RE: How Being A Voice of Reason on (Most) Social Media is Actually Helping Those You are Fighting Against
According to Bernie's own words he is a "democratic Socialist with a simple d". The problem isn't the outcomes but how we get their and their long term effects. Those who first came to America and Australia drove away the natives and claimed their resources. The end results are good. But the methods are not. Same goes with animal testing.
But it the case of the economic stuff, not just methods but also the long term consequences are also terrible. Even cocaine is amazing in the short term. The housing bubble was awesome too. But at the end it all popped and everything got worse at the end.
Personally I'm extremely against government funded education with a passion. I have nothing but contempt for it: https://steemit.com/informationwar/@vimukthi/i-m-a-genius-and-a-star-student-this-is-why-i-think-going-to-school-was-the-worst-thing-to-happen-to-my-life
As for healthcare I prefer a hybrid system: https://steemit.com/familyprotection/@vimukthi/investigation-into-canadian-healthcare-system-how-one-gynecologist-made-millions-while-mistreating-patients-for-years-while
France isn't exactly a well implemented social democracy
Historical speaking there is no such thing as well implemented social democracy.
The Scandinavian system basically comes down to let the markets be free + tax half of what they they make which is more sustainable than any other welfare model I know of.
The current Chinese system isn't that different from the feudal system they had centuries ago. Their success is mostly thanks to long term planning, protectionism and copying what's working in other countries + arbitrage.
There is going to be individuals who benefit from practically every single policy. But it is the long term economic effects we should be concerned of. Most of the rapidly developed nations of the post world war has no minimum wage. Eg: Singapore, UAE, Taiwan, Monaco, Qatar, Liechtenstein
Yes, and Bernie is misusing it. Rather, democratic socialism has come to mean social democracy. It's an important distinction, because as far as I know, no one actually wants socialism like the Soviet Union or Cuba. You had terrible experiences with public education, but this is why the government should pump more money into it, and they didn't, leading to unqualified teachers.
Look, I went to a private school myself, sure it's better than public, but I also know people who went to public schools, and they turned out fine. If we didn't have the public education system, majority of the people here would still be uneducated. The education may not be the greatest, but my fucking god, public education here is the greatest thing that could have happened to us. I couldn't imagine living in a place full of ignorant people who couldn't tell left from right.
What do you mean by hybrid system? Do you mean both? Because that too we have. You can either choose public or private. Private is better, but for those without cash, they go public which is completely free. Of course long wait times are a given, but it's really better than no healthcare at all.
By social democracy, I meant countries with strong capitalist values, but with a good social welfare so both China and Scandinavia fit the bill. From what I understand, the US doesn't cover everyone, hence why people like Sanders want to bring it to them.
If the lack of choice is the problem, as I've said, here, you always had a choice between both.
As for the minimum wage, you speak of UAE, but also know that they have labour violations there. It's not the kind of country I like to support.
Exactly this. It is having the choice that matters. The "public" doesn't even have to be state funded. It could be funded by a church or some other charity.
The entire middle east have labor violation problems with the low skilled foreign workforce. Most of these workers are actually coming from India, Pakistan and Bangladesh from what I know. The most ironic thing is that these workers would still be worse off if they remained in the countries. So it has become sort of a serve in heaven kind of tragedy. From what I've learned from People who worked in Dubai, the skilled workers have a great time there. They all spoke very highly of Dubai. I know a person who quit being a teacher to work as a supervisor for a cleaning company in Dubai.
Nobody would be able to live in modern days like this. I see lots of middle aged and old people having trouble learning to use smartphones but kids have zero trouble with learning. The environmental conditions of our time would prevent anyone being close to illiterate except in a place like Somalia.
Will not make a significant change. Even if you give a champion an old Toyota for a race and pay a million dollars per race, you still won't have a winning race. A broken system can't be fixed by throwing money at it.
Scandinavia: Yes
China: No!
HK/Macau (special administrative regions of China): Yes but they have more in common with Singapore and UAE than China
Social welfare is great as long as it doesn't come from the government. I'm willing to bet that Sweden would actually loose its 1st world status within 25 years.
The government is making some changes to education here with attendance etc. The money does help, helping kids who are too poor to buy books, or even repairing the school buildings from time to time. Like I said, without public government education, we would be highly screwed in my opinion. I guess China isn't a democracy, yeah but it has welfare.
As for healthcare, I guess we'll just have to disagree. I see no problem with government run healthcares. But even then, the plan that Sanders is proposing isn't even government run, it's more government insured, not quite the same. I've seen quite a number of studies, looked at my own country and the average salary, looked at Scandinavia. I'm generally sold on the system. There is success without screwing the regular patient with a huge medical bill. As I said, if you want to go to a private doctor, you still can.