4 ms·

Fire departments, police and roads aren't "socialism". They are not the means of production and are not industry in any sense other than a desire to lay claim t

Fire departments, police and roads aren't "socialism". They are not the means of production and are not industry in any sense other than a desire to lay claim to successes that socialism itself doesn't possess.

soperj 3y ago
So, anything that isn't producing goods in a capitalist system should be publicly owned? Very good case for public health care then in the US.
- waihtis 3y ago
  Healthcare is most definitely producing goods. People will consume it much over their needs if it is free. A fire department or police are not, people will not call the fire department for the fun of it, only if there is fire. That said, healthcare is definitely a troubling one because its interests do not align particularly well with a profit-driven model. It should probably have some kind of halfway model to discourage overt usage while ensuring people get healthcare in the scope they need it even if they have a bad financial situation. I don't have a good answer for it.
  - soperj 3y ago
    > Healthcare is most definitely producing goods Services? Unless you're talking pharma? > people will not call the fire department for the fun of it People phone 911 all the time for very stupid stuff.
    - waihtis 3y ago
      > People phone 911 all the time for very stupid stuff Is that so? In that case, it should cost money to call 911.
      - Apocryphon 3y ago
        It does. It's called salaries for emergency operators and it's paid for by your tax money.
        waihtis 3y ago
        By your logic breathing costs money, since someone is paid to plant trees into the ground
  - insanejudge 3y ago
    If only there was some sort of organization, beholden to the people by democratic election, which was obligated to protect and provide what does not particularly align well with a profit-driven model (military, roads and public transportation, fire & police services, sewer and water systems, GPS and weather reporting), to provide this other thing that does not align particularly well with a profit-driven model... hmm... everywhere it's been done universally and not under/defunded for electoral reasons, the combined economy of scale/standardization, removal of $100Bn+ middleman industries and cheap proactive preventative care saving on expensive emergency treatments more than completely negate the "people going to the doctor for funsies" cost
    - waihtis 3y ago
      I was speaking on behalf of the US in this instance, I do not believe the US GOV is capable of pulling a working public healthcare program for their scale.
- wernercd 3y ago
  Yeah... if it wasn't for examples around the world of "publicly owned" healthcare being absolute dog shit. IE: the VA. The VA is publicly owned healthcare for our nations heros and how are they treated? They kill themselves in the parking lot waiting to get treated. Look at any public option around the world and you'll see okay results to start with... with long wait times, rationing, lower outcomes, etc as it ultimately fails. I wouldn't wish the VA on my worst enemy and you're blind - purposely or religiously - if you don't see the massive problems with systems like it. People don't run from Socialist/Communist countries because they are successful. Quite the opposite.
  - Supermancho 3y ago
    > Yeah... if it wasn't for examples around the world of "publicly owned" healthcare being absolute dog shit. > IE: the VA. My family's experience with the VA has been better than private healthcare. I am not a veteran, so I've been paying ~500 premiums for awhile to get a similar level of care to the veterans in my family. They do live in California and Minnesota, which are considered liberal states.
    - wernercd 3y ago
      "I'm not a Veteran". I'm a Veteran. I stay away from the VA for all the reasons listed above. You could argue it's better than nothing but the fact remains that on aggregate private is better unless you are healthy (AKA: don't need it) and only care about free (aka: better than nothing). Doesn't take too much googling to see that the VA suffers all the halmarks of why to not trust Government owned and operated options. And it's not getting any better with the current dysfunction of the government due to poor leadership from the top down and deep division as people ignore facts and history to support a religion that says socialism is good - despite the facts. So again... I wouldn't wish the VA on my worst enemy even if you know a couple people lucky enough to not be fucked over by Uncle Sam.
      - insanejudge 3y ago
        Yeah a lot of these government programs do bear the hallmarks of 40 years of management dependent on people sworn to defund, dismantle and obstruct any efforts to improve or reform them, who promised their constituency they were dysfunctional and whose (re)election campaigns depend on failing programs to hold up and point at. Would you invest in a company where half of the board was filled by people who swore that the very existence of companies like that was immoral bordering on tyranny, and that they were going to shrink the corporation down to the size where we could drown it in a bathtub? That sounds like a stock with a pretty poor long term outlook. The religion right now kind of goes the other way: Government by democratically elected representatives is evil. Government by autocratic CEOs beholden only to an elite group of investors is good. It's weird seeing so many (former? ostensibly?) freedom loving people suddenly swearing things like the country is going to die unless we take the right to vote away from people and give it to property (landowners).

