of life and security threatening trauma into their developing years...
...and BOOM!
I also have a long (enneagram related) history on this forum of fluctuating between my normal anxious and insecure mode: 6w7 sx/sp (or sp/sx)...to doing things that'll help me feel more secure and less anxious 6w7 sp/sx...which has the side-benefit of bringing up my confidence levels which leads me to go out and explore more ...7w6 sx/sp ... which only lasts a few days (if even that) before I'm back to seeing I had probably made yet another poor decision, imagining all the ways that something can go wrong, and returning to anxious mode.
Regarding 5 months before knowing prego:
Not having noticed my pregnancy is simple, but multi-influenced:
a) I have polycystic ovary syndrome aka PCOS. This means that I can go months (my record was 9 months without being pregnant) without having a period..and without having been pregnant. It also means that pregnancy is harder to accomplish because there's too thick of a wall around the uterus (due to lack of monthly shedding), as well as scar tissue, that blocks a fertilized egg from attaching to the uterus.
b) The time when I was throwing up? My roommate was cooking our food and she kept not cooking things properly. I assumed the throwing up had to do with that. "confirmed" when I took over the cooking for myself again and stopped throwing up.
c) I was on psyche meds that have side effects of weight gain. So even though I was in the best shape of my life, physically active, doing workouts, going to college to get a Recreation/Fitness Degree, etc...I kept gaining weight. I assumed it was the meds until I reached a point where I was panicked that maybe it was a tumor instead. (I wasn't dating or such, so there wasn't any recent sexual activity.)
d) By the time I bought the pregnancy tests, and went to see a Dr to verify, I was already 5 months along.
Regarding the last two Qs:
What does keeping and raising the child I couldn't abort have to do with libertarianism or my brother?
I kept the child because I was responsible for her. I considered seeing if her father wanted her, or his parents, but I didn't think they could do a good job of raising her. And when her special needs would over-power my own, I'd reconsider sending her to them. But ultimately I felt I would be the one best to understand what she was dealing with, and finding ways to help her overcome them. There was also a wanting to stop the cycle of abuse that ran rampant in our family. And the only way I felt I could ensure that was to be the one who raised her instead of them.
My problem with cosigning is that it means that the cost of rent here is way too high for a full time worker to be able to get even the cheapest and crappiest one bedroom apartment.
But it's not just the monthly cost of the apartment, my daughter could cover that by careful budgeting as I had. The problem is the demands that a renter must have an income that is 3 times the amount of the rent. Which then means that there must be two people working to get a studio or one bedroom apartment, and at least 3 people working full time to get a two bedroom apartment.
This means, in turn, that there are fewer choices and fewer options for workers and families today than there were when I was in my late teens and early 20s.
It influences whether or not a worker can go to school to improve their job prospects, or even to be looking for another job. More specifically for me, it means my daughter will be stuck in her dead-end job with nearly zero chances of upward mobility which could provide greater economic security, and significantly greater changes of even further downward mobility which would give way to even greater economical insecurity.
It also is a major reason why we have more homeless people than ever before. College students and single workers living in their cars.
And I worry about what will happen to my daughter when there's no one who can cosign for her. She'll become homeless as well. So I have to find ways of teaching her how to do that and be safe and well.
(and this doesn't even cover the climate change effects on economic security)
Historically, banks won't lend you money to buy a house unless your household income is 2.4X the cost of the house. 3X seems excessive. The landlords are trying to get a richer clientele.
Usually, the cost of property and the cost of rent is closely tied to how much money you can make by living in that area. High rents = high incomes. Of course, that is an average. When people are just starting out in their careers, it helps to have parental support.
You can't do much about this, but if property taxes were higher, then property would be worth less and it would cost less to buy property and consequently landlords wouldn't have to charge so much rent to cover their loan costs. They would, however, pass along the property tax increase to their renters.
BUT, with the added revenue from property taxes, the government could lower the income tax, which is a tax on productive labor, and renters with income would come out ahead. Why would you want to tax productive labor? Whatever you tax, you get less of.
Originally Posted by anndelise
Regarding the last two Qs:
What does keeping and raising the child I couldn't abort have to do with libertarianism or my brother?
