America Is Already There

[Shadow Wolf]

The whole premise that people who try hard should do better is one I don't have any issue with, really,

It's not working that way in America. It's been my experience that working and trying harder don't get you ahead and do get you sent to the operating room due to injuries that may be common due to this hard work and trying harder thing (carpal tunnel syndrome in my case). Even as a case manager in mental health I was still below the poverty line.
But being argumentative with a boss and ceasing to care about my job is when I got promoted. Driving people around elevated me put of poverty. And now I'm looking at making poker a full time/mostly full time thing. Because in America hard work is for suckers.

. But no-one would ever suggest that we remove the rights of a person to bequeath possessions to the next generation.

After a certain point I do. All it does is ensore generational wealth that tends to accumulate and stay there regardless of individual effort (such as Trump's wealth despite his abysmal business history and record).

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It's not working that way in America. It's been my experience that working and trying harder don't get you ahead and do get you sent to the operating room due to injuries that may be common due to this hard work and trying harder thing (carpal tunnel syndrome in my case). Even as a case manager in mental health I was still below the poverty line.
But being argumentative with a boss and ceasing to care about my job is when I got promoted. Driving people around elevated me put of poverty. And now I'm looking at making poker a full time/mostly full time thing. Because in America hard work is for suckers.

After a certain point I do. All it does is ensore generational wealth that tends to accumulate and stay there regardless of individual effort (such as Trump's wealth despite his abysmal business history and record).

Heh...I wouldn't read too much into those sentences you quoted. They were contextual. The main point of the post kinda aligns with your thoughts, if stated a little differently.

 

[SomeRandom]

That rate is about the averagr rate here. Plus it's not unusual for them to have to purchase school supplies for students using their own money.

They have to buy the materials? Wtf?

 

[PureX]

I just don't see socialism as a magic pill to fix economic issues. Maybe the issues would be different but not necessarily better.

Well, it might make sense to look for the reasons why. Because moderate democratic socialist reforms have worked well for us in this country in the past, and it is working well for other countries, today. The logic is there, and so is the effective history. So why you can't see this is a mystery.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

They have to buy the materials? Wtf?

Well...it's all about levels. Teachers here do the same, but it's more when they want things above and beyond the standard supplies provided.

From what I've read about some US schools, it can be basics even, in some cases.

 

[Revoltingest]

In Austria, everyone who works gets free healthcare.

What of those who don't work?

Btw....

 

[Revoltingest]

Oh, ours get lifetime free healthcare by default of living in Australiastan. Though many may opt for private.

Interesting....I like preserving the private option.

 

[SomeRandom]

Well...it's all about levels. Teachers here do the same, but it's more when they want things above and beyond the standard supplies provided.

From what I've read about some US schools, it can be basics even, in some cases.

I mean if a teacher wants to go the extra mile, I can understand. I could even understand if a teacher just gets fed up with an awful piece of equipment and buys a better piece out of frustration lol
But basics is asking a bit much from your staff, surely?

 

[lewisnotmiller]

I mean if a teacher wants to go the extra mile, I can understand. I could even understand if a teacher just gets fed up with an awful piece of equipment and buys a better piece out of frustration lol
But basics is asking a bit much from your staff, surely?

Yup.

 

[SomeRandom]

Interesting....I like preserving the private option.

Ehh, private here is hit or miss. Like for some reason physiotherapy is a “bonus extra” even though pretty much every workplace has to give employees physio if they ever injure themselves so like what’s the point? Although it’s handy for dental procedures and optional procedures I suppose

 

[SomeRandom]

Yup.

Well I guess that explains the underpaid overworked teacher trope so common in US media. Everywhere else seems to translate that as the overcaring teacher just trying to do right in a somewhat crappy system. Or else a comedic portrayal.

 

[Revoltingest]

Ehh, private here is hit or miss. Like for some reason physiotherapy is a “bonus extra” even though pretty much every workplace has to give employees physio if they ever injure themselves so like what’s the point? Although it’s handy for dental procedures and optional procedures I suppose

It also serves as a "Plan B" when government fails.
Ameristan's border states have done a booming business
at times when Canuckistan's system failed them.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Well I guess that explains the underpaid overworked teacher trope so common in US media. Everywhere else seems to translate that as the overcaring teacher just trying to do right in a somewhat crappy system. Or else a comedic portrayal.

It varies greatly in America, near as I can tell. Their funding models are mighty strange to our eyes, and commonly linked to local property taxes, amongst other sources.

Public schools in poor areas here commonly get additional funding to try and offset various disadvantages. That's not always the case in the US. Heck, I'm not even sure its often the case. As you can imagine, property taxes are higher in affluent areas.

