4 ms·
Free society? What kind of "free society" is it when people can't afford basics like housing, healthcare, and education? The median US individual income is cu
by actually_a_dog 4y ago
Free society? What kind of "free society" is it when people can't afford basics like housing, healthcare, and education?
The median US individual income is currently about $36k. People at the median are either not making it or just barely making it. How is that "free?" MIT has calculated that the living wage in the US is just over $24/hour which is $48k per year. The median is about 1/3 short of that. That's what you call "free?"
See https://livingwage.mit.edu/ https://livingwage.mit.edu/
Correction: a living wage for an individual is nearly $40k or $20/hour. This is approximately the median individual income. Half of people literally can't live self-sufficiently, and you want to call this a "free" society?
- mquander 4y agoThat living wage is for a family of four, not an individual.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- actually_a_dog 4y agoSorry, I misread. The graph here shows that a single individual needs to make nearly $40k or $20/hour in order to have a basic lifestyle that doesn't even include savings or entertainment: https://uc735a30719703449309c8146b8e.dl.dropboxusercontent.com/cd/0/inline/BndKkSJfHyn4pueP8DCteWyI0y8IXe05CHt57cz9wCZHCbr5v3A6jjSj0D_mHCD1bqyH_y7B0Yj9urNNF-XkEmRUPIT36dRNYlEuRpdjdhGMrTeyo1V24NzofcyoofDzZUxBRWodWuwJ2rNSNuGeL9swj-vzCl_OrUdsO--SBFkkQg/file# https://uc735a30719703449309c8146b8e.dl.dropboxusercontent.c... Besides, do you want people to not have children at at least the replacement rate? You know, that's bad for the economy, right? Current US fertility rate is below replacement rate, and immigration is only barely making up for it. The argument stands.
- olalonde 4y agoFree as in freedom, not as in free beer.
- actually_a_dog 4y agoWhat freedom? Freedom implies the ability to do things. You can't do that if you can't afford to live. Keep in mind MIT's living wage calculation doesn't include things like savings and any sort of entertainment. What kind of life is that?
- olalonde 4y agoI meant it as in "negative liberty" or the "freedom from interference by other people". This is how it's usually defined when people say "free society", the opposite being an "authoritarian society".
- paul_x_miller 4y ago
- sudosysgen 4y agoWell, not quite. Negative liberty is an ill defined concept that descends from the need to santize the religious concept of god-given right. In reality, anyone exercising their right to property, for example, interferes with anyone else who might want to use it. It is only justifiable insofar as such an interference allows for more positive liberty in general, which is why positive rights are the only ones that actually matter (indeed, the only pure negative rights that don't imply interference in the actions are other are in factr the positive freedom to do what one wants with oneself's body). While your interpration is the classical liberal (and religious) dogma, generally when people hear free society they understand it as a society where you can reasonably do what you want, not a society where property rights are absolute. And indeed such an interpretation is much more coherent.
- olalonde 4y ago