I kept the child because I was responsible for her. I considered seeing if her father wanted her, or his parents, but I didn't think they could do a good job of raising her. And when her special needs would over-power my own, I'd reconsider sending her to them. But ultimately I felt I would be the one best to understand what she was dealing with, and finding ways to help her overcome them. There was also a wanting to stop the cycle of abuse that ran rampant in our family. And the only way I felt I could ensure that was to be the one who raised her instead of them.
Historically, banks won't lend you money to buy a house unless your household income is 2.4X the cost of the house. 3X seems excessive. The landlords are trying to get a richer clientele.
There's a few things going on from what I can understand.
For starters, we're in a college town, so there's high demand for rentals. Also, they charge extra rent for each person that shares the apartment. The understanding has been that if a student is renting an apartment, they must be from out of county, and so it's expected that the parents of the students will pay for some if not all the rent.
Also, due to the high demand, lots with homes are being torn down and multi-level apartment complexes are being built by the same developers who aren't local (probably from California). Even the cheaper apartments have been bought by these people. When I first moved out here (22 or so years ago), only a few apartments had this 3x requirement, and yes, they were in the nicer areas, with nicer apartments. I think the 3x demand started appearing more, in lesser neighborhoods, around the time when these developers were starting to push hard to buy up house lots to convert into apartments.
I feel like there's gotta be at least 1-2 other reasons why this has become such a widespread practice here, though.
Usually, the cost of property and the cost of rent is closely tied to how much money you can make by living in that area. High rents = high incomes. Of course, that is an average. When people are just starting out in their careers, it helps to have parental support.
That's what I would have thought. Unfortunately my daughter was born to me, I'm on disability, and so my income is below poverty line. I'm not eligible to cosign for her. Richard and I aren't actually married, but he's been kind enough to cosign for her before. Though he refuses to do it if she has a roommate. (understandable, he doesn't want to be held responsible for someone else) So my ability to help her is limited. I keep hinting to her that things might be easier financially if she moved somewhere else. But she wants to be near her friends, and where things are familiar to her. (If I wasn't with Richard, I'd have left this area years ago.)
Regarding my typing:
No, I'm NeFi in Socionics.
[Hidden in "spoiler" but elevated by me]In MBTI I'm xNfx. (x means that I'm really close to the border of the two choices and it would switch depending on circumstances, lowercase f means I leaned more F than T, and Capital N means there was no doubt/borderingness)
[...]
So take a socionics NeFi with their ability to look at things from differing even conflicting perspectives...
...add a very high propensity for Neuroticism, and very low propensity for Conscientiousness...
I'm not into Socionics but have plunged into the description to accommodate your language. IEE is actually ENTP in MBTI. Duckygo didn't give any "NeFi" Socionics profiles, so just went with the next best thing.
Oh, and what got me into politics in 2016 was my anger about how my 21yo daughter works a full time job at minimum wage, but still requires a co-signer to get one of the cheapest 1 bedroom apartments in town. I didn't have a problem getting cheapass apartments when I was her age, the price disparity has gotten out of proportion![emphasis by me]
Originally Posted by anndelise
My problem with cosigning is that it means that the cost of rent here is way too high for a full time worker to be able to get even the cheapest and crappiest one bedroom apartment.
But it's not just the monthly cost of the apartment, my daughter could cover that by careful budgeting as I had. The problem is the demands that a renter must have an income that is 3 times the amount of the rent. Which then means that there must be two people working to get a studio or one bedroom apartment, and at least 3 people working full time to get a two bedroom apartment.
Unfortunately, you have not answered my question: what is your issue with the practice of co-signing? What it sure looks like you have an issue with, though, is the reinforced accountability (i.e. "co-signing") to pay the price of having spared the life of a 5 month old fetus because of wanting the best for her. Do you not wish to be accountable for your choice for parenthood?
This means, in turn, that there are fewer choices and fewer options for workers and families today than there were when I was in my late teens and early 20s.
It influences whether or not a worker can go to school to improve their job prospects, or even to be looking for another job. More specifically for me, it means my daughter will be stuck in her dead-end job with nearly zero chances of upward mobility which could provide greater economic security, and significantly greater changes of even further downward mobility which would give way to even greater economical insecurity.
