Re: Socialism

[pyat]

From Time Magazine:
"There is no way that the French government can pay for this lifestyle forever, except that it somehow does. "

Yes. The argument that socialized health care and welfare will somehow bankrupt a country is an odd one, since it often comes from strong proponents of free markets, who firmly believe in society's ability to generate wealth. I also hear it from people who claim the military is underfunded.

Of course, that last point may be legitimate in Canada, where the military budget is just 1% (give or take a few tenths) of the GDP. However, I more commonly hear it from Americans, where military spending represents about 45% of total world military spending, and is at the point where the U.S. could annually fund the construction two dozen space elevators instead, something which, P.S., would generate more wealth rather than simply evaporating into accounting limbo.

In any case, the belief that socialized health care and welfare will eventually bankrupt a nation is similar to the belief that continuing to buy groceries will eventually put you in the poorhouse.

Comments

[dagoski.livejournal.com]

What you're seeing here is the fact that the US is not a nation in the same sense as the majority in the world are. We do not have a dominant ethnicity or cultural identity. This feeds back into our politics by making it impossible for the electorate to subsidize the lives of the people they see as The Other. Look at how the Republicans have emphasized cultural, religious and regional differences to peel votes away from the party that campaigns of consensus. There are a lot of people who would vote Democrat, meaning they'd vote for a pretty progressive platform save for one or two cultural issues.

[eyebeams.livejournal.com]

We do not have a dominant ethnicity or cultural identity.

Except for anglo white dudes.