It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Europe is many different countries, with different languages, cultures, practices and political systems.
You have not specified which you refer to.
I can only comment on that of France.
Voluntarism, in which area?
The proclaim fiercely - these government officials are MY employees, I pay them, and they are using MY money, so I am not about to let them run around and do whatever they wish with it!
I personally don't know anyone who has made that choice. I am not sure why you wouldn't want to. Everyone gets sick, everyone needs a vacation, everyone retires. In any case, there is still taxes you have to pay anyway, just as in the US.
originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: ForteanOrgI wasn't saying there was no place for all of it, only disputing that society as a whole should pay for it.
STEM professionals directly go back to put value into society in the fields we train them for. A music major most likely will not
Pure academics are the same. Sure we need a certain amount of them, but not nearly as many as will be produced if they don't have to pay for their degrees.
This would not change. We would be basically paying for them to carry degrees that enable them only to work in low-skilled service industry jobs like they do now, and those jobs really only require a high school diploma. So why pay for them to study and academic field for 4 years first? It is highly inefficient.
originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: lydie15
It's All about the Benjamin's . Socialism Never Creates Wealth , it can Only Absorb it which makes it Doomed to Failure .
rich people hate socialism
remember kids, fair wages, safe working conditions and free healthcare are a bad thing.
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: lydie15
It's All about the Benjamin's . Socialism Never Creates Wealth , it can Only Absorb it which makes it Doomed to Failure .
Capitalism does not generate wealth either. It generates debt. Capitalism cannot grow an econony without the economy growing into debt. Every dollar in capitalism is borrowed into the economy. It failed before it started but we cant see it till the music stops.
originally posted by: blood0fheroes
a reply to: Bluesma
Yes. In all areas of human interaction and association I believe force should not be used to compel. One should always have the option to opt out for any or no reason, at any time. Conversely , one should also be able to opt in at any time.
The reason I originally asked your thoughts was not to disparage or elevate any particular form of government; it is because it seems to me that socialism cannot maintain itself without mandatory participation, and so I see no benefit to it over our current less than perfect government. Whereas here, there are options for non participation, even supposed non negotiable taxes where it is each persons responsibility to assess their own tax liability, or whether they even have a liability... at least according to the letter of the law.
originally posted by: blood0fheroes
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: lydie15
It's All about the Benjamin's . Socialism Never Creates Wealth , it can Only Absorb it which makes it Doomed to Failure .
Capitalism does not generate wealth either. It generates debt. Capitalism cannot grow an econony without the economy growing into debt. Every dollar in capitalism is borrowed into the economy. It failed before it started but we cant see it till the music stops.
Incorrect.
Capitalism does indeed generate wealth. Currency is neither money, nor wealth. The fact that our current fiat currency is backed by debt is no fault of capitalism or any other ism.
originally posted by: blood0fheroes
originally posted by: MALBOSIA
originally posted by: Zanti Misfit
a reply to: lydie15
It's All about the Benjamin's . Socialism Never Creates Wealth , it can Only Absorb it which makes it Doomed to Failure .
Capitalism does not generate wealth either. It generates debt. Capitalism cannot grow an econony without the economy growing into debt. Every dollar in capitalism is borrowed into the economy. It failed before it started but we cant see it till the music stops.
Incorrect.
Capitalism does indeed generate wealth. Currency is neither money, nor wealth. The fact that our current fiat currency is backed by debt is no fault of capitalism or any other ism.
Ok. Write off all the debt and see how much wealth is left. The buildings arnt worth squat, they will fall down if not constantly maintained, our cars will stop working in a year without maintenance, our clothes are cheap and fragile. We have nothing that doesnt require more debt to maintain.
There is no wealth in capitalism. The US is the largest capitalist society and farthest in debt. If you switched to gold or silver it never would have got so big.
Regulated fiat currancy WILL work under socialism and the products coukd be built to last without economic consequence like there is in capitalism.
Giving them access to debt to compete with capitalism is what drove a stake through them. Not socialism.
Fractional reserve banking and intrest based spending needs capitalism to survive. So cut off the leg to save the body is the way i see it.
originally posted by: blood0fheroes
a reply to: MALBOSIA
I'm glad we agree that debt is the problem. Though historically every fiat currency has eventually been debased, whereas currencies backed by tangible assets like the gold standard have maintained their value for centuries.
Giving them access to debt to compete with capitalism is what drove a stake through them. Not socialism.
Fractional reserve banking and intrest based spending needs capitalism to survive. So cut off the leg to save the body is the way i see it.
Agreed. We should cut off the leg of fractional reserve banking and fiat currency if we ever hope to return to a capitalist economy. As it stand the u.S. economy is best described as "crony capitalism", or corporations in bed with government. Another name for this is fascism.
originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
Welfare states are capitalist in nature, not socialist in nature. This seems to be lost in attempt to save the word "socialism" from its own failures.