It also is a major reason why we have more homeless people than ever before. College students and single workers living in their cars. And I worry about what will happen to my daughter when there's no one who can cosign for her. She'll become homeless as well. So I have to find ways of teaching her how to do that and be safe and well. [emphasis by me]
I kept the child because I was responsible for her. [...] But ultimately I felt I would be the one best to understand what she was dealing with, and finding ways to help her overcome them.
But how would you be the best one to understand, if your economic freedom (that which influences the mortgage prices, influences against the trend of governmental regulation) is more important for you?
Regarding the last two Qs:
What does keeping and raising the child I couldn't abort have to do with libertarianism or my brother?
Libertarians score higher on Jonathan Haidt's "harm/care scale" and because of less interest in tradition (i.e. are more empathic than rule abiding/enforcing), their "thinking outside the box," or in this case "helping outside the box" is ungrounded in reality. That means a lack of foresight about the extremes of decentralization, the loosening of social fabric owed to individualism, laissez-faire economy (of the 'nuclear family' enterprise).
Also, I'm in a perpetual back and forth between Transmitting mode (Sx) (the liking and sharing of posts/memes/etc) vs a more Self-Preserving mode (Sp) (taking care of my nest, and preparing for times of insecurity).
While political memes, in theory, can be the subject of Sx transmission, alone they are not. With such omission, your understanding of Sx-dom appears to be false.
I appreciate you taking the time to reply to this, especially the part about your worries for your daughter; but when it comes to the "progressiveness" of your political views, I'm sorry to say but you do not sound convincing.
Except for impaired empathy, an ordinary guy who's looking for down-to-earth, loving, loyal friends and a geeky, warm, voluptuous girlfriend!
Unfortunately, you have not answered my question: what is your issue with the practice of co-signing?
There seems to be a misunderstanding going on between us. I'm either misunderstanding you, or your misunderstanding me, or both.
I DID answer your question. I may not have given you the answer you wanted, or I may have not been as directed as you wanted, but I did answer your question.
---
What it sure looks like you have an issue with, though, is the reinforced accountability (i.e. "co-signing") to pay the price of having spared the life of a 5 month old fetus because of wanting the best for her. Do you not wish to be accountable for your choice for parenthood?
The current local economic demands for renters to have income that is 3x the rent, isn't done as an effort to reinforce accountability for having children. That's a silly thing to even suggest.
edited to add: here's a link from a simple search regarding the 3x thing, it includes comments reasons for it, and reasons it's a poor measurement of suitability.
For every reason for it, there are alternative ways to help provide the security that the owner wants...but rental management places won't allow those alternatives. (I've even offered to pay a full year's rent at once, which means they could put it in the bank and make interest income from it for themselves. So 3x isn't just about feeling secure that the rent can be paid.) https://www.trulia.com/voices/Rental...or_time-425848
---
But how would you be the best one to understand, if your economic freedom (that which influences the mortgage prices, influences against the trend of governmental regulation) is more important for you?
Here you are either assuming or projecting some kind of values that don't match with anything I've said. Thus reinforcing the feeling that there's a misunderstanding happening within our communication efforts.
Edited to add: since you specifically bolded my "I would be the one best to understand what she was dealing with", I'll clarify what that meant. I had been on psyche meds for over 6 months, so that means my body (and uterus) were being heavily influenced before, during, and 5 months after conception. This is a recipe of potential disaster for the fetus in the womb, and how it will develop outside of the womb. I stopped all psyche meds as soon as I discovered my pregnancy. But those first 5 months are the most sensitive for the fetus, and so there were definitely negative effects for the resulting child, my daughter. I have a decent understanding of my family's history of psyche issues, and my own psyche issues. So, yes, I felt that I would be the best person available to raise her, who'd not only have a good chance of understanding what she was dealing with, but also in finding ways to overcome them.
---
Libertarians score higher on Jonathan Haidt's "harm/care scale" and because of less interest in tradition (i.e. are more empathic than rule abiding/enforcing), their "thinking outside the box," or in this case "helping outside the box" is ungrounded in reality. That means a lack of foresight about the extremes of decentralization, the loosening of social fabric owed to individualism, laissez-faire economy (of the 'nuclear family' enterprise).
Ok, so I'm guessing that you're not from the USA, while I am. *(see "edited to add" at end of this section")* And my understanding is that we're using the same terms to refer to different things.
