4 ms·
Imagine there was a button you could push that would give every single person everything you're mentioning - a free house, free healthcare, and all the things y
by rjf72 7y ago
Imagine there was a button you could push that would give every single person everything you're mentioning - a free house, free healthcare, and all the things you're not mentioning - free education, free sustenance, free childcare, free longterm paid pa/maternal leave, guaranteed high paying jobs, etc. Who wouldn't push this button? I think every single individual, right/left/libertarian/liberal/conservative or whatever other identity would. The reason people are critical of ideas such as you are mentioning is not because they don't want them, but because they do not think they are economically viable.
To get a ballpark for economic factors, let's try to figure out what the total value of absolutely all goods and services transacted, at market value, per year in the US and then divide that by the national population. I think if you asked the average person what they thought this figure would be, most would put it in the hundreds of thousands. Some might even put it in the millions. Fortunately it's really easy to figure out exactly what the answer is. It's precisely what the GDP/capita captures. It's about $62,000. And we're already chopping 27% of that in taxes to fund our current [generally underfunded] programs, so you can drop it down to $45k.
That is, as hard as it is to believe, the entire economic product of the country. Our unimaginable achievements - both social and personal can make it hard to realize how little we actually have. So you need to fund all the grand ideas you have in proportion to this keeping in mind that it doesn't mean you have $45k per person to spend. That is the entire economic product of the country.
This is why it's much easier to have a grand vision than to actually think about implementing it. Taxing the rich is hardly a solution because it again misses out on just how little we really have. If you go and just take 100% of Bezos' wealth from him, all $150 billion, that works out to about $470 per person - for one year. And he is exponentially richer than most rich. By the time you get to stripping the 20th richest person of all his wealth, you're down to $10s of dollars. Not too long after that, you're down to pennies per person. And that is, again, just money for a single year. These grand ideas need neverending annual funding.
---
This is why even in places like Norway, which has extensive national wealth due to a mixture of a small population and large sums of nationalized oil money, it's not just free everything for everybody. Solving all of these issues requires much more than just a desire to solve them. The reason I mention this is because I think this shared desire is something that often gets lost in today's increasingly polarized world. We all want the same things; it's just we disagree on how to get there.
- throwawaycert 7y ago> Who wouldn't push this button? My father's entire family, who have literally said that being homeless should be a capital crime because it proves how useless you are. Yes, bad people do exist. Why is this still a surprise to conservatives?
- ramblerman 7y agoIt's easy to make an argument when you generalize your opponents viewpoint to the most extreme and ridiculous standpoint. Switzerland is by no means a socialist utopia. You don't get a free house, or are somehow guaranteed a high paying job (who was even arguing that?). But when it comes to healthcare everyone is in the same pot. I.e. you contribute the average for a person your age and share the risk across the population, as it should be imo. We could absolutely stop people going bankrupt when they get cancer.
- zhdc1 7y agoSwitzerland has a very strong social support system for people who make what, in other countries, would be a solidly middle class income. This includes subsidies for housing, basic necessities, and healthcare insurance.
- hohloma 7y agoWhen you already started, why didn't you try to really compare the numbers? Norways GDP per capita is only a little higher - 75k USD, and if you actually checked, much of their oil profits go into their national fund and not spent. But if we actually start checking more, Sweden, who has a much higher population and no oil profits, also has the same socialistic policies with a per capita GDP of only 53k USD. I dont believe in free lunch, unlike many left leaning people, but some form of universally free policies are clearly possible, if taxation and implementation are done right.
- jsmith99 7y ago> a free house, free healthcare, and all the things you're not mentioning - free education, free sustenance, free childcare, free longterm paid pa/maternal leave, guaranteed high paying jobs, etc The great majority of Americans nevertheless do have houses, healthcare, education, sustenance, childcare and jobs. This suggests that the economy can provide these things and that also providing them to the small proportion currently without them is probably feasible. Making them 'free' and involving taxes just rearranges the payments involved. It doesn't require producing much more than America already does. The challenge is to do this without damaging incentives and the economy or creating moral hazard (free riders). That's the difficulty.