Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Sebster. Interesting figures, but I have to ask what it is they are spending the money on. If it includes Defence Budget, then I can tell you right now the UK spends a lot less percentage wise than the US, meaning more of the money is spent on Social stuff, again in terms of percentage.

BTW, what in the name of Satan's Portion do they spend the rest of it on? Or is that where Defence type stuff comes into it? Sorry, I'm shockingly ignorant when it comes to such things!

Sebster. Interesting figures, but I have to ask what it is they are spending the money on. If it includes Defence Budget, then I can tell you right now the UK spends a lot less percentage wise than the US, meaning more of the money is spent on Social stuff, again in terms of percentage.

BTW, what in the name of Satan's Portion do they spend the rest of it on? Or is that where Defence type stuff comes into it? Sorry, I'm shockingly ignorant when it comes to such things!


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Goddammit! Not a double, but a triple post. FAIL!

Sebster, please define a bloated military. Not calling you out, just asking for a little clarity. Or is that something akin to 'how long is a piece of string'

Point I was making that even the US has a Military and Council type stuff.

mattyrm wrote:Rather than get into one of these internet intellectual debates, ill get right to the point pop some smoke and go straight down the middle commando style!

Seems to me, if you have taken from the system, you will be all for it, and if all you seem to do is pay into it. You wont.

Easy isnt it?

For myself, i have always been a healthy bloke, i am smart, i have never struggled with finding work, and at the age of 30 i have never ever had a single penny from the system. No dole, no kids, no benefits of any kind, and i havent seen a doctor in 15 years.

I dont like Socialism, i am selfish, i look after myself and i want everyone else to do the same.

I understand why people are for it. But i dont agree with them.

I would get health insurance, and i like to spend my money on me. Women, comics, booze and warhammer, i dont like giving it to needy people, gypsies, asylum seekers, mental patients, criminals, homeless people, or any fether.

Is that simple enough?

Entirely...
/Firing resolution aquired.

Your opt out of social responsibility as a healthy young employed man is accepted. What's that? You've been injured in a car accident? You'd like healthcare, housing and welfare to support you and your wife who is now having to remain home and tend you and also the schooling and health costs for the three children you had when I didn't have any.

And you want me to pay for all this, because you were stupid enough to get hit by a car.
And now your telling me one of your kids has developed schizophrenia and become one of those mental patients you wouldn't pay for...
The other kid got knocked up after some teenage pissup party, your what, pro-life?

LOL.
Have fun dealing with life when the supports afforded to you by socialist supports are removed and you get some bad luck.

Your an ex-soldier, are all those Gulf War Syndrome types taking the piss? All those guys who suffer depression and commit suicide after being in warzones and seeing their mates turned to red mist are spongers and should just pull their socks up?

Your opinion is drawn as someone who does have the ability to support himself and also lacks the empathy and enlightened self interest to understand that gak happens to people, gak could happen to you and it's far better for you and yours to be in a society that protects those that fall foul of life happening to them then one that allows people to fall into the abyss.

Frankly as someone with no intention of breeding, I ain't thrilled with paying taxation that goes on schools, why isn't there an opt out for me and my wife from that part of tax? Because paying a tax to support them is part of the deal I make with the rest of society that if I develop cancer, others will be paying my healthcare in the NHS.

If your going to cite personal insurance, I can tell you that working for an insurance company, the money making business we are in is designed around Not Paying Out. We have big teams of assessors looking for ways and means to not pay the money people think we should be paying them. We make people jump through far more hoops to get the cash, we put people though Independant Medical Assessments, whilst these are 'impartial' we tend to use the companies that we find give us the better result and discredit the medical evidence the claimant produced. We in insurance ain't nice people, we ain't state run, we have a profit margin to meet.

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:Sebster. Interesting figures, but I have to ask what it is they are spending the money on. If it includes Defence Budget, then I can tell you right now the UK spends a lot less percentage wise than the US, meaning more of the money is spent on Social stuff, again in terms of percentage.

BTW, what in the name of Satan's Portion do they spend the rest of it on? Or is that where Defence type stuff comes into it? Sorry, I'm shockingly ignorant when it comes to such things!