So I'll rephrase what I meant when I say "progressive", to mean "social democratic"...and before you get confused by what I mean by that, I'll add that I'm a Bernie Sanders supporter.
In the USA, Liberals are not the same thing as Libertarians. Libertarians score very high on the Liberty/Oppression scale, and about average on the Fairness(Proportionality)/Cheating scale. Liberals score high on the Care/Harm scale; quite sensitive on the Liberty/Oppression scale; and about average on the Fairness(Proportionality)/Cheating scale.
And yes, this makes them somewhat blind to values that the other 1/3+ of the country includes in their decision making: Authority, Loyalty, and Sanctity.
(though many liberals have a variation of those three, as well; For example, I favor Sanctity of, and Loyalty to, the Earth and Sustainable Stewardship of its Resource. I'd rather American Resources be used to benefit ALL Americans on its soils, rather than Proportioning it out to whoever has the most money to buy off our government representatives or Proportioning it out to whoever's best at exploiting workers.)
* edited to add: after reviewing the thread I saw that you had already told me you weren't from the USA. I apologize for not having remembered that bit. If I had remembered I would have realized we were already headed to misunderstandings regarding those political labels, and maybe I could have clarified the above earlier.
---
While political memes, in theory, can be the subject of Sx transmission, alone they are not. With such omission, your understanding of Sx-dom appears to be false.
I appreciate you taking the time to reply to this, especially the part about your worries for your daughter; but when it comes to the "progressiveness" of your political views, I'm sorry to say but you do not sound convincing.
This is a thread specifically about Social-last and politics. A question was asked:
Just getting curious here- Social last types, what are your political or social justice opinions, and how involved are you in politics, if at all?
Are you completely apolitical and disinterested, or are you more involved than the stereotypes would have us believe?
...and I answered for myself.
You asked me questions, I answered.
I feel no need to convince you of anything.
There seems to be a misunderstanding going on between us.
I'm either misunderstanding you, or your misunderstanding me, or both.
I DID answer your question. I may not have given you the answer you wanted, or I may have not been as directed as you wanted, but I did answer your question.
---
The current local economic demands for renters to have income that is 3x the rent, isn't done as an effort to reinforce accountability for having children. That's a silly thing to even suggest.
edited to add: here's a link from a simple search regarding the 3x thing, it includes comments reasons for it, and reasons it's a poor measurement of suitability.
For every reason for it, there are alternative ways to help provide the security that the owner wants...but rental management places won't allow those alternatives. (I've even offered to pay a full year's rent at once, which means they could put it in the bank and make interest income from it for themselves. So 3x isn't just about feeling secure that the rent can be paid.) https://www.trulia.com/voices/Rental...or_time-425848
---
Here you are either assuming or projecting some kind of values that don't match with anything I've said. Thus reinforcing the feeling that there's a misunderstanding happening within our communication efforts.
Edited to add: since you specifically bolded my "I would be the one best to understand what she was dealing with", I'll clarify what that meant. I had been on psyche meds for over 6 months, so that means my body (and uterus) were being heavily influenced before, during, and 5 months after conception. This is a recipe of potential disaster for the fetus in the womb, and how it will develop outside of the womb. I stopped all psyche meds as soon as I discovered my pregnancy. But those first 5 months are the most sensitive for the fetus, and so there were definitely negative effects for the resulting child, my daughter. I have a decent understanding of my family's history of psyche issues, and my own psyche issues. So, yes, I felt that I would be the best person available to raise her, who'd not only have a good chance of understanding what she was dealing with, but also in finding ways to overcome them.
---
Ok, so I'm guessing that you're not from the USA, while I am. *(see "edited to add" at end of this section")* And my understanding is that we're using the same terms to refer to different things.
So I'll rephrase what I meant when I say "progressive", to mean "social democratic"...and before you get confused by what I mean by that, I'll add that I'm a Bernie Sanders supporter.
In the USA, Liberals are not the same thing as Libertarians. Libertarians score very high on the Liberty/Oppression scale, and about average on the Fairness(Proportionality)/Cheating scale. Liberals score high on the Care/Harm scale; quite sensitive on the Liberty/Oppression scale; and about average on the Fairness(Proportionality)/Cheating scale.
And yes, this makes them somewhat blind to values that the other 1/3+ of the country includes in their decision making: Authority, Loyalty, and Sanctity.
