|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On March 08 2016 00:00 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2016 23:54 Plansix wrote:On March 07 2016 23:50 Gorsameth wrote:On March 07 2016 23:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 07 2016 15:57 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:42 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:35 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote:
People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country. Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think? Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US? We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something? Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude). The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields. Same as healthcare, make it available to everyone and we get rationing. please educate me. How is education a finite resource. You have finite number of people to teach it. Finite classroom space. Finite books. Some form of selection or "rationing" is be necessary to make sure the people that attended higher education are in the right place. There is no reason to offer it to everyone and set people up to fail. I would totally agree with you if you could prove that having some people with higher education is better than having everybody with a certain degree of education. The USSR and China actually proved, in my opinion, that it is both morally and economically better for a country to give the best education it can to the entire population rather than just giving the best it can to a few selected and highly qualified individual (which is a form of aristocratic vision of the world, from top to bottom, very opposed to the ideal of the market were all agents are basically impossible to differenciate).
That might be a miscommunication on my part. When I say higher education, I mean masters or PHD program. Considering that some sort of post high school education is necessary to obtain a job, I wasn’t referring to that specifically. That the selection/rationing would increase with the difficulty of the specific field.
|
On March 08 2016 00:02 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2016 23:54 Plansix wrote:On March 07 2016 23:50 Gorsameth wrote:On March 07 2016 23:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 07 2016 15:57 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:42 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:35 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote:
People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country. Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think? Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US? We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something? Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude). The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields. Same as healthcare, make it available to everyone and we get rationing. please educate me. How is education a finite resource. You have finite number of people to teach it. Finite classroom space. Finite books. Some form of selection or "rationing" is be necessary to make sure the people that attended higher education are in the right place. There is no reason to offer it to everyone and set people up to fail. Which is no different from how it is already being done. There is already a selection process for studies to ensure you have the required foundation.
Not really. You can go to college being totally unqualified and get whatever degree you want if you pay for it yourself. No one tells you that your degree will be worthless if they're making money on your inability to grasp that fact for yourself.
|
The issue is not in degrees but that there is not enough work to be done for everyone to make a living.
The whole "be a productive member of society you moocher"-argument falls totally flat, when you realize that people with money actually need to have a reason to hire more people, and they usually don't. There is a demand shortfall for the forseeable future and no amount of education will help fixing that. You can't solve a demand side problem with increasing the supply.
|
United States43585 Posts
On March 07 2016 23:37 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2016 15:57 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:42 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:35 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote:
People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country. Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think? Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US? We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something? Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude). The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields. Same as healthcare, make it available to everyone and we get rationing.
You are aware that you already have rationing, right? That limits on what insurance will and will not cover is rationing?
Just checking because this whole "death panels and rationing" scare that the right does seems to work under the assumption that neither of those are everywhere in the current system. I don't know why they don't just commit to it and say that in a society with socialized healthcare everyone will die (eventually). It's just as true and it's just as meaningless.
|
On March 08 2016 00:01 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2016 23:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 07 2016 15:57 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:42 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:35 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote:
People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country. Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think? Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US? We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something? Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude). The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields. Same as healthcare, make it available to everyone and we get rationing. One of the major issues in US healthcare is just how bad it is at encouraging preventative healthcare because it's not profitable for healthcare providers. Quite a lot of major medical procedures could be avoided if people would go to the doctor the moment they feel poorly so that their issues could be looked at and fixed on the cheap. That is because healthcare is designed to maximize profit rather than ensure people are healthy.
The onus for incentivizing preventative care is therefore on employers, insurers and other entities who actually pay for care. Back on the larger theme of paying for performance, we see value based care plans for individual procedures and outcomes while provider organizations like ACO's who receive bundled payments (you get $x for this population, spend it how you like if you do well the leftover $$$ is yours) for their populations as a whole where preventative care and keeping people healthy becomes more prominent.
Did that make sense? I feel like I made word salad. It's Monday morning.
