Politics & Socialism

[LPFSTheFett]

 

Not to start a fire thread, but I'm really just curious about a couple of things.

 

1. Can someone name some of the government programs that aren't capitalistic that actually work(like Soical Secuirty, Medicare, Welfare, Disability, Unemployment, Workers Comp, schooling etc...) While I'm not a rocket scientist, I just simply can't think of a single government program that works as originally intended.

 

2. Onto the schooling. I've known for awhile that the US has fallen pretty far in the ranks when it comes to our childrens education. I'm curious if there is a chart showing how much we pay for our kids education vs other countries. I searched and couldn't find anything. My assumption is that we pay the most(with maybe Japan spending more) and are getting far less. Though that is purely my assumption, and I could be WAY off. I just really want to know.

 

Again, not really trying to start a polical war, just curious about the above. Though will be perfectly happy to debate anything political. Opinions are surely not something I'm lacking.

[Mensan]

Rural Electrification, the Interstate Highway System, "The federal government has been tremendously successful in disseminating health and safety information, for example, about smoking and seat belts." - George F. Will, National Institutes of Health, Youth Summer Jobs Program, The F.A.A., lighthouses, federal penitentiaries, The National Park System, guaranteed student loans, aid to Greece, Social Security. Medicare. Head Start. Food Stamps. "The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is the most wildly successful government program in the history of man." - Ben Stein, Public libraries, the F.B.I., the G.I. Bill...

[Nitrousbird]

Our govenrment is all about waste. If we simply trimmed the fat (and there is a shit ton of fat), this country could be out of debt in a realitively short amount of time. If I were to guess, a good 75% of our tax money goes to shit we really don't want or need.

 

Why do we need welfare when we already have unemployement benefits?

[smokinHawk1647545499]

Why do we need welfare when we already have unemployement benefits?

 

well we have those that dont work, then others that dont work hard.

[CRed05]

Why do we need welfare when we already have unemployement benefits?

 

Welfare is permanent unemployment. Unemployment is only good for a few weeks, I think maximum 1 year.

 

I don't know how you can say that any of those programs don't work because they do. There will always be people taking advantage of things though.

[Nitrousbird]

well we have those that dont work, then others that dont work hard.

Just because you are on unemployment doesn't mean you don't work hard. People get laid off all the time - it usually takes more than a week to find and start a new job. The program could use some tweaking, but it at least helps WORKING Americans, and is designed to get them working again.

 

Welfare is permanent unemployment. Unemployment is only good for a few weeks, I think maximum 1 year.

 

I don't know how you can say that any of those programs don't work because they do. There will always be people taking advantage of things though.

Why do we need welfare? Do we really need to let people just live off of our money forever, and do nothing for it? Unemployment covers those that need a short-term helping hand – since we have that covered, let’s dump welfare all together.

[LJ]

 

Why do we need welfare when we already have unemployement benefits?

 

Take friends of mine. Both had decent jobs and they end up getting pregnant. She has to quit her job because of complications, so their income is cut in half and they are really struggling. They applied for Welfare and foodstamps, but apparently $30k per year for a family of 2 with a baby on the way is too much money to qualify for help. THOSE are the people that welfare is supposed to help. Sadly the system is broken and it awards the losers but won't help the people that really need it.

[CRed05]

Why do we need welfare? Do we really need to let people just live off of our money forever, and do nothing for it? Unemployment covers those that need a short-term helping hand – since we have that covered, let’s dump welfare all together.

 

Take friends of mine. Both had decent jobs and they end up getting pregnant. She has to quit her job because of complications, so their income is cut in half and they are really struggling. They applied for Welfare and foodstamps, but apparently $30k per year for a family of 2 with a baby on the way is too much money to qualify for help. THOSE are the people that welfare is supposed to help. Sadly the system is broken and it awards the losers but won't help the people that really need it.

 

Think you just kind of answered yourself there. There are people that actually need it.

[Nitrousbird]

Think you just kind of answered yourself there. There are people that actually need it.

But LJ just pointed out that the people that need it don't get it, so why not just dump it?

[LJ]

But LJ just pointed out that the people that need it don't get it, so why not just dump it?

 

Dumping it isn't the right answer. Fixing the system is. Unemployment doesn't help because she had to quit for her own personal reasons.

[CRed05]

But LJ just pointed out that the people that need it don't get it, so why not just dump it?

 

Dumping it isn't the right answer. Fixing the system is. Unemployment doesn't help because she had to quit for her own personal reasons.

 

Yes, fixing it is better than just dumping it.

 

I also don't know the whole story, but if you can't afford a baby then you shouldn't have a baby. There are obviously exceptions to it where shit happens.

