 |
|
DinoDoc
|
 |
AECCP loves Democracy
Sep 1999 time: 23:32
|
|
Che: You're not making any sense. Argue against people stated opinion not what you think they are.
Last edited by DinoDoc on 13-12-2003 at 02:03
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002 time: 00:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Caligastia
Yeah, I like the idea of elderly people dying in shacks. |
Well if you don't then be quiet.
quote: I can't say I have all the answers, but I know what doesn't work. |
But it does work - elderly people are not dying in shacks!!! The possibility you are excluding is that this might be the best we can do, given human nature. Perhaps we could tweak the system a bit to make it more efficient, but no alternative has yet been found.
If we don't have a reasonable alternative, then it is childish and idiotic to throw away the one that we have.
quote: If your investments are diversified, and you transfer your money into low-risk areas well before you retire, this won't be a problem. |
Yes it will. For one, it is irrational to just save for your retirement because you don't know when you'll die. This is why risk sharing by insurance schemes is most attractive. It prevents people running out of money when they live too long.
The people who have the most incentive to pay into an insurance scheme are those who stand to get more out than they pay in. Hence the scheme will have to start denying people products because there isn't any money in it. Private insurance schemes always face problems like this.
quote: How can someone be too poor to put money aside for retirement, yet they can afford to pay into SS? It's one or the other. |
Because if private insurance was the only option it would cost more. A compulsory scheme avoids adverse selection risks. Look at what happened to private health insurance in NZ when the government started cutting health care.
quote: So I'm not a real New Zealander unless I support socialist government programs? |
No, you are just one of those cloud cuckoo land folk who bought into the failed Rogernomics rubbish. New Zealand is better off without you.
quote: Yeah, that's why NZ has historically had significantly higher unemployment than the US. |
No. You obviously weren't around in the 70s. It doesn't matter anyway, the standard of living and health care for most people in NZ which is not a rich country is a lot better than the US.
quote: Exactly, and as with all things government, there is no competition and therefore no motivation to provide value for money. |
That deserves a Ming laugh
         
The whole point of government providing services is that they are things that a market wouldn't provide. Otherwise we'd leave it to the market. That's why the police among other things are funded by compulsion.
There can be problems caused by lack of competition, but that doesn't mean there are no pressures. People will vote out governments that do not provide a decent level of service in favour of reformers.
But this is still irrelevant. If the government is providing a service, however badly, that people need and that markets would not provide, then it is on balance a good thing.
quote: Yes, the market would no doubt provide a better sevice. |
Prove it. All you have done is repeat silly Tory slogans without providing any substantial reasons. Both Chegitz and I have challenged numerous people on this thread to show how a private scheme would do as well as SS at providing such broad public goods. But no one has come up with anything other than whining about having to pay tax.
In fact conservative governments don't believe you because none of them will totally get rid of SS either.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Imran Siddiqui

|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970 time: 00:32
|
|
quote: There once was a country that built a great wall to keep out barbarians. It was very costly, and very expensive, but it worked, no barbarians came. But generations passed, and no one remembered that there were barbarians, and they began to complain about the cost of the wall, and why should they have to pay. We've never seen a barbarian, they don't exist.
And so they stopped maintaining and manning the wall. And the barbarians came and killed them, stole their women and children, and took their land. |
That's a simplistic view of the fall of China. The reason the Mongols were able to win was because of a gradual fall of the Confusian system. The wall fell into disrepute not because they chose not to pay for it, but because they couldn't.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:32
|
|
Wow, this thread is just calling out to me...nah, I'll resist for now.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:32
|
|
quote: Simple changes to SS, including the most obviosu two, income limits and raising the retirement age would extend th system by decades. |
Yeah, but eliminating it would be better. I already pay into an IRA, for example - I see no reason why I should be double taxed. If I feel like giving to the poor, I'll goddamn well do it on my own. If no one feels like giving to the poor, well, then I guess some people will just have to starve - but it's their own fault for not planning ahead. Sorry.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
David Floyd
|
|
The bottom of a large bottle of beer
Jan 1970 time: 05:32
|
|
MrFun,
Excuse me. I see no reason I should pay twice, with one of those times being for a program I don't want and won't get anything out of anyway.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32. Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|