In the US;
Defence 23% (this is about half of the world's total military spending, and doesn't include Afghanistan or Iraq spending, that was funded outside of budget and another 4% give or take)
Welfare 20%
Health 19%

In the UK;
Welfare 25%
Health 20%
Defence 7%

Sebster, please define a bloated military. Not calling you out, just asking for a little clarity. Or is that something akin to 'how long is a piece of string'

It seems every socialist utopia, USSR, People's Republic of China, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, put a hell of a lot of men into the army. They wouldn't spend as much money because they don't have it, but in terms of sheer numbers they're up there with the best of 'em. Easier to control them, I think.

Fair enough, and I'm with you now!

MGS..any chance you keep it a little more civil matey? Want to keep this an open thread!

What?

I was being civil, Mattyrm doesn't like the crusts cut off his cucumber sandwiches, do you Matt...?

Hey you brits need to type English like the rest of us!

mattyrm wrote:For myself, i have always been a healthy bloke, i am smart, i have never struggled with finding work, and at the age of 30 i have never ever had a single penny from the system. No dole, no kids, no benefits of any kind, and i havent seen a doctor in 15 years.

Up to now. Long may it continue. But you have taken from society - you were born (in a hospital), went to nursery, Primary school, Secondary school, joined the Royal Marines (you know how much I respect this, by the way, but taxpayers fund the military. Fact), and are currently working for the Local Authority. It also doesn't matter that you haven't used the NHS in 15 years - you obviously used it before then, and if you stay in the UK, you will almost certainly use it again.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no hard-core red by any stretch - I am very uncomfortable with some aspects of Unionism, and would never join a union (apart from the NUS, which apparently I have no choice in). I don't believe that anyone has the 'right' to a job - although they should have the right to a safe workplace, and certain other protections. I think socialism has actually provided my countrymen with greater social mobility, but I think there should be limits to how much control over our lives the government actually has. I think some socialist mechanisms are absolutely vital for any civilised society.

Frazzled wrote:Hey you brits need to type English like the rest of us!

You mean Errrrr merican!!

or CanadIAANNNN EHHH!!

I need to get to work, poor people to fleece. Rich people to make richer. Be back.

Frazzled wrote:
And now Sebster, Shuma, and Dogma will post about how I am utterly evil for daring to speak the words "limited government."

Why would you assume that I don't want government to be limited? You seem to have an odd habit of taking any criticism of points you make, and assuming that the person delivering the criticism must be diametrically opposed to your position. We have different views on politics (mostly because I don't have a commitment to any principles), particularly international, but it isn't like I approach this whole thing from standpoint of tyranny.

Anyway, your analysis was mostly spot on, though I'd also add the Cold War to the list as something which contributed towards equivocating socialism with evil.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Frazzled wrote:is University of Chicago public? I forget.

U of C is private, like Malf said, but it doesn't suffer from the same sort of elitism in entrance that the Ivy League, and other prestigious east coast schools do. They admitted me, and I went to a nondescript (though well ranked) public high school.

I'd love to see some form of limited socialism. The biggest defect I see with the welfare, or dole systems are the lifelong recipients. There are entire generations that have never worked, beyond raising 6 or 7 more welfare babies. I have no problemsupporting people who are out of work because they are temporarily out of work, or medically incapable of working. I think there should be some sort of limit- anyone who can't find any sort of work in two years needs some extra encouragement to find work. I think it would be reasonable to give individuals 2 years of unemployment benefit for every 10 years worked, with the first 2 given to you at birth. This would keep more of society productive, and limit the system.

As a disclaimer, this is pure theory. I have no idea of how you would go about implementing it or how it would impact the country. I just hate to see generations grow up knowing that all they need to do to survive is collect a check they did nothing to earn.

You get X number of years of lifetime benefits. Once its used up, its used up.

Strangely I thought that was what the Clinton changes did-give it an expiration date. Was I wrong?

Gitzbitah wrote:I'd love to see some form of limited socialism. The biggest defect I see with the welfare, or dole systems are the lifelong recipients. There are entire generations that have never worked, beyond raising 6 or 7 more welfare babies. I have no problemsupporting people who are out of work because they are temporarily out of work, or medically incapable of working.

