5 ms·

If I were a rich software engineer feeling angry at people who criticised the capitalist system we had, perhaps whilst failing to acknowledge that people in Ame

If I were a rich software engineer feeling angry at people who criticised the capitalist system we had, perhaps whilst failing to acknowledge that people in America die because they can't pay health insurance, or are homeless because they can't afford housing, or end up eating what they find in someone's trash because they can't afford to buy food, I think that I'd do one thing: I'd consider whether perhaps I might be wrong. Maybe my worldview is a bit skewed by the situation I find myself in. Maybe my country isn't very fair at all, and it's not right that I have the privileges I do whilst my fellow citizens suffer. And maybe it's not the Government's fault, either. Perhaps those Europeans with their welfare states aren't all socialist nutcases, but maybe they have something right that America has got wrong. Often I hear Americans say "this isn't real capitalism! we need more capitalism! less government!". And I look at the state of homelessness in their country, or those without health insurance, and I think "really? Do you really need more of that? Maybe instead you need to spend a little less on your military and a little more on looking after the least fortunate in your society, the sick, the vulnerable. Maybe that would make a difference." The "more capitalism" mantra always makes me think of communists who argue "well, this wasn't real communism! That's why it failed!" And it's so ironic, because those most vocally against communism are the same people who are cheerleading extreme capitalism, failing to notice that they are simply on the other side of the mirror.

Hermel 12y ago
With both, private and public spending, it is not the quantity that matters, but quality. Both sometimes waste money, and that's what needs to be addressed. More government does not solve anything as long as that additional spending finances bureaucracy. Since the most cost-effective governments are normally also the smallest, my personal view is that one should spend less on the federal level, but more on the local level. Decentralization is key.
- wstrange 12y ago
  That can make it difficult to implement consistent standards that are not subject to the whims of local politicians. There are also economies of scale that are difficult to achieve on a local level. Drug purchasing, for example. A federal government is going to have far more negotiating power. But I take your point. Perhaps the right answer is that laws and oversight are the domain of the federal government, and implementation is local.
dionidium 12y ago
or are homeless because they can't afford housing, or end up eating what they find in someone's trash because they can't afford to buy food There's a bit of a straw man or, at least, mischaracterization hidden in here. It's true that the U.S. does a pretty poor job of dealing with the mentally ill and those at the very bottom who simply cannot take care of themselves. And I think if you push people, even those on the far right, they'll acknowledge that we probably need to do something to help those people. But, outside of this group, nobody is digging through trash for food. We live in a society where clothes and food are as cheap as they've ever been. And there are government programs to fill the gaps. Arguments like yours only further distance you from the people you're trying to convince, because it's obvious to just about anyone, including (especially?) those who have actually been poor, that they're just not true. I've been poor. And it sucks. It sucks for lots of reasons, all related to access to resources, lack of successful friends and coworkers, its drain on your motivation, and so on and so on. But I never feared missing a meal. That's not the experience of most poor folks in the U.S.
- randomsearch 12y ago
  > But I never feared missing a meal. That's not the experience of most poor folks in the U.S. I'm not an expert on the U.S. However, I have seen people digging through trash for food in Atlanta. I have also seen the extreme state of homelessness in Philadelphia, and the problems in San Francisco. It is certainly true that many people in the UK struggle to afford food [1], and given that the US has a much greater disparity of wealth, I assume that the US has this problem on a great scale. So, no, I don't agree that it is an exaggeration. [1] http://www.trusselltrust.org/foodbank-projects http://www.trusselltrust.org/foodbank-projects
  - dionidium 12y ago
    Yes, I've seen them, too. And there's a risk here that it will sound like I'm moving the goal posts around so that I'm right by definition. But that's not what I'm trying to do. There are of course those at the bottom who are chronically homeless. Those are the folks I was referring to in my first paragraph. Yes, you will see them digging in dumpsters. But this is not the typical experience. Most poor people never end up homeless. And those who do are typically homeless for a short period of time (and do get help).
metaphorm 12y ago
what about the middle class? not everyone is so poor that they need welfare. we're having a real problem now of people who make just enough money that they can survive on their own income but they can't prosper because of wage stagnation and rising cost of living.

Hermel 12y ago

With both, private and public spending, it is not the quantity that matters, but quality. Both sometimes waste money, and that's what needs to be addressed. More government does not solve anything as long as that additional spending finances bureaucracy. Since the most cost-effective governments are normally also the smallest, my personal view is that one should spend less on the federal level, but more on the local level. Decentralization is key.

wstrange 12y ago
That can make it difficult to implement consistent standards that are not subject to the whims of local politicians. There are also economies of scale that are difficult to achieve on a local level. Drug purchasing, for example. A federal government is going to have far more negotiating power. But I take your point. Perhaps the right answer is that laws and oversight are the domain of the federal government, and implementation is local.

dionidium 12y ago

or are homeless because they can't afford housing, or end up eating what they find in someone's trash because they can't afford to buy food There's a bit of a straw man or, at least, mischaracterization hidden in here. It's true that the U.S. does a pretty poor job of dealing with the mentally ill and those at the very bottom who simply cannot take care of themselves. And I think if you push people, even those on the far right, they'll acknowledge that we probably need to do something to help those people. But, outside of this group, nobody is digging through trash for food. We live in a society where clothes and food are as cheap as they've ever been. And there are government programs to fill the gaps. Arguments like yours only further distance you from the people you're trying to convince, because it's obvious to just about anyone, including (especially?) those who have actually been poor, that they're just not true. I've been poor. And it sucks. It sucks for lots of reasons, all related to access to resources, lack of successful friends and coworkers, its drain on your motivation, and so on and so on. But I never feared missing a meal. That's not the experience of most poor folks in the U.S.

randomsearch 12y ago
> But I never feared missing a meal. That's not the experience of most poor folks in the U.S. I'm not an expert on the U.S. However, I have seen people digging through trash for food in Atlanta. I have also seen the extreme state of homelessness in Philadelphia, and the problems in San Francisco. It is certainly true that many people in the UK struggle to afford food [1], and given that the US has a much greater disparity of wealth, I assume that the US has this problem on a great scale. So, no, I don't agree that it is an exaggeration. [1] http://www.trusselltrust.org/foodbank-projects http://www.trusselltrust.org/foodbank-projects
- dionidium 12y ago
  Yes, I've seen them, too. And there's a risk here that it will sound like I'm moving the goal posts around so that I'm right by definition. But that's not what I'm trying to do. There are of course those at the bottom who are chronically homeless. Those are the folks I was referring to in my first paragraph. Yes, you will see them digging in dumpsters. But this is not the typical experience. Most poor people never end up homeless. And those who do are typically homeless for a short period of time (and do get help).

metaphorm 12y ago

what about the middle class? not everyone is so poor that they need welfare. we're having a real problem now of people who make just enough money that they can survive on their own income but they can't prosper because of wage stagnation and rising cost of living.