On March 08 2016 00:02 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2016 23:54 Plansix wrote:On March 07 2016 23:50 Gorsameth wrote:On March 07 2016 23:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 07 2016 15:57 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:42 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:35 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote:
People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country. Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think? Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US? We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something? Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude). The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields. Same as healthcare, make it available to everyone and we get rationing. please educate me. How is education a finite resource. You have finite number of people to teach it. Finite classroom space. Finite books. Some form of selection or "rationing" is be necessary to make sure the people that attended higher education are in the right place. There is no reason to offer it to everyone and set people up to fail. Which is no different from how it is already being done. There is already a selection process for studies to ensure you have the required foundation.
It's not strong enough. American students, on average, are woefully underprepared for college and laughably behind their peers in other nations. No one thinks that the critical thinking skills and other things people get in college are not useful, but there is a lot of college fluff that people don't need for many jobs.
Furthermore, guaranteeing student loans means colleges are misincentivized to pretty much take whoever meets a pretty low set of qualifications while jacking up tuition.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
dont think the damper on job creation and new businesses/expansions is primarily a short run demand side problem.( a long
run demand thing like demographics is real) growth is strong in some of the more tech driven areas and corp profit is persistently high in an environment of very active m&a but no new entrants to traditional sectors.
it is a mix between demand, outsourcing and higher complexity of global mkt representing barrier to entry. some shortterm focus of management too.
weve talked about this previously. temporary slack caused by low aggregate demand isnt that big right now. problem is more structural
|
On March 08 2016 00:17 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On March 07 2016 23:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 07 2016 15:57 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:42 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:35 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote:
People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country. Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think? Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US? We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something? Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude). The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields. Same as healthcare, make it available to everyone and we get rationing. You are aware that you already have rationing, right? That limits on what insurance will and will not cover is rationing? Just checking because this whole "death panels and rationing" scare that the right does seems to work under the assumption that neither of those are everywhere in the current system. I don't know why they don't just commit to it and say that in a society with socialized healthcare everyone will die (eventually). It's just as true and it's just as meaningless.
Not everyone is as rational as you are about having care limited. Death panels are bunk and as you said exist in some form anyways, but I don't think most people really understand the difference in how care is delivered under a public system compared to our current one.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
making cc cheaper to free and have them teach more vocational skills can help. it is still about replaceability though.
if you have a leaky two chamber balloon thing (capital-labor) and you apply pressure to the capital side to push more air to labor, the air will just escape.
it is not feasible or even good to eliminate trade so you want to reform the structure and get more control over it so all partipants are lifted to our regulatory and labor standards. this will only help.
|
United States43585 Posts
On March 08 2016 00:27 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 00:17 KwarK wrote:On March 07 2016 23:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On March 07 2016 15:57 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:42 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:38 WolfintheSheep wrote:On March 07 2016 15:35 oBlade wrote:On March 07 2016 15:26 Slaughter wrote:
People in the US talk such a big game when it comes to being friendly and open and the bastion of freedom of opportunity but really its just a country full of selfish people. Me me me, I must win and if someone else is winning then its my loss so no I don't want to pay for things that benefit other people because fuck them they all must be moochers who want everything given to them.
*meanwhile in Europe* Isn't it great that we have enriched our nation by investing in ourselves as a whole instead of being divided and letting some invisible hand work its magic?
Like there is 0 sense of community and unity in this country. Everyone is too individualistic and what groups do form are numerous with narrow goals and they all distrust each other (and also cut across cultural/racial/economic/religious lines).
We carved ourselves up into niches and everyone only wants their niche to win and thinks that they are 100% self reliant and every other group is just looking for hand outs on their dime.
No one actually wants to make America "great" again, they want to make whatever niche they are apart of to get theirs and who cares about the rest.