(though many liberals have a variation of those three, as well; For example, I favor Sanctity of, and Loyalty to, the Earth and Sustainable Stewardship of its Resource. I'd rather American Resources be used to benefit ALL Americans on its soils, rather than Proportioning it out to whoever has the most money to buy off our government representatives or Proportioning it out to whoever's best at exploiting workers.)
* edited to add: after reviewing the thread I saw that you had already told me you weren't from the USA. I apologize for not having remembered that bit. If I had remembered I would have realized we were already headed to misunderstandings regarding those political labels, and maybe I could have clarified the above earlier.
---
This is a thread specifically about Social-last and politics. A question was asked:
...and I answered for myself.
You asked me questions, I answered.
I feel no need to convince you of anything.
It takes time to cool down but I'm taking it, alright, more than just dishing it out. I missed the mark big time but the driving force was just. This is not the complete rebuff, I'm lazy to do it. Plus, I'm not even sure it's better to make you aware of your own self, lest you'll co-opt that. But if I really cared to and wanted to, the easiest point to tackle is your not progressive but conservative (Cartesian, "innocent-") use of the mother love rhetoric. Most women do this to win... a lot of things. Oh, and I'm also lazy to read up on Jon Haidt, but even if you got that right (I can doubt that since in line with the competitiveness to ruff my argument, you still fail to provide the source, you know, giving back to the community and all...) you are still missing a point with libertarians and their "care/harm" rhetoric... that which relates to your conservative use of the motherhood rhetoric. So overall, you may claim "social democrat," your actions speak somewhere between conservative and libertarian.
So I might put more effort into digging up some cases about mother "love" later (I have them saved somewhere) but since I'm already sure you are not "leaning more towards feeling," as you wrote earlier but you are an ENTP - and I'm also sure the only Enneagram 6 you might have may actually be a 5w6 (like my uncle has it) but your primary motivation is more of an Enneagram 3 - I'm okay with postponing that response indefinitely. You guys shouldn't smarten up too much, there are even greater numbers of "zombies" you'd jump opportunistically to fool/exploit. Plus, I've been through these rounds already: of getting into these long debates of tangents within tangents with an ENTP and no matter what they still wouldn't admit to being immoral/ethically disloyal, they'd relativize my Fi because everything depends on something else, so there's no final agency to blame, right?
Last edited by Neokortex; 07-26-2019 at 10:03 PM.
Except for impaired empathy, an ordinary guy who's looking for down-to-earth, loving, loyal friends and a geeky, warm, voluptuous girlfriend!
It takes time to cool down but I'm taking it, alright, more than just dishing it out. I missed the mark big time but the driving force was just. This is not the complete rebuff, I'm lazy to do it. Plus, I'm not even sure it's better to make you aware of your own self, lest you'll co-opt that. But if I really cared to and wanted to, the easiest point to tackle is your not progressive but conservative (Cartesian, "innocent-") use of the mother love rhetoric. Most women do this to win... a lot of things. Oh, and I'm also lazy to read up on Jon Haidt, but even if you got that right (I can doubt that since in line with the competitiveness to ruff my argument, you still fail to provide the source, you know, giving back to the community and all...)
Oh, I assumed you were familiar with his work since you yourself were referencing Jon Haidt.
Source book = "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion" by Jonathan Haidt.
I was on the second to last chapter of my second read through of the book at the time that I posted that last response to you. I was actually excited to see that someone else had read his work...but after your response I'm doubting you've actually read his book. Have you gone to his website at least? Here's a helpful quote for ya: (please note that the writer of the quoted article was Jonathan Haidt.)
https://billmoyers.com/content/excer...ighteous-mind/ :
(A note on terminology: In the United States, the word liberal refers to progressive or left- wing politics, and I will use the word in this sense. But in Europe and elsewhere, the word liberal is truer to its original meaning—valuing liberty above all else, including in economic activities. When Europeans use the word liberal, they often mean something more like the American term libertarian, which cannot be placed easily on the left- right spectrum. Readers from outside the United States may want to swap in the words progressive or left- wing whenever I say liberal.)
you are still missing a point with libertarians and their "care/harm" rhetoric... that which relates to your conservative use of the motherhood rhetoric. So overall, you may claim "social democrat," your actions speak somewhere between conservative and libertarian.
