4 ms·

This is why I think improved social safety nets (not necessarily any specific scheme such as mincome or negative income tax or similar, just guarantees that nob

by cbd1984 11y ago

This is why I think improved social safety nets (not necessarily any specific scheme such as mincome or negative income tax or similar, just guarantees that nobody lives worse than some minimum) will actually save capitalism: It will free businesses from the moral quandaries expressed in your post, and enable them to make pure business decisions without having to consider the well-being of anyone involved. The alternative is inherently unstable, socially: Once people think they have nothing to lose by tearing down the system, it gets torn down. The anti-safety-net capitalists are inadvertently creating a society which will have little to lose from destroying what they're working to build.

zo1 11y ago
The instability you mention resolves itself in a purely "capitalist" system. For example, I currently pay X amount of money every month, privately to an insurance company. They, in turn, insure me against the risk of losing my job, becoming disabled and unable to work and a bunch of other things. They calculate the amount required based on how much I earn, and probably my age/risk profile. No need for a social safety net to protect me from losing my job there. Sure, a safety net is all nice and dandy. And you could possibly argue that it'll benefit those that can't pay for it like I can, but I'd respond to that in saying that their insurance amount would be a whole lot less. Classic sliding scale. But to be fair, if I was that poor, I'd put more value into having such a fall-back as I'd probably be unskilled labor at that point. On a side note, when I hear a lot of arguments against an "emergent behavior" system like relatively pure capitalism, I am reminded of the whole "evolution vs intelligent-design" debate. I guess, for me, emergent and self-correcting systems are inherently elegant just by themselves. There is no need for a "creator" (government in this case) to guide the lowly agents to do whats best for themselves within their local constraints.
- mamon 11y ago
  Things like insurance work well as long and you are young, healthy and have a well paying job. I don't know when your current insurance expires, but good luck renewing it when you are 60 old and have serious heart condition. Then your risk profile may simply be unacceptable to any insurance company, and you end up being on your own.
- marincounty 11y ago
  I looked into that private unemployment insurance/disability plan a few years ago, and I couldn't get the numbers to work, maybe it's changed? That private insurance was doable for my father generation 25 years ago, but most of those companies(especially the ones who offered convalescent care) right now are in dire straights. They don't offer the safety net they used to? (I would name your insurance company--if your really feel they offed you a fair plan?). I know way too many former Programmers who are in dire need of a good government safety net, even in these boom times. This profession has so many variables that scream out for good government safety nets--it's almost laughable: A low barrier to entry?(It's getting easier to learn this stuff monthly.), No unionization. A workplace that's constantly chuning. A really high level of failed companies. Eager workers who will work for free, and I probally forget a lot? My point is I know way too many former Programmers. Some are even homeless. In fact, in my world, know two homeless individuals personally; they are both former Programmers. One played a big role in Word Star. Everything seems fine in the good times, but when the money gets tight/person gets older--it seems to get ugly. More ugly than pretty much any profession I can think of? All that The Fountainhead thinking kinda works in your twenties-thirties, but the world looks so much crueler after 45--at least for me? There's more than a few things I said/believed in my twenties that I wish I could take back. Basically, I wasen't as slick as I thought? I do hope that monetization really changed the game, and these companies are becoming more mainstream? But mainstream is not mainstream anymore? I know very few professions that aren't in a remodel, or complete take down? It's about survival, the balance sheet, and a few guys at the top who are literally making a killing. To the guys at the top who aren't spreading it around, read The Price of Privlage, by Madeline Levine. Zero in on the sections about happiness and wealth. It's an eye opener! Even from a someone like myself--who never felt sorry for the wealthy?

by cbd1984 11y ago

zo1 11y ago

The instability you mention resolves itself in a purely "capitalist" system. For example, I currently pay X amount of money every month, privately to an insurance company. They, in turn, insure me against the risk of losing my job, becoming disabled and unable to work and a bunch of other things. They calculate the amount required based on how much I earn, and probably my age/risk profile. No need for a social safety net to protect me from losing my job there. Sure, a safety net is all nice and dandy. And you could possibly argue that it'll benefit those that can't pay for it like I can, but I'd respond to that in saying that their insurance amount would be a whole lot less. Classic sliding scale. But to be fair, if I was that poor, I'd put more value into having such a fall-back as I'd probably be unskilled labor at that point. On a side note, when I hear a lot of arguments against an "emergent behavior" system like relatively pure capitalism, I am reminded of the whole "evolution vs intelligent-design" debate. I guess, for me, emergent and self-correcting systems are inherently elegant just by themselves. There is no need for a "creator" (government in this case) to guide the lowly agents to do whats best for themselves within their local constraints.

mamon 11y ago
Things like insurance work well as long and you are young, healthy and have a well paying job. I don't know when your current insurance expires, but good luck renewing it when you are 60 old and have serious heart condition. Then your risk profile may simply be unacceptable to any insurance company, and you end up being on your own.
marincounty 11y ago
I looked into that private unemployment insurance/disability plan a few years ago, and I couldn't get the numbers to work, maybe it's changed? That private insurance was doable for my father generation 25 years ago, but most of those companies(especially the ones who offered convalescent care) right now are in dire straights. They don't offer the safety net they used to? (I would name your insurance company--if your really feel they offed you a fair plan?). I know way too many former Programmers who are in dire need of a good government safety net, even in these boom times. This profession has so many variables that scream out for good government safety nets--it's almost laughable: A low barrier to entry?(It's getting easier to learn this stuff monthly.), No unionization. A workplace that's constantly chuning. A really high level of failed companies. Eager workers who will work for free, and I probally forget a lot? My point is I know way too many former Programmers. Some are even homeless. In fact, in my world, know two homeless individuals personally; they are both former Programmers. One played a big role in Word Star. Everything seems fine in the good times, but when the money gets tight/person gets older--it seems to get ugly. More ugly than pretty much any profession I can think of? All that The Fountainhead thinking kinda works in your twenties-thirties, but the world looks so much crueler after 45--at least for me? There's more than a few things I said/believed in my twenties that I wish I could take back. Basically, I wasen't as slick as I thought? I do hope that monetization really changed the game, and these companies are becoming more mainstream? But mainstream is not mainstream anymore? I know very few professions that aren't in a remodel, or complete take down? It's about survival, the balance sheet, and a few guys at the top who are literally making a killing. To the guys at the top who aren't spreading it around, read The Price of Privlage, by Madeline Levine. Zero in on the sections about happiness and wealth. It's an eye opener! Even from a someone like myself--who never felt sorry for the wealthy?