Fuck You. Got Mine is the motto of this country. Okay. We're going to making housing free for everybody. A domicile is more important than ever in this day and age. Especially with ballooning housing costs. Nobody will notice you without a place to live. And people who have housing pay taxes (homeless people pay less taxes) - so it all works out. If you're at all skeptical about the viability of the specifics of footing the bill for my rent, it means you hate helping people, are greedy, and just want to insult people by calling them moochers. What do you think? Is low-income housing not even a thing in the US? We're not talking about low-income housing or shelters. We're talking about free housing for everybody.What Bernie's pushing is not "adding to the myriad need-based scholarships and loan programs," it's "free college for everybody." Or have I missed something? Depends. I haven't actually read his plan (if that's even laid out yet), but free post-secondary education (or heavily subsidized education) usually leads to stricter qualifications for students and for the schools. So college may be free, but everyone still won't be going to college (whether its desire or aptitude). The biggest difference would be that the bottom colleges will actually have to start caring about academic output...which is why in most other countries going to a Community College doesn't really have a stigma to it, but it does probably mean you're receiving an education in a trade or applied skills for specific fields. Same as healthcare, make it available to everyone and we get rationing. You are aware that you already have rationing, right? That limits on what insurance will and will not cover is rationing? Just checking because this whole "death panels and rationing" scare that the right does seems to work under the assumption that neither of those are everywhere in the current system. I don't know why they don't just commit to it and say that in a society with socialized healthcare everyone will die (eventually). It's just as true and it's just as meaningless. Not everyone is as rational as you are about having care limited. Death panels are bunk and as you said exist in some form anyways, but I don't think most people really understand the difference in how care is delivered under a public system compared to our current one.
I've lived under both and I would take the NHS 15 times out of 10 rather than the US system. It's not about the money coming out of your paycheck, that employer provided insurance is money coming out of your paycheck either way, it's about having a system that works for you and cares for you. I've tried to make an appointment under both, I've tried to get prescriptions for generic drugs in the US for something that has been out for 20 years and been told that I need to go to Mexico to get the generic or else pay 10x the price I'm used to paying for it in the UK. I've had people I care about try and get urgent care and try to wrestle with a mess of different providers and networks, none of which are willing to help them but simply send them in an endless loop of "call this person to see if you qualify" and even after someone is found that is in network there are no appointments for 6 months.
I don't think Americans understand that living in England, if I needed immediate care I could walk into my doctor's office that morning and see a doctor that morning through triage. Just before I left for America I needed to get a set of vaccines so I called my local GP, told them what I needed and they offered me an appointment two days later. I showed up for my appointment, a nurse gave me the vaccines immediately and then I left without a bill. I recently made an appointment to get a physical through my healthcare provider over here. I had to phone around until I found one accepting new patients and they were able to give me an appointment a month from when I called.
When people who haven't experienced socialism think about what they've been told by talking heads they think inefficiencies, long lines, hoarding etc. My experience has been the opposite. The NHS just works. The American system doesn't, and it fails to work at twice the price.
|
The American system works great. Only its primary goal is to maximize profit, not well being.
|
I have so many friends from Canada and the EU that can’t understand why the US system is so terrible and people put up with it. Then I have to explain to them that the health insurance lobby has a lot of influence over government and donates heavily. Then they ask why we put up with that too.
By the end it, it degrades down to the fact that we are terrified of government, so we will let anyone else screw us over so long as we don’t vote for them.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
main problem is how you pick which peovider serves which area. the current distribution of doctors is not really ideal towards figuring that out.
|
On March 08 2016 00:26 oneofthem wrote:
dont think the damper on job creation and new businesses/expansions is primarily a short run demand side problem.( a long
run demand thing like demographics is real) growth is strong in some of the more tech driven areas and corp profit is persistently high in an environment of very active m&a but no new entrants to traditional sectors.
it is a mix between demand, outsourcing and higher complexity of global mkt representing barrier to entry. some shortterm focus of management too.
weve talked about this previously. temporary slack caused by low aggregate demand isnt that big right now. problem is more structural
i didn't mean a short term slump in demand but instead that productivity has increased faster than demand for actual humans doing actual things, and the gap will only widen ever further with ongoing automation.
|
On March 08 2016 00:52 Plansix wrote:
I have so many friends from Canada and the EU that can’t understand why the US system is so terrible and people put up with it.
"Socialism"
It's remarkable how afraid Americans are of that word.
|
On March 08 2016 00:58 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On March 08 2016 00:52 Plansix wrote:
I have so many friends from Canada and the EU that can’t understand why the US system is so terrible and people put up with it.
