3 ms·

No offence. I don't even no where to start in responding to you. In reverse order. Welfare: a single anecdote is no rebuttal, how could it ever be? I've lived

No offence. I don't even no where to start in responding to you. In reverse order. Welfare: a single anecdote is no rebuttal, how could it ever be? I've lived in Finland, I've _experienced_ the Scandinavian model first hand and I keep up-to-date on global stats. Granted, they are not perfect places but in terms of inequality (hint: this metric _really_ matters), social inclusion, access and quality of healthcare, education, public services and so on the countries of Scandinavia frequently come out on top _globally_. That is uncontested. Yay for your Thai friend. Maybe they would have made €700 (going rate) a week as a waiter in a hotel in Scandinavia? Politics: I _said_ re-make the UN _security council_. Not dismember the UN! I can't take you seriously if you don't give an honest reading of what I said. But yes, I am advocating disengaging gradually from NATO, it is a source of tension in the world _and_ importantly for Europeans it makes Europe subservient to US foreign policy. The rest of what you say there I cannot understand. Science: Eh hello? All our eggs in one basket? We need to become multi-planetary ASAP. The tech discovered in attempting to do so will actually help improve life on earth. Not a zero-sum game, sorry! Tobin tax: You may not have noticed the recent implosion of the world economy a.k.a. The Great Recession. And the subsequent bailing out of the financial industry. Inequality growing to levels not seen since the Gilded Age. Most people know that the one way to make the financial sector subservient to the rest of the economy and not the other way around is to implement some form of Tobin tax. The UK is quaking in its boots in the EU because it recognises that France, Germany and others want this. Without context your numbers are meaningless. With all respect, you need to realise that anecdotal unreferenced data-points are not a rebuttal to statements of general opinion. For instance you need to assert what you think is wrong with the Scandinavian model, wrong with the idea of a Tobin tax, and so on. Tax havens: You're happy with people scamming the system. I'm not. This process is already well under way by the way.

tajen 11y ago
+1 for responding point per point ;) Welfare: At least you've experienced the Scandinavian model, so I'll give credit to your testimonial. I've lived in Australia so I've experienced another one, pretty much at the opposite, and if you say my Thai friend could have made the same money in Oslo, with more healthcare and education, then I'd vote for the Scandavian model. Science: "We need to become multiplanetary asap"? Social inclusion or sustainability is a higher priority to me. Concerning the technological advance that space exploration brings us, well, wherever we pour dozens of billion euros we'll get a technological advance. So I'd rather we explore world hunger than space. But nowadays it's easier to get votes for supporting ESA than world hunger. Tobin tax: If it could solve everything you mention, I would be all for it. But it won't solve inequality and it will slow down our economy again.
- igravious 11y ago
  Hey, no problem. Kudos for taking the criticism graciously. Welfare: I can't comment on Australia. Australia is resource-rich and people from this part of the world keep emigrating to there and not coming back. I don't know how well Oz treats its poorest, which is my measure of any society. But I'm no commie :) Science: This is what I'm saying. I don't think is totally zero-sum. Granted, money spent on the space programme is money not spent on "world hunger" (where does this go by the way, charity?) But there are economic benefits from pursuing space. I've heard that a lot of world hunger could be solved by reducing subsidies to EU and US farmers which is a form of protectionism which goes against the capitalist spirit, and I'd be all for that to the limit of US and EU being food-independent. So you see, I'm not commie either :) Tobin tax: Clearly there is an economic imbalance to the benefit of the financial sector of the economy. In fact, it seems like many governments get "captured" by finance and so can't effectively regulate and legislate. The Tobin tax is supposed to address this and to the best of my knowledge is said to be a good way of addressing the imbalance by taxing certain types of capital flows. It totally is meant to rebalance the economy thereby making everybody a bit equal which should boost economic growth!

tajen 11y ago

+1 for responding point per point ;) Welfare: At least you've experienced the Scandinavian model, so I'll give credit to your testimonial. I've lived in Australia so I've experienced another one, pretty much at the opposite, and if you say my Thai friend could have made the same money in Oslo, with more healthcare and education, then I'd vote for the Scandavian model. Science: "We need to become multiplanetary asap"? Social inclusion or sustainability is a higher priority to me. Concerning the technological advance that space exploration brings us, well, wherever we pour dozens of billion euros we'll get a technological advance. So I'd rather we explore world hunger than space. But nowadays it's easier to get votes for supporting ESA than world hunger. Tobin tax: If it could solve everything you mention, I would be all for it. But it won't solve inequality and it will slow down our economy again.

igravious 11y ago
Hey, no problem. Kudos for taking the criticism graciously. Welfare: I can't comment on Australia. Australia is resource-rich and people from this part of the world keep emigrating to there and not coming back. I don't know how well Oz treats its poorest, which is my measure of any society. But I'm no commie :) Science: This is what I'm saying. I don't think is totally zero-sum. Granted, money spent on the space programme is money not spent on "world hunger" (where does this go by the way, charity?) But there are economic benefits from pursuing space. I've heard that a lot of world hunger could be solved by reducing subsidies to EU and US farmers which is a form of protectionism which goes against the capitalist spirit, and I'd be all for that to the limit of US and EU being food-independent. So you see, I'm not commie either :) Tobin tax: Clearly there is an economic imbalance to the benefit of the financial sector of the economy. In fact, it seems like many governments get "captured" by finance and so can't effectively regulate and legislate. The Tobin tax is supposed to address this and to the best of my knowledge is said to be a good way of addressing the imbalance by taxing certain types of capital flows. It totally is meant to rebalance the economy thereby making everybody a bit equal which should boost economic growth!