Word of caution on all this though...it varies, state to state, so I'm talking very generally here.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

It also serves as a "Plan B" when government fails.
Ameristan's border states have done a booming business
at times when Canuckistan's system failed them.

To be clear, though, the Canadian system is quite different to Australia.
We have universal healthcare, and long waits for public hospitals to perform elective procedures (for example).
But people can access private hospitals, either via private health insurance were all encouraged to have via taxation, or by paying.

My understanding of the Canadian system is that almost all hospitals operate based on a single public funding model. To an Australian (like both myself and @SomeRandom ) that means they operate similarly to public hospitals in Australia.

Good levels of care everyone can access, bad wait times for non emergency procedures, etc.

Accessing US hospitals is somewhat like an Australian choosing to pay for a private hospital.

Not arguing anything, here, just trying to clarify differences as I understand them for @SomeRandom (mostly).

 

[Revoltingest]

Not arguing anything, here, just trying to clarify differences as I understand them for @SomeRandom (mostly).

FYI, you needn't issue a disclaimer for my benefit.
I read what you post without mischievous inferences.
Ameristan will eventually go single payer health care IMO,
& I advocate the most libertarian version, which is like yours,
ie, a private option allows more & better service for those
who want & can afford it.
Hillary once (when Bill was Prez) proposed a government
run system with private care being illegal. Fortunately, Bill's
scandals distracted from that.

 

[Nakosis]

Well, it might make sense to look for the reasons why. Because moderate democratic socialist reforms have worked well for us in this country in the past, and it is working well for other countries, today. The logic is there, and so is the effective history. So why you can't see this is a mystery.

Most democrats deny that their progressive social agenda has anything to do with socialism. At best it can be described as social programs supported by capitalist economics. I suspect Bernie Sanders was the only real socialist in democratic politics who has never really found the support he needed amongst the democratic party.

 

[Nakosis]

Ha...
I'm an ex-teacher. I was pretty good at it, if I can say that without sounding a prat. But I left teaching, and took an entry level job in the software industry.
My wife is a nurse, who decided to get into mental health nursing.

So...our quals are about the same. She's done some further study, I haven't, but still. Ballpark same training levels.

I earn approximately twice as much as her at this point. Not because I work harder. Not because my job is more stressful. I'd say we both work pretty hard, and our jobs both have stress. Neither of us has taken an easy path, that's for sure.

I earn more because I work in the private sector and I earn my bosses (business owners) money. If I left and went somewhere else, they think there would be an impact on their revenue, and potentially I'd make a competitor stronger. Also, I'm generally easy to deal with and make their life easier, rather than harder.

My wife earns less because if she leaves, she goes to another hospital, and they don't compete. She doesn't earn anyone money, and her whole department is a cost to the taxpayer.

Her work is much more important to the health of society, whereas mine has no discernible impact on the quality of life we lead. I make much more money because my work earns other people more money. That's it.

It's the same with basketball players, incidentally. You can make your own call on all of that, and how you see it. But it's nothing to do with 'worth'.

You are making my point. Your "worth" is subjective. Not that I am belittling the work your wife does, but the economy doesn't care about subjective value. The economy cares about the creation of wealth. Obviously, chasing after money is not the most important thing in life however wealth has to be created to support programs like the ones for mental health. So your work is actually more important. Without the wealth you create, there would be no money to support the mental health programs.

 

[Nakosis]

I doubt anyone is claiming it's a 'magic pill'. Maybe just a baby step in the right direction.

I don't understand the baby step. I'm not personally against socialism, I just don't understand where people see the benefit.

 

[PureX]

Most democrats deny that their progressive social agenda has anything to do with socialism. At best it can be described as social programs supported by capitalist economics. I suspect Bernie Sanders was the only real socialist in democratic politics who has never really found the support he needed amongst the democratic party.

I agree. The democratic party is owned and controlled by the wealthy capitalists who pay for their campaigns, numerous perks, and high-paying after-public-office jobs. They are political whores, mostly, not socialists. They also made damn sure Sanders would never be their candidate for president for the same reason.

I don't know how socialist Sanders is, but at least he dared to speak of enacting some socialist policies. Which is why the capitalist whores in the democratic party made sure he'd never get a presidential pulpit to speak from. And socialism has been so hopelessly and relentlessly slandered in our culture, by the capitalist mouth-pieces, that hardly anyone even knows what the word means anymore, and falsely equate it with totalitarian dictatorship.

 

[PureX]

I don't understand the baby step. I'm not personally against socialism, I just don't understand where people see the benefit.

The benefit is in spreading the money, the opportunities, and the control of commerce out among everyone who engages in it. How can you not see the benefit of this?