And as a socialist, I agree wholeheartedly, Socialism is about mutual support, not 'sponging' but protecting those in society that need our support. I also believe that those claiming benefits can be doing compulsory service for their benefits. I walk to work past a river bank that is just covered in rubbish, if everyone in a mile radius currently claiming jobseekers allowance did an hour a day at that river bank with a spiked stick and a bin bag, it would be cleared.

If the weather is crap, hows about all those folks repaint a school gym or something. An hour or two doing the things we currently rely on volunteers for seems eminently reasonable.

I'm currently claiming jobseekers myself, and if a condition of that was that I had to help tidy the place up once a week, I'd be all for it.

Frazzled wrote:You get X number of years of lifetime benefits. Once its used up, its used up.

Strangely I thought that was what the Clinton changes did-give it an expiration date. Was I wrong?

Yep, that was Clinton.

Albatross wrote:taken from society - you were born (in a hospital)

Which we have to pay for. Friend of mine recently had a kid and the bill is $10,000.

Albatross wrote:went to nursery

Again, not provided by the state.

Albatross wrote:Primary school, Secondary school

This could be state funded, but might not be if you go to a private school.

Albatross wrote:joined the Royal Marines

That isn't exactly free money now is it? It is a job and you get paid, not subsidized.

Albatross wrote:and are currently working for the Local Authority

Again, working. Socialism doesn't mean you don't get paid for working a job.

Thanks for this thread. It's nearly impossible to find a rational discussion on this topic.

Now, first, I'm one of those crazy liberals. Primarily, I believe in equal access to top quality education (hey, I'm a product of California's UC system), and greater public funding for scientific research (I want my sci-fi to be sci-reality as soon as possible, what can I say...being a scientist also biases my view, of course).

But I do understand fiscal conservatism, which is why I've always wondered why people weren't allowed to allocate how their tax dollars were spent. While certain things must be determined by the government for basic services budgets, I've always felt that other things would be more "optional". In other words, say, how about allowing people to determine where 50% (an arbitrary percentage) of their taxes were spent? For example, say that as you fill out your state taxes, you could check the box for public elementary schools if you wanted your tax money spent there (say you have a child in the system), but leave the box for highway construction/maintenance empty if you didn't (maybe you ride your bike on local streets only). In a way, this allows the people to vote with their tax dollars for the services they want. Also, this would presumably give more power to the middle class, as they carry the majority of the tax burden in society.

Would this be a complete disaster? Or might it work?

Socialism is a word with a lot of negatives connatations and misconceptions about it especially for those living in the US of A. It gets relentlessly tossed around in a negative tone for political mayhem and for many its only a half step or so away from following the footsteps of Nazis and other such socities despite how ill-informed such a view is.

Which is somewhat ironic since when you take the issues line by line like should everyone have access to affordable health care, they'll agree to such a notion...but if you add nasty sounding words to it; no dice.

Like the word athiest, it just doesn't "sound good" especially how it gets tossed around.

What if everyone spent their taxes on the provision of ice cream, and nobody was spending it on road repair?

The Dreadnote wrote:What if everyone spent their taxes on the provision of ice cream, and nobody was spending it on road repair?

Everyone would have to deal with rocky road for a while.

The Dreadnote wrote:What if everyone spent their taxes on the provision of ice cream, and nobody was spending it on road repair?

I would imagine that's why we'd only get to pick where 50% of it went.

The Dreadnote wrote:What if everyone spent their taxes on the provision of ice cream, and nobody was spending it on road repair?

Then we'd all be Americans.

The Dreadnote wrote:What if everyone spent their taxes on the provision of ice cream, and nobody was spending it on road repair?

That's the point.

If people don't want it, it's gone.

Or if the people want it, it gets a lot of money.

Now, I understand that your question is based on hyperbole and that you wanted to take an extreme case to make a point, but are you saying that it wouldn't work?

The why can't they just be able to spend it on what they want-ala ice cream? Why does the government take your money and decide?

Thats kind of the point.

Frazzled wrote:The why can't they just be able to spend it on what they want-ala ice cream? Why does the government take your money and decide?