[LJ]

Yes, fixing it is better than just dumping it.

 

I also don't know the whole story, but if you can't afford a baby then you shouldn't have a baby. There are obviously exceptions to it where shit happens.

 

They COULD afford it, there were problems with the mom's development during pregnancy so she was put on bedrest. Her job didn't have FMLA or short term disability (office manager of a small Dr's office, go figure) so her only option was to quit. They lost like 40k in income. He is finishing his degree and already works like 60 hours per week.

[Guest Spam]

You cant fix something that is inherently corrupt.

[Drewhop]

In on page one of potential train wreck.

[Evolved8]

InB4PG2.

[Mensan]

Pointing out problems without suggesting any sort of solution is non-productive and pointless.

[Clifford Automotive]

I could type a pretty decent post here like I just did in the Taco Bell Thread. If you read that one, you'll kind of get an idea of where I could go in here.

[greg1647545532]

1. Can someone name some of the government programs that aren't capitalistic that actually work(like Soical Secuirty, Medicare, Welfare, Disability, Unemployment, Workers Comp, schooling etc...) While I'm not a rocket scientist, I just simply can't think of a single government program that works as originally intended.

 

There's hardly any government programs that can be characterized as "capitalistic." Actually, let me back up.

 

Capitalism and Socialism are economic terms that describe an overal economic climate. In a capitalist society, private individuals own the means of production. In a socialist society, the state owns the means of production. The closest the US has come in recent years to anything that meets the classic definition of "socialism" is the takeover of GM. Even that was pretty short-lived though. In Europe when all the banks failed, the governments stepped in and literally took over the banks. In the US we threw money at them, but it wasn't the same thing.

 

Social programs are an entirely different beast. If you want to talk about "capitalistic" programs run by the government, the only one I can think of is the Department of Justice, which attempts to create a level field for private businesses by preventing price fixing, monopolies, and other anti-capitalistic practices. Even government funded small business loans, which you might think support capitalism, are actually anti-capitalistic in that they give an unfair advantage to small businesses who qualify.

 

What you're actually talking about in your OP are social welfare programs, which are only tangentially related to socialism. To answer your question about which social programs "work" or "work as originally intended," you'd need to define their original intent. I think there are two major purposes of social programs:

 

1) To provide a basic safety net for society because it's the right thing to do. You might (and probably do) disagree that this is the role of the government, but that's neither here nor there, because we're judging whether these programs are a "success" or not. So, do the current crop of social programs work to keep people from hitting rock bottom? I think that they do. There are millions upon millions of old people who are utterly dependent on social security and medicare to make ends meet. There are millions of disabled people who are dependent on disability, welfare, and medicaid. These millions and millions of people aren't currently living in squalor in alleys. The quality of life for poor people on the government dole in America is actually quite good. So I think we can say that these programs do indeed succeed in goal #1.

 

Now, you might argue that a solid economy and private charities would also get people to that some point, and therefore social programs aren't necessary. That may be (although I'd disagree), but you didn't ask if we'd be better off or equal without social programs, you asked if they worked. And I think it's clear that they're not failing.

 

2. Another goal of social programs is to keep the US competitive in a global market. Both sides of this argument could fill volumes of books, so I'm not going to hash it out here, but the basic idea is that a worker is most productive when he (or she) is cared for. Private companies already know this, which is why they provide health care, sick days, safety equipment, vacation days, and a pension. That logic extends to the country as a whole.

 

I can already hear you getting angry over there, so let me stop you. Social programs have been around for my entire lifetime, and generations before that in some cases, so we'll never know what "could have been." Opponents will argue that we're worse off with them, proponents will argue that we'd be worse off without them. It's just like the Bush tax cuts. Proponents said that the tax cuts would help the economy. When the economy tanked anyway, proponents said that it would have been worse without them. There's really no good way to answer that question.

 

So, do social programs "work" to keep America competitive in a global economy? I think your mind is already made up.

 

Let me put it another way. We spend more than half a trillion a year on the military. Does the military work? Hell fucking yes it does. Would it work if spent half of what we do now? Good luck answering that question.

 

 

2. Onto the schooling. I've known for awhile that the US has fallen pretty far in the ranks when it comes to our childrens education. I'm curious if there is a chart showing how much we pay for our kids education vs other countries. I searched and couldn't find anything. My assumption is that we pay the most(with maybe Japan spending more) and are getting far less. Though that is purely my assumption, and I could be WAY off. I just really want to know.

 

I never really follow the schooling debate that closely, but my understanding is that we don't spend the MOST and we're not the WORST, but we certainly spend a lot for what we get. All accounts suggest that the quality if someone's primary education is only slightly affected by the amount spent on it. The sad state of our schools is more likely a side effect of our anti-intellectual cultural climate.

