-8.38, -6.05
GIANT CAVAET: I find aspects of the test's design to be questionable. The lack of nuance is incredibly bad because you general know which choice aligns in which direction, but incredibly poor wording makes it hard to swallow some of the questions. I answered using their wording, not the way I would have if the question was precisely worded. As such, my actual place is definitely to the left of this.
"Are people born unlucky?" in the religion section- Very Vague. You could say someone born into an oppressive situation is unlucky, but it's not that they themselves are unlucky. Is this a disagree or agree?
The one regarding people who can work, should work- This question is framed with a viewpoint baked right in. The way the question is written makes it perfectly natural to agree, but the question also doesn't paint a remotely accurate picture of how the system actually works. I would also say that people with lots of money who get lower tax rates on capital gains are the actually the group that this question accurately describes.
There are a bunch of other questions that I thought were flat out sloppy due to the lack of nuance. Does anyone think that Charles Manson could have been rehabilitated (regarding the question about whether the worst offenders can be rehabilitated)? I can't imagine that there would be much variation in the answer, so what was the question actually trying to determine?
