5 ms·
> Now it seems we are no longer capable of such projects Not quite, we changed our priorities considerably. The US shifted its government expenditures to welfa
by adventured 8y ago
> Now it seems we are no longer capable of such projects
Not quite, we changed our priorities considerably. The US shifted its government expenditures to welfare, entitlements and standing-military spending. The US has dramatically expanded its social safety net over the last four or five decades. You can see that by checking the federal budget by decade and how its allocation has changed. Properly few voters want to go back to 1955, they'd rather we continue paying for free healthcare for the bottom 1/4, at a cost of ~$650 billion per year. If you give those people a choice between national high-speed rail and their health coverage, they'll choose health coverage every time. The mistake in the case of the US, is in not having built eg high-speed rail when it could have done it, before welfare and entitlement spending demands got so massive.
In short, the US system, the social contract, has fundamentally, permanently changed. There's no scenario where it will or ever can do infrastructure like it did 60 or 80 years ago, because the government allocations can never be like they were. It's comparing two entirely different systems of spending demand & allocation, along with entirely different social expectations.
China is currently undergoing exactly the same transformation as it seeks to build out a social safety net. As that proceeds, they'll no longer be fiscally capable of the infrastructure spending they've been undertaking the prior ~20 years. Social welfare spending demands will rise perpetually, particularly given the rate at which their society is aging. Right now the average pension in China is about $200 per year, and their pension system is already financially tipping over. That won't stand, China will be forced to allocate dramatically greater spending to social welfare over time. China is about to start running twin deficits, on their fiscal budget (already bad) and their trade. I don't see a scenario going forward where they can both meet the social demands of an aging population that wants a far greater social safety net and the free-wheeling infrastructure spending behavior of their past. They'll be forced to choose, as every other developed nation has.
- maypeacepreva1l 8y agoI think you are saying why US can't do it. Healthcare prices maybe one of the reasons not because people want to remain healthy.
- CryptoPunk 8y agoAll types of social welfare spending have increased over the last 50 years, not just healthcare. A larger proportion of the population is dependent on the government now than 50 years ago.
- Nasrudith 8y agoOf course one thing not brought about social welfare is that isn't a choice of to pay or not but to pay now vs pay later no matter what you do - in addition to humanitarian and reputation impacts. It is harder to calculate given hard numbers only exist if things go wrong. Not paying for vaccination or hygenic programs leads to outbreaks which are expensive to contain and not containing leads to even more. Even literally leaving people to die in the street still generates expenses
- CryptoPunk 8y agoThat is not what the evidence shows. The evidence shows that social welfare spending can increase future costs. For example it increases the percentage of women who have children out of wedlock. The increase in social welfare spending is the primary reason why the percentage of children born to single parents rose from about 4% in 1948 to 40% today. That in turn increases nearly every type of socioeconomic problem.
- adrianN 8y agoMaybe people just don't put as much importance on weddings as they did when children out of wedlock had substantially reduced rights? I don't think the link to increased welfare spending is as clear as you make it. I for example only married for the tax benefits.
- CryptoPunk 8y agoThe evidence suggests that increases in the availability of social assistance cause an increase in the percentage of children born out of wedlock, so it's not merely an observation of a correlation. There are undoubtedly other factors as well, but the expansion of social spending is one of the major ones.
- RobertoG 8y agoAre you saying that the USA has not currently the knowledge, raw materials and manpower for keeping its social safety net and building infrastructure at the same time? Because from where I'm standing it seems that it's the political will what is missing.
- Cyph0n 8y agoYou can immediately pick up the direction of the argument from the order in which the alleged reasons were listed (hint: welfare before military spending). And, as expected, the inefficiency of the US welfare system was not even brought up.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]