Thats kind of the point.

Because these would be the things that not everyone wanted funded, but is still in the realm of "things the government provides". Now, I know that it's vague, but it's because these things change over time. Maybe in the future there will only be private schools for instance and the public school box will no longer be on the form, if no one wants to pay for public education. Or, it could be things like the defense, which the government is already responsible for, but you can add more of your tax dollars to it, if you wanted.

There's one thing that I definitely think has an impact on the way Americans view the concept of 'Socialism'.

Namely, the Cold War. Even living in Canada it had a fairly large impact on the lives of my parents and others of their generation, so I can hardly imagine the effect it had on Americans. After spending their young lives with the threat of nuclear war hanging over their heads, and learning about how awful Russia's communist regime was (and it was awful), I'm sure that it's fairly ingrained in a lot of Americans that socialists and communists are 'the enemy'. It's simply a product of the political climate in which they were raised.

Personally, I'm willing to pay taxes to ensure that when I need it, my government will be there, and I'm totally okay with those taxes also going to help other people. But this is tempered by living in Alberta, where our political ideology is a little to the right of deeply conservative. So I understand the cold economic realities that businesses have a lot of power (namely the Oil Companies) and governments have to work to keep their province/state/country a good place for businesses to come to. Which, simplistically, means that you can't tax businesses overmuch to pay for social programs, which means that in the end, it will come out of taxpayer pockets.

MeanGreenStompa wrote:What?

I was being civil, Mattyrm doesn't like the crusts cut off his cucumber sandwiches, do you Matt...?

lol.

I like a man who shoots straight to be sure, i didnt think MGS wasnt being civil.

As i said, i see where you guys are coming from, and as i said, i dont think that we should let people rot in the street, but i just feel like the system is too easily cheatable, so im all for making it harder to get money from the state, not easier. Also, i care only about people i percieve as having something in common with me, i admit its a little black and white, but thats something you need as a soldier. Hence i dont give a fig if we give money to Africa, or pay for a Romanian immigrant to get a sex change. When a Taliban fighter shot at my patrol, i didnt stop to think "why is he doing this? Did his parents beat him? Did he never have a chance to get an education? Did he get brainwashed as a boy?" No, i shot back, dropped a few mortars on them and then yomped back to base for tea and crumpets.

Red, your argument was a little strange, (I wasnt in the army though, shame on you!) I joined the Royal Marines because i was a very angry young man and i wanted to shoot people. That fury got me my green beret and some skills i can use, but what has that got to do with socialism? :S

It is state funded to be sure, but your argument is lost on me. There are some jobs that HAVE to be done and we will always need soldiers, id have joined a mercenary company if the Royal Marines or the army didnt exist. Doing something that happens to be funded by the State has nothing to do with supporting socialist ideals, in fact, im an aggressive man, its the exact opposite isnt it? Or were the all the coppers beating the mine strikers up Socialists?

Anyway, ill tolerate some sort of social assistance, but not anything like Socialism that relys on an easily cheatable system. I think people living off the state should live on army bases in dorm, get their food and clothing issued, and basically be treated like i was at boot camp. Its cheap, it works, and it will stop people starving or dying of illness but not swamp the streets in chavs who never work, whose parents never work, who live in a house they never pay for.

Arg! And i told you guys i didnt want to get into a massive debate, i spend too long on here as it is!

Cant we just agree that i am more selfish than you and that can be an end to it? Im cool with admitting it and everything.

Ah fair enough!

Now, on the subject of State Education. As I said earlier, I feel it is very much the State's obligation to ensure Children are educated to one degree or other. As for opting out of your Tax Money funding it if like myself you are currently childless, could it not be argued the percentage of your Taxes that are put into the Education System aren't so much paying for the next generation, but akin to a loan repayment for your own Education? Just throwing out a curve ball there!

Of course, this is treading into the waters akin to Sins Of The Father, and being born into a kind of indentured servitude, owing a debt to your Country/Government which you begin paying when you start work.

Socialism might work in countries that have never had any other form of government (you know, you get used to it) but the US was not founded on socialist policies. Yeah if you go line by line there are probably SOME ties to what socialism represents (a fact only because liberals seem to want to bring this country in that direction).