soperj 3y ago

So, anything that isn't producing goods in a capitalist system should be publicly owned? Very good case for public health care then in the US.

waihtis 3y ago
Healthcare is most definitely producing goods. People will consume it much over their needs if it is free. A fire department or police are not, people will not call the fire department for the fun of it, only if there is fire. That said, healthcare is definitely a troubling one because its interests do not align particularly well with a profit-driven model. It should probably have some kind of halfway model to discourage overt usage while ensuring people get healthcare in the scope they need it even if they have a bad financial situation. I don't have a good answer for it.
- soperj 3y ago
  > Healthcare is most definitely producing goods Services? Unless you're talking pharma? > people will not call the fire department for the fun of it People phone 911 all the time for very stupid stuff.
  - waihtis 3y ago
    > People phone 911 all the time for very stupid stuff Is that so? In that case, it should cost money to call 911.
    - Apocryphon 3y ago
      It does. It's called salaries for emergency operators and it's paid for by your tax money.
      - waihtis 3y ago
        By your logic breathing costs money, since someone is paid to plant trees into the ground
- insanejudge 3y ago
  If only there was some sort of organization, beholden to the people by democratic election, which was obligated to protect and provide what does not particularly align well with a profit-driven model (military, roads and public transportation, fire & police services, sewer and water systems, GPS and weather reporting), to provide this other thing that does not align particularly well with a profit-driven model... hmm... everywhere it's been done universally and not under/defunded for electoral reasons, the combined economy of scale/standardization, removal of $100Bn+ middleman industries and cheap proactive preventative care saving on expensive emergency treatments more than completely negate the "people going to the doctor for funsies" cost
  - waihtis 3y ago
    I was speaking on behalf of the US in this instance, I do not believe the US GOV is capable of pulling a working public healthcare program for their scale.
wernercd 3y ago
Yeah... if it wasn't for examples around the world of "publicly owned" healthcare being absolute dog shit. IE: the VA. The VA is publicly owned healthcare for our nations heros and how are they treated? They kill themselves in the parking lot waiting to get treated. Look at any public option around the world and you'll see okay results to start with... with long wait times, rationing, lower outcomes, etc as it ultimately fails. I wouldn't wish the VA on my worst enemy and you're blind - purposely or religiously - if you don't see the massive problems with systems like it. People don't run from Socialist/Communist countries because they are successful. Quite the opposite.
- Supermancho 3y ago
  > Yeah... if it wasn't for examples around the world of "publicly owned" healthcare being absolute dog shit. > IE: the VA. My family's experience with the VA has been better than private healthcare. I am not a veteran, so I've been paying ~500 premiums for awhile to get a similar level of care to the veterans in my family. They do live in California and Minnesota, which are considered liberal states.
  - wernercd 3y ago
    "I'm not a Veteran". I'm a Veteran. I stay away from the VA for all the reasons listed above. You could argue it's better than nothing but the fact remains that on aggregate private is better unless you are healthy (AKA: don't need it) and only care about free (aka: better than nothing). Doesn't take too much googling to see that the VA suffers all the halmarks of why to not trust Government owned and operated options. And it's not getting any better with the current dysfunction of the government due to poor leadership from the top down and deep division as people ignore facts and history to support a religion that says socialism is good - despite the facts. So again... I wouldn't wish the VA on my worst enemy even if you know a couple people lucky enough to not be fucked over by Uncle Sam.
    - insanejudge 3y ago
      Yeah a lot of these government programs do bear the hallmarks of 40 years of management dependent on people sworn to defund, dismantle and obstruct any efforts to improve or reform them, who promised their constituency they were dysfunctional and whose (re)election campaigns depend on failing programs to hold up and point at. Would you invest in a company where half of the board was filled by people who swore that the very existence of companies like that was immoral bordering on tyranny, and that they were going to shrink the corporation down to the size where we could drown it in a bathtub? That sounds like a stock with a pretty poor long term outlook. The religion right now kind of goes the other way: Government by democratically elected representatives is evil. Government by autocratic CEOs beholden only to an elite group of investors is good. It's weird seeing so many (former? ostensibly?) freedom loving people suddenly swearing things like the country is going to die unless we take the right to vote away from people and give it to property (landowners).