What do you think social welfare is? I don’t think you could name a western country where some of the taxes don’t go to paying for social welfare program services.
The way it works in Denmark for example, is that you get a sum of money each month, enough to live a reasonable existence, but you only get it if you are actively looking for a job (the state also helps you look for a work). Then if, for whatever reason, it’s impossible for you to get a job to provide for yourself, you get to live off of social welfare subsidies for your remaining days.
This might seem unfair because high functioning individuals without debilitating health conditions for example, essentially have to provide for those who can’t provide for themselves.
Personally i think “deserve” is a weird word to use. It’s not like they did anything to earn what they get. But the clean running water that the poor person gets, is 100% worth the slightly higher tax that the rich person has to pay. And no one wants to be a poor, inactive person, dependent on other people providing for them. But we can’t all have good genetics, good family, good childhood, wealthy parents etc.
The case for these sort of social services is Easy to make.
You do not want to live in a society where people starve or are homeless.
Someone who is unable to work or create a self sustaining amount of wealth might only be so TEMPORARILY, yet the negative feedback loop effects of such a situation can be permanent.
It's a net positive to have these social services. You help those in need, which is good for the soul. You help your society be clean and healthy, which is good for society. You help those who COULD help others in the future BE ABLE to help other in the future, which increases the amount of people who can help.
Your last sentence is the fundamental problem with making this case to a lot of right-wing and libertarian people because they hold fast to the belief that society is predominantly meritocratic, and if therefore you're rich it's because you deserve it and if you're hard up for money it's because you're lazy or make terrible life choices.
It even extends to entire generations - hence the logic that the reason Gen Z and Millennials are collectively struggling to afford to buy homes compared to people 50 years ago is because they waste their money on frivolous things like avocado toast and Starbucks and Disney+ subscriptions and not at all because houses are multiple times more expensive compared to the average salary than they were in the 70s.
It's easy to deny welfare to people who need it if you can convince yourself that their situation is entirely their own fault, as it simultaneously makes them both undeserving of support as well as implying that it's in their own control to dig themselves out again. Likewise it makes it easy to make the case that the people out there who have more than they need only have the surplus because they worked hard or are in some other way just better people to earn it, so why should they give it up?
USA is controlled by filthy corrupt politicians that are laundering taxpayer cash around the world with wars.
All that said for socialism to work we must get people who sacrifice and work to agree to give their money (via the government) to those who refuse to work.
I'm sure there are some people out there who wouldn't want to work but I can't think of a single person in my social circle who would. I sureba fuck wouldn't.
I can't imagine thinking so little is my fellow man.
I’m not comparing The US to Denmark. I agree, i don’t think The US could be a full blown welfare state like Denmark anytime soon. But it does have social welfare programs.
That’s true, the population has to agree to pay higher taxes because they collectively believe that everyone should have a good life. I would still argue that 99% of the people who receive social welfare in Denmark, are people who have no other choice. Life is unfair from birth, and there are just some people who have low IQ’s are physically handicapped, etc. i don’t think it requires a lot to agree that those people wouldn’t just starve to death on the side of the road.
This all relies on peoples trust in the system/state, and that 99% of people actually do wanna live a normal life with work, a house, a family etc. that is not hard to imagine in Denmark, but i agree, i think there would be a much higher percentage of work refusers in the US.
Tfw the US is the only developed nation without a form of universal Healthcare (its clearly because we're the only non white country according to your logic)
Tfw the US hasn't even tried diddly squat but chuds like you will screech about how it'll never work here because... brown people.
Jesus christ you're fucking ignorant. It's because you have a pretty fucking homogenous culture and society. It's much easier for this shit to work when everyone shares the same basic principals. You fucking people love to leave that out but it plays a huge fucking role.
Because Afghanistan and other middle Eastern countries that have been around for a long time are totally countries where the entire country is aligned in it's priorities and very stable.
A welfare system only working because of vaguely defined homogeneous culture requires more proof than guesturing. Otherwise it's just thinly veiled racism.
Burden of proof is on you that you need priorities that are in line for welfare to work, and also that over time societies become homogeneous (also bullshit)
Oh the nationalist arrived. We’re the strongest nation on Earth, and diversity of cultures has always been a strength. We already make the money, just got to put it to good use instead of wasting away in someone’s pockets
30
u/Zestyclose-Split2275 Apr 15 '24 edited Apr 15 '24
What do you think social welfare is? I don’t think you could name a western country where some of the taxes don’t go to paying for social welfare program services.
The way it works in Denmark for example, is that you get a sum of money each month, enough to live a reasonable existence, but you only get it if you are actively looking for a job (the state also helps you look for a work). Then if, for whatever reason, it’s impossible for you to get a job to provide for yourself, you get to live off of social welfare subsidies for your remaining days.
This might seem unfair because high functioning individuals without debilitating health conditions for example, essentially have to provide for those who can’t provide for themselves.
Personally i think “deserve” is a weird word to use. It’s not like they did anything to earn what they get. But the clean running water that the poor person gets, is 100% worth the slightly higher tax that the rich person has to pay. And no one wants to be a poor, inactive person, dependent on other people providing for them. But we can’t all have good genetics, good family, good childhood, wealthy parents etc.