From what I understand (and I'm sure I'll be flamed for not being a UC flunkie and knowing the facts exactly) Socialism revolves around the government controlling more of the aspects of an individuals life than the individual would be entitled to (say where his taxes go, what goods and services he HAS to pay for wether he wants them or not and being told how to run a business (unlike in a capitalist society).

Take the HCR Bill for example. While I won't get into the legality of it (and it was shady at best how it got passed, illegal at worst) the biggest knock against this NWO Health Care Bill is the fact that the government has told me that in 4 years (2014) I HAVE to have medical/health care. If I don't want health insurance/medical/dental/life insurance I should not be required to purchase any or all of those plans just so that the money I spend gets collected into a pool of sorts and divided out so that others that can't afford it can get it. It's everyones right in this country to be healthy and live but NOT at the expense of others.

This new HCR Bill also does not mean "free" healthcare. I see lots of people spout on about "free" healthcare in Canada and I have to laugh. I pay 7% sales tax on anything that isn't considered a grocery item (pop and candy being the sole exception) and clothing items are also not taxed. If I go north 3 hours to Manitoba, Canada I'll be paying about 12% tax on those same items. If the extra 5% tax is going to help pay for healthcare than I don't see how it's free. It might be free in the sense that you walk into a doctor and get your broken arm reset for no expense to you but by paying 5% more for a trip to Subway or BK than someone living in the US, over the course of your life you'll will pay a lot more in extra taxes than your arm cost you to fix (or a lot more than you would having to BUY healthcare coverage every month) so over the course of 40 years you will pay more for your "free" medical care than I will having to go through a private insurer.

Our government isn't the best but it's also not the worst. I have a uncle who lived in London for the past 30 years. He is now back in the states due to no fault of his own and one of these weeks I'm going to have to have a talk with him about what his life experience over in the UK was like. I know he missed it over here whenever he came back to visit but he never did discuss too much his views on how fair or unfair the British government is.

So call me selfish or whatnot (I've been called worst, even here on Dakka) but like Matty I don't care to have to spend money on something I may or may not want to spend it on. I've used the system and I appreciate some aspects of it but the parts of the system I had to use were also earned. I don't get UI payments unless I have worked a job in the past (unlike welfare and food stamps just given out to anyone 18 and up for being 18 and up and too lazy to work) so to get the money from Obama I have been getting required me to work (and the job I worked to get UI bennies the past 12 months had me working 60 hour weeks (no stranger to some but 60 hour work weeks aren't exactly common in most jobs)). Other than that I've never gotten handouts of any kind. I've had medical insurance through work (only because it was affordable and had some damn good coverage for the premium I paid) but in the past 10 years I'ved used it twice to buy meds for a sinus infection. So in a nutshell I've paid $12K over the past 10 years in premiums to save total $300 on meds. So I didn't NEED the insurance. I got it just in case I had a situation outside of my home (home owners insurance), auto (auto insurance) or work (workmens comp) would mean I would get help for very little expense on my part. With the insurances I have through auto, work and home I really am wasting money on health care. Perhaps when I'm old and I have a stroke I'll need the healthcare but right now if I fall off a ladder at home, get hurt at work or get hurt in an auto accident those insurances kick in and pay and those are already insurances that by law I'm required to have (unless I don't drive but that's not an option) or work covers me (as soon as I go back to work).

Socialist programs might seem fair to those who think that everyone should be entitled equally to everything but it's unfair to those people who don't need socialist programs but have to "add to the coffers anyway" because someone paid too much money to do nothing but play golf and spend $10,000 in a single evening on dinner and shopping using tax payer money can say to the people of this country "We need Change."

I think it's only fair that I am able to drive to work in a Lambo and live in a $10M dollar condo so I think that every tax payer should have to fork over an extra nickle per paycheck to ensure that I get my Lambo and my $10M condo. It might only be a nickel but is that still fair having to pay for someone else's goods and services? Hell, put me down for a private masseuse/chiropractor. It helps me feel better in the daytime so it's a cause worthy service.