[Slowbalt]

Well said. Interesting find around these parts.

[Science Abuse]

But LJ just pointed out that the people that need it don't get it, so why not just dump it?

 

"People that don't need it get it, lets just dump it" is like saying "I have a fuel line leak, so I just stopped putting gas in the tank".

 

Welfare, in a civilized country, will always be needed. Anyone who says differently is living a dream world. Employment will never, ever, ever be 100%, even if a population is 100% hard working. Welfare is not not as wasteful as you are lead to believe it is. You here about extreme examples because they attract veiwers to people TV shows. It used to be a lot easy to cheat the system, but things have come a very long way since then.

 

"My freinds need it and don't get it, but assholes do" is likely not true. You're freinds aren't getting it because it's very hard to get.

 

PS what kind for shitty ass doctor staffs and office and doesn't provide them short term disability? What a dick.

 

 

Something to chew on:

Pure capitalism will never work. The distribution of wealth always, always, baite you int he ass. Pure capitalism accelerates it, and the end result is the revolt of the poor, redistribution of wealth, and likely a socialist system will be put in place.

 

Pure Socialism will never work. It is simply impossible to provide for all the people, all the time, and maintain sanity. Prison is pure socialism.

 

What you need is a blending, where people can succeed and get ahead, but not so far ahead that the top 1% controls 90% of the nations wealth. You need regulation and a means for supporting the unemployed, who are mathematically statistical leftovers. You have them, you always will.

 

Looking to other countries for inspiration is ok, but don't look for anyone elses model to work. Every country with a strong economy has a model that works for them, and won't necessarily anywhere else.

[Tractor]

Eric your right, 100% employment is impossible and its believed that the powers that be would like to see it at about 4-6%. This keeps pay steady otherwise 100% would mean companies would have to perpetually increase pay to entice new talent aboard. Just like inflation is better at about +1% per year because it keeps everything balanced opposed to larger swings and especially deflation.

 

The part about welfare not being cheated is somewhat right, sure its harder, but I can personally take you to family of mine who know all about cheating the system. They make more money than my wife and I and we are doing well. They do things really nasty like, still claiming stuff from my long dead mother inlaw as if she were still here and married to my father inlaw even though he's remarried. There's no system to check this sort of thing so they take advantage.

[TTQ B4U]

This post for sale to Slowbalt so he can get another shot at proving himself on page 1

[V8 Beast]

Unemployment is almost impossible. I attend hearings and represent my employer all the time. Most companies do their best to keep you from it.

 

In response to LJ's story... If you make 30k a year and lose your job then a lifestyle change is in order with the way the government is now. When my wife was let go from her managerial job at a dental office we lost $35k in income. At the time I made $32.5 a year so I understand exactly what they went through. We sold a car, made arrangements with the mortgage company, deleted all unneeded expenses, and roughed it for 4 months before she found another job. Then she got let go from the next job 8 months later for economic reasons... again.

 

If I lose income for any reason its my job to get back on my feet. Its my job to plan ahead, and my job to have savings for a rainy day. I learned this the hard way and the entire time I never once thought to apply for handouts. A proper working system would be there for people to help them in situations like this for a very limited time. If I didnt have that car to sell I would have been sol. Stop paying the bums and start paying the hard workers that will more than likely get back on their feet. Lazy asses, eating steak, in front of their flat screen tv, in a section 8 home in the suburbs, working 12 hours a week really pisses me off...

[I Eat Rice]

well we have those that dont work, then others that dont work hard.

 

This is one of the most close minded and ignorant things I have read in a very long time and shows your overall lack of knowledge of the world and our country....

[LJ]

Unemployment is almost impossible. I attend hearings and represent my employer all the time. Most companies do their best to keep you from it.

Depends, some companies already pay the highest premium and really don't care. the Federal Gov't and a few big banks in Columbus come to mind.

 

In response to LJ's story... If you make 30k a year and lose your job then a lifestyle change is in order with the way the government is now.

They have 1 paid off car, a $55,000 mortgage, student loans in forbearance and eat like college students. What else do you want them to do?

When my wife was let go from her managerial job at a dental office we lost $35k in income. At the time I made $32.5 a year so I understand exactly what they went through. We sold a car, made arrangements with the mortgage company, deleted all unneeded expenses, and roughed it for 4 months before she found another job. Then she got let go from the next job 8 months later for economic reasons... again.

I am assuming she got unemployment. His wife doesn't qualify because she only had 5 months at this job, and she needed 6 to qualify.