Political Lean of Scientists

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

So I'd assumed a lot of their supporters would be from these kind of backgrounds- private schools, Ivy League college, things like that.

No, the thing they share is, I have what I want and don't want to lose it...

[Strange]

11 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

So I'd assumed a lot of their supporters would be from these kind of backgrounds- private schools, Ivy League college, things like that. So I'm surprised that the more educated you become, the less likely you are to be a Republican.

An expensive education doesn’t necessarily equate to a good education. 

[swansont]

3 hours ago, Strange said:

Who said it does?

Curious Layman implied a connection

2 hours ago, Curious layman said:

Ive always associated the Republicans with business, and the wealthy. So I'd assumed a lot of their supporters would be from these kind of backgrounds- private schools, Ivy League college, things like that. So I'm surprised that the more educated you become, the less likely you are to be a Republican. And I've always associated the Democrats with the working classes- Factory workers, street cleaners, waitresses, low income families etc..

Well then, educate yourself, and reduce the bias you have.

Even the application of some basic reasoning should tell you this isn’t the case. If “the wealthy” is the top 1%, they can’t make 50% of the college educated, even if all of the wealthy were republicans, which they aren't.

 

[Strange]

1 hour ago, swansont said:

Curious Layman implied a connection

Oh. I read the comment as big corporations supporting the Republican Party, not education

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

Oh. I read the comment as big corporations supporting the Republican Party, not education

It’s ambiguous.

[Curious layman]

I'm still surprised by this fact, when I look at Democrats and Republicans, I think of Labour and the Conservatives, in the U.K. the blues (conservative, Republican), are generally the better educated people, the middle and upper classes, not always of course. But that's the impression I've always had.

When I said wealthy, I wasn't thinking of the top 1 percent, just the people with good jobs.

[swansont]

9 minutes ago, Curious layman said:

I'm still surprised by this fact, when I look at Democrats and Republicans, I think of Labour and the Conservatives, in the U.K. the blues (conservative, Republican), are generally the better educated people, the middle and upper classes, not always of course. But that's the impression I've always had.

When I said wealthy, I wasn't thinking of the top 1 percent, just the people with good jobs.

The current incarnation of the GOP hates education for most people. It’s problematic when the voting population can see through their BS. 

Here is one of many links to stories about this, and how it was not always the case.

https://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/mar/22/democrats-more-educated-republicans-pew-research-c/

The trends you describe may have been the case decades ago, before the right started running away from science.

[John Cuthber]

They have been doing it for a while.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/texas-gop-rejects-critical-thinking-skills-really/2012/07/08/gJQAHNpFXW_blog.html

 

[MigL]

Don't confuse Democrats and Republicans with Liberals and Conservatives.
American Democrats are probably to the "right' of your UK Conservatives.
I have no clue where most American Republicans are anymore.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, MigL said:

I have no clue where most American Republicans are anymore.

At some kind of rally (most often Monster Truck, MAGA, or Klan).

[John Cuthber]

3 hours ago, MigL said:

I have no clue where most American Republicans are anymore.

 

Talking to Putin about setting up a dictatorship.

[Airbrush]

Left-leaning policies, are more popular according to the polls.  Such as climate change, gun control, and taxing the rich.

Edited September 2, 2019 by Airbrush

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

taxing the rich.

Another part of scientific reasoning is removing as much bias as possible. Progressive taxation is NOT simply "taxing the rich". I would consider someone a very poor rich person if they couldn't avoid a 90% tax on earnings over $5M/year. Instead, progressive taxes not only ensure the wealthy pay a proportional share, they also stimulate businesses to invest rather than sitting on the huge sums of cash they've been amassing for so long. That kind of money does little for the economy, and encourages buyouts and consolidations. Progressive taxation can help us avoid antitrust issues and companies that are too big to fail.

[CharonY]

16 hours ago, MigL said:

Don't confuse Democrats and Republicans with Liberals and Conservatives.
American Democrats are probably to the "right' of your UK Conservatives.
I have no clue where most American Republicans are anymore.