So I might put more effort into digging up some cases about mother "love" later (I have them saved somewhere) but since I'm already sure you are not "leaning more towards feeling," as you wrote earlier but you are an ENTP - and I'm also sure the only Enneagram 6 you might have may actually be a 5w6 (like my uncle has it) but your primary motivation is more of an Enneagram 3 - I'm okay with postponing that response indefinitely. You guys shouldn't smarten up too much, there are even greater numbers of "zombies" you'd jump opportunistically to fool/exploit. Plus, I've been through these rounds already: of getting into these long debates of tangents within tangents with an ENTP and no matter what they still wouldn't admit to being immoral/ethically disloyal, they'd relativize my Fi because everything depends on something else, so there's no final agency to blame, right?
Your mbti typing of me means nothing here. so I'm not going to bother addressing it.
Also, your response isn't to me as a person nor anything I've actually written, but are based on your gut assumption of retyping me. Which kind of confirms Haidt when he says that "Intuitions come first, strategic reasoning comes second." Hence, your blatant misunderstandings of what I've actually written. Your intuitions about what I meant by "progressive", "liberal", NeFi, etc. have been proven now to be off, (see the links for the proof) which means that your 'strategic reasoning' is off as well. Perhaps read the Haidt related links, review his materials, review what I've written, and perhaps you'll find the 'error of your ways',
----- edited to add:
you may claim "social democrat," your actions speak somewhere between conservative and libertarian.
It must be nice to live in a country where the things I'm interested in having in the USA is so taken for granted that it's considered conservative to want them. It must be nice to have single payer medical insurance, a livable minimum wage to basic living costs ratio, sustainable energy rather than fossil fuels, pro-choice, equal rights for lgbtq+, a country attempting to counter climate change, a non-corporate-bought government, religion being kept out of government, humane treatment of immigrants and refugees, and a country that doesn't think the free-market is god-like. It really must be nice to live in that country. But that is NOT the USA yet. And currently, wanting those things is considered soooo far Left that it's anti-american. That to want those things means you hate america. I can only dream of the day when those things are considered so inherent in our system that they're considered conservative values.
Oh, I assumed you were familiar with his work since you yourself were referencing Jon Haidt.
Source book = "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion" by Jonathan Haidt.
I was on the second to last chapter of my second read through of the book at the time that I posted that last response to you. I was actually excited to see that someone else had read his work...but after your response I'm doubting you've actually read his book. Have you gone to his website at least? Here's a helpful quote for ya: (please note that the writer of the quoted article was Jonathan Haidt.)
Your mbti typing of me means nothing here. so I'm not going to bother addressing it.
Also, your response isn't to me as a person nor anything I've actually written, but are based on your gut assumption of retyping me. Which kind of confirms Haidt when he says that "Intuitions come first, strategic reasoning comes second." Hence, your blatant misunderstandings of what I've actually written. Your intuitions about what I meant by "progressive", "liberal", NeFi, etc. have been proven now to be off, (see the links for the proof) which means that your 'strategic reasoning' is off as well. Perhaps read the Haidt related links, review his materials, review what I've written, and perhaps you'll find the 'error of your ways',
----- edited to add:
It must be nice to live in a country where the things I'm interested in having in the USA is so taken for granted that it's considered conservative to want them. It must be nice to have single payer medical insurance, a livable minimum wage to basic living costs ratio, sustainable energy rather than fossil fuels, pro-choice, equal rights for lgbtq+, a country attempting to counter climate change, a non-corporate-bought government, religion being kept out of government, humane treatment of immigrants and refugees, and a country that doesn't think the free-market is god-like. It really must be nice to live in that country. But that is NOT the USA yet. And currently, wanting those things is considered soooo far Left that it's anti-american. That to want those things means you hate america. I can only dream of the day when those things are considered so inherent in our system that they're considered conservative values.
I thought you said you...
Originally Posted by anndelise
feel no need to convince [me] of anything.
Except for impaired empathy, an ordinary guy who's looking for down-to-earth, loving, loyal friends and a geeky, warm, voluptuous girlfriend!
Originally Posted by anndelise
Lemme backtrack. So I don't understand: what was your problem with "co-signing" in 2016? The extra "red tape" work or that the minimum wage wasn't enough for a proper studio flat?
Reply With Quote
