4 ms·

This pandemic will amplify the wealth inequality drastically. The poor will lose their jobs and houses, while the mega rich will find a way to tap into those tr

by nojvek 7y ago

This pandemic will amplify the wealth inequality drastically. The poor will lose their jobs and houses, while the mega rich will find a way to tap into those trillion dollar stimulus funds. I don’t understand why Congress wouldn’t pass a simpler, $1000 to every person with SSN and address in file + $500/dependent. It would have been faster to process and get that money out. It would save people from losing their homes and put food on the table. IRS still hasn’t started sending those checks out and so many people will still miss out. IRS is the most effective institution that could aid millions of people in a short time. I just don’t get why America is so afraid of being a bit socialist ? Wouldn’t this save the people & economy in the long term?

roenxi 7y ago
Technically I think neither way* would be more socialist than the other; the socialism part happened when the government took the money in as taxes/created the money. Socialism is in how the government and property rights interact. Regardless; blanket handouts to everyone would be a much better choice than giving more money to the wealthy. EDIT No, actually on reflection the bulk handouts would be more socialist; but this is bringing out the 30cm measuring stick to see which skyscraper is bigger. Government is handing out other people's money.
missedthecue 7y ago
>I just don’t get why America is so afraid of being a bit socialist ? Because like you pointed out, since they're that shitty at doing something like giving away money, they'd be even worse at more complicated things. It's best to just let them do as little as necessary. Your comment is basically, "god, the government sucks so hard, let's let them suck hard in more areas of our life!"
- AlexandrB 7y ago
  Baked into this line of reasoning is the assumption that the government is some kind of linear(ish), static system that monotonically increases the amount of fuck-ups with the amount of responsibly it is given. This is the same kind of gross simplification that pretends that people are "rational agents" that "maximize their utility". Let's grow up, shall we?
  - missedthecue 7y ago
    The problem is that there is a huge incentive-incompatibility problem at all levels of government. It is a structural problem inherent to system thereof and is the source of the inefficiency issues. It cannot be avoided by piling on more incentive-incompatibility. You cannot fix a flaw by adding more flaw. This is why they fuck up so much from your local DMV to the federal $2 trillion stimulus program.
    - radicalbyte 7y ago
      And the entire banking system in 2008 wasn't built on a pyramid of f-ups? What about the US healthcare system? Cable TV / internet? Or the rail network in the UK? I'd argue that commercial systems have a stronger systemic problem which leads to inefficiencies on a larger scale than governments. We only really see good results when we combine markets with strong government involvements to keep them fair; and that is extremely hard to get right because of regulatory capture.
- pavlov 7y ago
  After 40 years of being managed mostly by people whose ideology requires the government to be failing, the American government isn’t very good at many things. This isn’t a surprising outcome.
  - loopz 7y ago
    US is Great at all things, unfortunately the self-sabotage need to stop please.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
js2 7y ago
Elizabeth Warren suggested increasing payouts to anyone who gets a social security or disability payment since the federal government is already setup to make payments regularly to those people, and since the vast majority of them will spend the money.
Waterluvian 7y ago
Yeah you ought to see how it's being rolled out in Canada. In Ontario I filled out an incredibly short web form (address, name, child's name, bank account). And in turn they wire $200 per child into my account to buy them learning supplies. There are no financial restrictions. They just want to get the money out. I'm sure I'll pay for it later with all the tax I pay. Still proud of it. Socialism shines during crisis.
- mantas 7y ago
  What does it have to do with socialism?
- nojvek 7y ago
  Canada is pretty dope country. Would deffo move there if real estate prices weren’t insane. If Trump gets re-elected, I’ll have to evaluate whether I want to spend my life in US.

by nojvek 7y ago

roenxi 7y ago

Technically I think neither way* would be more socialist than the other; the socialism part happened when the government took the money in as taxes/created the money. Socialism is in how the government and property rights interact. Regardless; blanket handouts to everyone would be a much better choice than giving more money to the wealthy. EDIT No, actually on reflection the bulk handouts would be more socialist; but this is bringing out the 30cm measuring stick to see which skyscraper is bigger. Government is handing out other people's money.

missedthecue 7y ago

>I just don’t get why America is so afraid of being a bit socialist ? Because like you pointed out, since they're that shitty at doing something like giving away money, they'd be even worse at more complicated things. It's best to just let them do as little as necessary. Your comment is basically, "god, the government sucks so hard, let's let them suck hard in more areas of our life!"

AlexandrB 7y ago
Baked into this line of reasoning is the assumption that the government is some kind of linear(ish), static system that monotonically increases the amount of fuck-ups with the amount of responsibly it is given. This is the same kind of gross simplification that pretends that people are "rational agents" that "maximize their utility". Let's grow up, shall we?
- missedthecue 7y ago
  The problem is that there is a huge incentive-incompatibility problem at all levels of government. It is a structural problem inherent to system thereof and is the source of the inefficiency issues. It cannot be avoided by piling on more incentive-incompatibility. You cannot fix a flaw by adding more flaw. This is why they fuck up so much from your local DMV to the federal $2 trillion stimulus program.
  - radicalbyte 7y ago
    And the entire banking system in 2008 wasn't built on a pyramid of f-ups? What about the US healthcare system? Cable TV / internet? Or the rail network in the UK? I'd argue that commercial systems have a stronger systemic problem which leads to inefficiencies on a larger scale than governments. We only really see good results when we combine markets with strong government involvements to keep them fair; and that is extremely hard to get right because of regulatory capture.
pavlov 7y ago
After 40 years of being managed mostly by people whose ideology requires the government to be failing, the American government isn’t very good at many things. This isn’t a surprising outcome.
- loopz 7y ago
  US is Great at all things, unfortunately the self-sabotage need to stop please.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

js2 7y ago

Elizabeth Warren suggested increasing payouts to anyone who gets a social security or disability payment since the federal government is already setup to make payments regularly to those people, and since the vast majority of them will spend the money.

Waterluvian 7y ago

Yeah you ought to see how it's being rolled out in Canada. In Ontario I filled out an incredibly short web form (address, name, child's name, bank account). And in turn they wire $200 per child into my account to buy them learning supplies. There are no financial restrictions. They just want to get the money out. I'm sure I'll pay for it later with all the tax I pay. Still proud of it. Socialism shines during crisis.

mantas 7y ago
What does it have to do with socialism?
nojvek 7y ago
Canada is pretty dope country. Would deffo move there if real estate prices weren’t insane. If Trump gets re-elected, I’ll have to evaluate whether I want to spend my life in US.