4 ms·
“Socialism” but without any of the social safety nets, from what I hear. Lots of retirees getting their pensions reduced, their personal savings in the form of
by qzw 3y ago
“Socialism” but without any of the social safety nets, from what I hear. Lots of retirees getting their pensions reduced, their personal savings in the form of real estate (~75% of household wealth) sinking in value, can’t even see a doctor without waiting for months (unless paying high fees out of pocket), high debt loads both public and private, deflationary pressures, and oh, the whole population shrinkage thing in the long run. Daunting challenges even for a fearless leader that knows what he’s doing, not to mention the one they’ve got.
- yycc9866tfbvxd 3y ago[dead]
- chaostheory 3y ago> Lots of retirees getting their pensions reduced, their personal savings in the form of real estate In socialism, there’s no need for a pension. The state will decide what to distribute, how much and to whom. > can’t even see a doctor without waiting for months (unless paying high fees out of pocket) In socialism, you get allocated resources and services from the “community” aka state. When resources are finite, you wait in lines. We’re already seeing that in nations with socialized healthcare without a private option > the whole population shrinkage thing in the long run Thank you for bringing that up. All modern economic systems, socialism included, require growth.