Define “free health care & free education.” You call it “free,” I say someone paid for it, and you are the parasite assuming it’s a free lunch. Just admit it…you want someone else to pay for your stuff. So easy to be generous or opportunistic with other peoples money. smh.
And btw…does this protesting in France mean the socialists are starting to run out of other people’s money?
I don’t intend to be rude, I just wish to be direct. By default, if you want taxpayer money to pay for social services, that’ perfectly fine, but don’t call it “free.” What you are complaining about is a corrupt centralized authority, but then seemingly wish to defend UBI…enforced by a corrupt centralized authority. I find it so interesting that the same people complaining about government corruption want the solution to be more government.
I agree there is the potential for mass abundance. The problem we have is how do we get to the sort of utopia you describe without some sort of redistribution of wealth? The most likely dominators in the age of machines will be the likes of Google, AWS and Alibaba. They deploy their “machines” around the world sucking up jobs. They have the wealth and the means to create more wealth we end up with a two class world of the (real) elite dominators and the useless (the rest of us). If this theory is correct then there would need to be some mechanism to redistribute the wealth say through a tax on “machines” or for every worker replaced they take a share in one of the dominators equivalent to a similar return as their previous salary. Will the dominators just sit back and let that happen? Probably not, they will use their huge resources to tie every legal challenge up in red tape. We the rest of the people see that as fair? Unlikely to the point where they will take action against the dominators, potentially civil unrest. This is the crux of the problem I think we are facing. The calculations for a UBI don’t stack up to provide everyone with a beyond subsistence level of income!
Q: How did we get the global poverty rate down from about 95% to 10% over the past couple hundred years? A: income inequality. Q:How did we destroy entire civilizations? A: Redistribution schemes.
Innovation is a funny thing…it tends to make everyone better off. Redistribution does the opposite. Think decentralized wealth instead of redistributed wealth and let your mind think of all the possibilities.
I don’t agree calling someone a parasite for using the healthcare system. It’s not free because we pay tax.
Cheers Max, @lordhumungus Stop being a DICK, you are trying to draw me into some sort of infentile argument, you clearly are a young child who’s got no knowledge of the big wide world or any life skill by the sounds of it, so run along and go and pester someone who gives a shit…
Also as far as I’m aware our healthcare system is ranked higher than the states.
I’m not a socialist at all. Intact I can’t stand politics and try stay clear (sometimes I fail)But I do like our healthcare system. It has its faults, but it’s nice to know if anything ever happened where I couldn’t work and got ill, I would be looked after.
Your spot on there Max, the suits are trying to destroy it though and get their american coporations in at the trough to feed off our tax £’s.
I think weve still got a few years left before they drain our resources and we end up dying in the street like americans do
The US subsidizes the EU via military support, straight up cash, etc. And where’s the gratitude btw? Take that away, your healthcare system implodes and all the other little feel-good projects go down with it. Heck, it’s imploding on its own, you just don’t know it yet. All these redistribution schemes have the exact. same. outcome. every. single. time. They are designed to fail from day 1. The world can thrive without state-sponsored healthcare. Decentralize all of this nonsense, throw in things like mutual benefit societies et al, bring back the incentives to innovate. The larger the state, the smaller the citizen. You’ll be “looked after” for sure lol.
Any evidence to support this?
Well, it started with preventing the annihilation of Europe via war, followed by the Marshall Plan, with the key aspects of that still going on to this day. My point is that Europe could have never been able to experiment with socialist ideas without other people’s money and outsourcing their national defense to the U.S. If they don’t have a big military budget (because the U.S. does the bulk of that for them), then they can spend more on social programs, at least until they run out of that money too. Inevitable outcome, but people still believe in magic money. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marshall_Plan
Just an interesting point to make though is that the US likes to say that it wants the EU to have its own military commitments so that the US doesnt have to take care of us. But when the EU starts going towards its own military there is also pushback because that would probably mean a weaker NATO and also push the European countries to have more influence on military decisions in the world which I would say the US kind of has a monopoly on right now. I am just saying either the US keeps its say in the military actions made and spend its money on protecting Europe or it will have to accept that Europe will have its say as well.
I am myself for the EU having its own military and not being dependent on the US but dont pretend the US doesnt get anything in return for its military spending in Europe.
Also just my view on socialism, I am myself not for the European model of socialism but I would also say that the strain on the system right is not just because of socialism. We have a lot of complex problems contributing to our healthcare etc going the way it is going (I am aware though that some of these problems can be argued being a bi-product of socialism).
Is Universal Health Care Socialism?
Only if we believe that every other developed market-based economy in the world is socialist since the U.S. is the only one without universal coverage. We spend almost $10,000 per year per capita on health care, about twice as much as most developed countries. However, in terms of major health outcomes, such as infant mortality or life expectancy, we are laggards. In a recent OECD survey, we ranked 27th out of 35 countries in life expectancy. Japan spends about $4,000 per year per capita in health care, yet the average Japanese has a life expectancy of 84 years, versus 79 for the average American. Why?
Every developed country other than the U.S. has had universal care for decades.
I would recommend reading this book. It is a little old so of course a lot of thing have changed but it explains the different ways of thinking that Europe and the US have. I would also say that Jeremy Rifkin is a little to left leaning for my taste but I cant argue most of his points.
I definitely agree with this and there is a few instances of this in the book. But his descriptions of the value-systems and thinking of Europe vs the US is very good. Thanks for the information though definitely makes me more skeptical of him then before!
I find RIfkin to be in the same boat as Reich. You are better to ignore them both or you will lose IQ points.
A Philosophical Economist’s Case against a Government-Guaranteed Basic Income