I have heard that a lot but I think it really just shows the weakness of an one-dimensional scoring system. They are probably slightly right when it comes to economic ideals, where the far left in the US are closer to mainstream in much of Europe. However, in say social aspects this is not quite as true, or at least it is a mixed bag. There are of course a number of reasons, including the fact that the US (and Canada) are countries built on immigration, whereas Europe is more conservative in that areas. Often the progressive wing within the US is more progressive than the equivalent in Europe (as well as on the opposite end of the spectrum), which has provided the US with a reputation of being a country of extremes.

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

Left-leaning policies, are more popular according to the polls.  Such as climate change, gun control, and taxing the rich.

It strange (by design) that climate change is seen as a left-leaning policy. It is a mere statement of fact and the need for addressing it (if not the right approach) should be a no-brainer. That being said, the conservative movement has formed a weird amalgam of religious, business and other inputs and took stance against it, which is now virtually impossible to shift. 

[John Cuthber]

1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

Left-leaning policies, are more popular according to the polls.  Such as climate change, gun control, and taxing the rich.

Exactly when did "climate change" become a policy?

[MigL]

I would have thought it's the other way around, CaronY.

The US is probably more fiscally conservative than most European countries.
Some are so in debt that they've had to be bailed out by other countries.
They seem to be more socially progressive than the US, as they certainly have better social programs, like health care, climate change, education subsidies, gun control, etc.
And they do this by higher taxation rates, although sometimes this isn't enough, and their debt get out of control.
( Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy come to mind )

Edited September 3, 2019 by MigL

[iNow]

48 minutes ago, MigL said:

I would have thought it's the other way around, CaronY.

The US is probably more fiscally conservative than most European countries.
Some are so in debt that they've had to be bailed out by other countries.
They seem to be more socially progressive than the US, as they certainly have better social programs, like health care, climate change, education subsidies, gun control, etc.
And they do this by higher taxation rates, although sometimes this isn't enough, and their debt get out of control.
( Greece, Portugal, Spain and Italy come to mind )

It’s not the social programs that put those countries in difficult fiscal situations. It’s the fact that they share a currency which they don’t control.

The US is different because they have their own currency and can simply print more, or inject billions into the banking system through quantitative easing. This presents a slight inflation risk, but inflation has been historically low (unlike Venezuela or Zimbabwe) and so is not seen by investors as a problem in any way. 

The US could offer all the same social programs as those EU nations (and even many more) and yet would never face the same challenges as Greece or Portugal, for example, since the US doesn’t share a currency or lack direct control over its creation or supply in the market.

[MigL]

"It’s not the social programs that put those countries in difficult fiscal situations"

I didn't say it was.
It has been mostly mismanagement, and inertia to keep doing as they've always done.
( even in the face of the changed currency situation )

[CharonY]

2 hours ago, MigL said:

I would have thought it's the other way around, CaronY.

The US is probably more fiscally conservative than most European countries.
 

Actually, that is what I meant, I realize that I did not specify "they", my apologies. I.e. on the economic axis your assertions probably mostly hold true. But in other elements, including social programs it really depends. Many of those are tightly connected to the economic systems, but other aspects, such as those of based on traditional values (i.e. social conservatism) is fairly ingrained in mainstream. Or if you ask questions involving cultural superiority for example. In religious matters much of the USA is still more conservative than many parts in Europe. At the same time, certain strains of liberalism are more prevalent in the US culture when compared to a number of of European countries. And of course, Europe itself is culturally massively diverse showing a rather broad range of distributions, which makes these types of comparison difficult and perhaps ultimately meaningless.

[Airbrush]

On 9/2/2019 at 11:26 AM, John Cuthber said:

Exactly when did "climate change" become a policy?

What I meant was addressing climate change includes a range of left-leaning policies.  Same goes for gun control, health care for everyone, and humane immigration control. 

[CharonY]

8 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

What I meant was addressing climate change includes a range of left-leaning policies.  Same goes for gun control, health care for everyone, and humane immigration control. 

I think the bigger issue is that in the US, acknowledging that a) climate change is happening and b) that it is of anthropogenic origin, is already considered a left stance.

And this is problematic as it means that the Republican party has adopted denying facts as part of the party platform. The same happened with evolution, for example. This, I believe is at least partially caused by the two-party system. In much of Europe the mainstream parties (if they exist) generally do not adopt stances, they are more typically co-opted by what is considered extreme parties. Of course, those have a recent rise in popularity, so who knows.