 |
|
|
|
 |
Yohan
Champion of Deep&Nu-disco

Registered: Jan 2004
Location: Kitchener, Ont, Soviet Canuckistan
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Has any economic system not failed? Every economic system has had it's good points and bad, the American right-wing economic system being no exception. It's good because it's stable, but it doesn't cater for everyone with 12% below the poverty line (the figure is higher for some similar economies in Europe)
A blend between libertarianism and socialism is considered the most effective economic system by all Western governments and those that are further to the left seem to have less poverty culminating with the Scandinavian countries who, according to the CIA, have "N/A" poverty (which is because it is close to 0%) so go figure... |
Yeah, but those Scandinavian countries pay like 55% tax on income. (To be fair, that's the level for high income earners in Canada IIRC) But I don't think I'd enjoy living in a country that takes so much of my money.
I'm all for basic health care and free education up to high school and all the social benefits required for a person to be able to have opportunities to improve themselves.
But once you go over that and guarantee a comfortable standard of living for everyone, the desire and motivation to innovate and improve tends to disappear. Heck, would you want to work hard if you get 3 good meals, a warm bed and money to do whatever you want?
___________________
Latest mix: Yohan - Full Spectrum (Fall 14 promo)
Like my stuff? Join my FB group here!
| quote: | Originally posted by chinamon
not true. i say "ugh"
but i am a tranny. |
| quote: | Originally posted by kotsy
lol colour me retarded |
|
|
Jun-25-2007 16:50
|
|
|
 |
 |
Fir3start3r
Armin Acolyte

Registered: Oct 2001
Location: Toronto, ON, Canada
|
|
|
Re: Re: See? Americans aren't that bad...
| quote: | Originally posted by Lilith
Simple mathematics.
Per Capita income.
The US person on average earns about 41-42k a year.
As a rough comparison to other westernised countries, earn around 29-33k a year, this includes UK, Australia and most of the big Euro's like Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, Belgium, France and the Japanese.
Living costs, the US is either cheaper or roughly the same as those countries.
= More spare money on average per household. |
Simpler yet; poor people can't give to poor people (what they'd like).
___________________
"...End? No, the journey doesn't end here. Death is just another path...one that we all must take.
The grey rain-curtain of this world rolls back, and all change to silver glass...and then you see it...
...white shores...and beyond...the far green country under a swift sunrise."
|
|
Jun-25-2007 17:01
|
|
|
 |
 |
venomX
ISO salty whenches

Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Vancouver, Canada
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by EvilTree
Certainly there are people who live an altruistic life and want to work for the better of society.
But honestly, do you really give a rat's ass about other people, to the degree that you're willing to share everything you have, even to possible detriment to yourself and your family?
I don't think not many people fall under that category.
|
I don't think anyone is talking about a system that will cause detriment either to particulars or their families. In the obvious comparison, the Scandinavian countries, no persons or families are being harmed. And most people, if able to live comfortably, are very understanding and probably wouldn't mind working for a better society. Specially if society acknowledges and rewards altruism and looks negatively on egotism. There are ways around the problems you raise. In the long run a more socialist government is bound to be more stable and fruitful. A system where everyone has to fend for themselves, whilst everyone being interconnected at the same time is bound to implode. It will happen eventually in the US. The wealth divide is growing. Eventually it would lead to irreconcilable gaps and people will start revolting. At that point a more socialist government will have to emerge or the states will fall into chaos. Capitalism, as implemented right now in the US, is bound to fail.
| quote: |
Because not many people are born with athletic gifts that allows them to be a pro player? |
Easily fixed with 'roids .
___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean
| quote: | Orbax
At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome |
|
|
Jun-26-2007 00:46
|
|
|
 |
 |
venomX
ISO salty whenches

Registered: Apr 2001
Location: Vancouver, Canada
|
|
|
| quote: | Originally posted by NeoPhono
I don't follow the rationale with the neurosurgeon vs. window cleaner argument. If you take away the "advantages" of being a neurosurgeon (besides the supposed reward of helping people) who in their right mind would decide to be a neurosurgeon instead of a window cleaner? With the neurosurgeon you have years of hard work in school, followed by years of hard work in residency, followed by years of hard work as a surgeon. Why would you do that for say, $10 an hour, when you could wake up, wash windows and come home, working 9-5 with no schooling, for the same money? |
People don't operate solely on cost/benefit analysis. Research on vocational choices point to 2 factors as being strongly correlated with vocational choice. One is complementarity between career and personality. Second is the occupation of your parents. Granted it is not a perfect correlation, but it is very strong. Monetary concerns, amount of stress, hardship in school have little influence in the decisions. Therefore it is more probable that as long as neurosurgeons have kids, and there is people that are meticulous, hard working and like brains there will be neurosurgeons, regardless of pay. This scenario is more probable than everyone choosing to be a window cleaner, or a bum.
You are also not considering factors such as the prestige of the job, the inherent interest people have towards different subjects, the persons characteristics, the desire to help or contribute towards society. There are many factors. Boiling it down to just what pays more seems arbitrary. Just because people will have more resources available for them, regardless of their status, does not mean society will melt. Even just the societal mechanisms that are already in place would make sure that everything kept going smoothly even with lesser difference in pay. Societal pressures are a strong influence in peoples behavior.
___________________
Poetry>Byron//Blog>TheMean
| quote: | Orbax
At that point you kind of crossed the rubicon and you might as well lay siege to Rome |
|
|
Jun-26-2007 01:01
|
|
|
 |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 22:38.
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us - return to tranceaddict
Powered by: Trance Music & vBulletin Forums
Copyright ©2000-2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Privacy Statement / DMCA
|