"Socialism" It's remarkable how afraid Americans are of that word.
I think there are legitimate issues with socialism in the US, specifically because we are so large. But those problems can be solved or addressed in different ways. The way the US healthcare systems works is comically bad. Like actively terrible and the fact that anyone defends it or wants to revert back to pre-ACA healthcare is a joke. I don’t care what problems the ACA has, we need it to push our healthcare beyond being flaming garbage.
|
Its so mindnumbing that someone who advocates Soziale Marktwirtschaft would brand themself as socialist.
Furthermore a society should have enough experts, intelligencia and academia to realize which services are fit for a market and which are a necessity that would create incentives adverse to society at large if they were operated as a profit driven market.
Infrastructure, Healthcare, Utilities and everything that screws people disproportionally for being outside of the high margin low effort parts of the population come to mind....
|
KwarK, you're strawmanning here. I'm not arguing that the US health system needs improvements or that the it's somehow superior to the NHS. It would be ridiculous to think that (though I guess from the perspective of a billionaire the US is nice because you can have your own medical staff and access to cutting edge medicine).
I also didn't mean to imply that socialized/ nationalized medicine is bad. It's been boogeymanned yes, but its proponents rarely admit to its limitations; it's an objectively much better solution, but one with it's own drawbacks as well. To be perfectly clear, I'd be very happy with something like that-- I've lived in Taiwan and it has a kickass system, my grandma broke her hip a month ago, she got access to the best treatment without it impacting her finances. My concerns have always been about what sort of better system we can transition to from our current one.
An interesting point I just thought of-- the US healthcare system is running at lousy efficiency (defined as $$$ -> outcomes) compared to other nations' systems, but if we jacked that waaay up through price controls, advanced data analytics and proper incentives, would it be able to generate more value than a nationalized system?
Also based on what I've read and heard, the NHS isn't quite all daisy and roses either. Wait time for a GP is up to 2 weeks, and entry-level physicians are threatening to go on strike because of lousy pay and more hours.
|
I think part of the problem is that "socialism" is a word used abusively and in a really dishonest way by the right. It's meant to describe systems like the NHS, the French social security or nordic welfare states, but is on purpose associated to the former USSR and former eastern block.
As if Norway and 1960's Poland had anything in common.
Socialism as we use it in the modern era (à-la Sanders) is not exclusive to capitalism. That's why I prefer using social democracy. That's the same thing and you don't give bullets to the right wing to pretend that you want to emulate Stalin when you instal free education and healthcare.
|
On March 08 2016 01:08 ticklishmusic wrote:
KwarK, you're strawmanning here. I'm not arguing that the US health system needs improvements or that the it's somehow superior to the NHS. It would be ridiculous to think that (though I guess from the perspective of a billionaire the US is nice because you can have your own medical staff and access to cutting edge medicine).
Do you really actually think poor billionaires in germany have somehow worse medical care than their counterparts in the US?
The idea of universal healthcare is that it provides a reasonable/humane/dignified floor on treatment, not a ceiling.
If you have more money to spend you can get a stay at your private luxurious treatment center in beautiful locations that even attracts despots and dictators from all over the world.
|
On March 08 2016 01:09 Biff The Understudy wrote:
I think part of the problem is that "socialism" is a word used abusively and in a really dishonest way by the right. It's meant to describe systems like the NHS, the French social security or nordic welfare states, but is on purpose associated to the former USSR and former eastern block.
As if Norway and 1960's Poland had anything in common.
Socialism as we use it in the modern era (à-la Sanders) is not exclusive to capitalism. That's why I prefer using social democracy. That's the same thing and you don't give bullets to the right wing to pretend that you want to emulate Stalin when you instal free education and healthcare.
No it is not the same, social democracy is a form of government that is build on the idea that a stable economic system like "social market economy" can be achived through legeslation stemming from a representative democracy.
They are 2 intertwined parts of an overarching idea: social stability from a dignified existence through reliable law and regulation as well as redistribution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
