Why do Social Issues Almost Always Lose to Economics?

[cparle87]

I didn't realize it was one or the other.

There a guy on this forums who flat out told me the FDA should be abolished because meat producing companies should be able to do anything they want with no oversight whatsoever because any oversight is evil. I'm not surprised.

- - - Updated - - -

I just think Americans here...money away from me...nope. and walk away. Not seeing what it cost them.

There's too many people in the US who still believe that any kind of Socialism = Hitler and/or Communism.

[PC2]

There is a balance that can be struck between the two. As for the rest, I’ve seen people that are fully selfish, it does not end well for them long term. They tend to die depressed and alone.

That's just an anecdote. Life hasn't ended up well for anyone long-term, certainly not for altruists over self interested people. Regarding the "balance" that's why we have mixed system democracies. Not because altruism is good but because each person should consider their rational interest in relation to how the society works.

[artemishunter1]

I wish America joined the rest of the developed world in implementing universal free healthcare. Come on, that's should be one issue that everyone agrees on. But some folks are greedy and stupid.

that would be America's death kneel. Why can not you Europeans understand this? We have VERY loose Southern Borders, we have very strong human trafficing networks coming into from all over the world. We are VERY diverse population with Diverse values regarding population, birth rate, work and family. In the southern states like California, a lot of hospitals had to close and the remaining had to merge just for health tourism from Mexico and other Latin American countries. We have population from around the world who believe a good life is to work less, spend time with family and make as many babies as possible and GOD would provide. And the same population does not succeed enough to pull their own weight in tax money (they are poor, taxing them would make unnecessary suffering, all the while they have 7 children). We simply can not afford paying for their healthcare since we are already paying everything for their existance, from their rent, their cellphone, their utility, their education, their births, and everything, all the while we get low cost manual labor from them). Its like having billions of Greece (the country) in people form. Worse, their many children won't grow up to be budget neutral either. Most of them will be net loss in society, since universe leans toward chaos.

[NED funded]

If you think free markets drive prices down, you should go house shopping.

Yeah, it does. In fact, most of the efforts against free markets are done with the specific purpose of rising prices. Maple Syrup and milk cartels in Canada with their production quotas, licensing in various professions that don't really need it, NIMBYism and more.

[Kaleredar]

Rational self-interest is a good thing. What is perverted is altruism as a virtue, which is nonsense passed down by certain religions. It's like the Christian saying of "turn the other cheek", it's an irrational idea that doesn't actually make the world a better place. It just means you keep getting hit.

Cool it Ayn Rand. The notion of altruism being good is that you get hit so that others don't have to.

Not to be sentimental but take Martin Luther King Jr. for example. He got "hit" quite a lot as an adult. He was killed for it and new he'd be killed for it. But millions of people's lives were made better by the hits that he and other civil rights figures took.

[Super Kami Dende]

Because you need money to be able to fund socialised programs.

It's why the only types of "socialised" policies that work require a massive Capitalist backbone to keep them from failing. It's why socialism on it's own fails hard and can only be used successfully as a supplement to a Capitalist structure.

[PC2]

Have you found lots of women that want a selfish lover and husband?

It’s not an anecdote as it’s a retold life lesson in every culture around the world.

Self preservation and selfishness are not actually the same thing. One involves necessity, the other excess.

I think most all woman want a partner with rational self interest. A few may want a lover who is an altruist but it wouldn't be a good idea because they may value other peoples kids the same as their own potential kids. That would be insane if evolution selected for that tendency.

[artemishunter1]

That is then a balanced approach. Pure selfishness is not a virtue. There is an obvious give and take in a relationship, and society.

yes, this is true. This is why poor should do the best to breed like rabbits and take welfare from the rich. They are doing a great service to humanity and society at large by taking money from the rich. all the while hating the rich and contributing nothing of value to society even at their best. That is true give and take relationship in society, all the people who have something must give that thing to poor and less fortunate and poor people should take everything because they are poor and they are holy.

[PC2]

Cool it Ayn Rand. The notion of altruism being good is that you get hit so that others don't have to.

Not to be sentimental but take Martin Luther King Jr. for example. He got "hit" quite a lot as an adult. He was killed for it and new he'd be killed for it. But millions of people's lives were made better by the hits that he and other civil rights figures took.

MLK wasn't an altruist, he was willing to die for the idea of equal rights which is rational.

Ayn Rand apparently supported 0% tax. Nations have bills to pay so I don't think that's possible. And I disagree with areas of Objectivism regarding epistemology and free will.

[SL1200]

The almighty dollar is our one and only true god.

[Kaleredar]

MLK wasn't an altruist, he was willing to die for the idea of equal rights which is rational.

"willing to die for others so that they can live better lives" is a pretty damn good definition of altruism.

[PC2]

"willing to die for others so that they can live better lives" is a pretty damn good definition of altruism.

He was fighting for others based on the premise that they were in the same situation as him. That's rational. For the same reason that a mom is rational if she takes a bullet that she knows will save her kids. The mom is promoting her own existence which is what nature tells us to do.

[Pua]

Why are bunching the UK with America, we have universal healthcare and other social services. Our public services are just fine, and in what world is the Norweigian economy anywhere near that of the UK. Norway spends more per person on social services than the UK but that is not a representation of the entire economy.

Because both the UK and the US are hugely neoliberal economies, ran by ultimately the same set of political elites. And arguing that "our public services are just fine", can only mean you've no real experience of them recently.

Our public services are a joke.

And as for comparing economies, it's relatively simple; Norway, Germany and the Netherlands all run structural economies that produce money, while investing much more heavily in public services. Both the UK and US are still running huge deficits and, in the UK's case, the family silver has all largely been sold. Once financial services relocate to Europe post-Brexit, that's it - there's nothing else Britain offers the world.

Hopefully, Scotland reaches the lifeboats in time and abandons this madness.

I don't blame Germany's good social programs for its economy being weaker than that of the United States, but it's pretty funny that you credit their social systems for their imagined strength.

Except I didn't do that.

I simply pointed out that there are two ways of looking at it - that you need a good economy in order to build decent public services, or you use decent public services as part of building a good economy. The nations I listed take opposite approaches, and have very different results.

Please don't misrepresent what I'm saying again. Nobody benefits.

[Spectral]

Except I didn't do that.

I simply pointed out that there are two ways of looking at it - that you need a good economy in order to build decent public services, or you use decent public services as part of building a good economy. The nations I listed take opposite approaches, and have very different results.

Please don't misrepresent what I'm saying again. Nobody benefits.

So you're retracting this part then, right?

...Norway, Germany or the Netherlands, have much stronger economies than far more neoliberal nations such as the United Kingdom or America.

[DJ117]

In Denmark we have those things and balancing how much money they deserve is a daily discussion. We will never be satisfied.

[baskev]

There a guy on this forums who flat out told me the FDA should be abolished because meat producing companies should be able to do anything they want with no oversight whatsoever because any oversight is evil. I'm not surprised.

- - - Updated - - -



There's too many people in the US who still believe that any kind of Socialism = Hitler and/or Communism.

Yup my point exactly. And youtubers like dave rubin and fox news etc keep that way of thinking alive. While country's in EU use a combination of both capitalism with socialism.

But it does help when they come here. I have seen plenty of video's about people coming to EU . Need to go to the doctor and hospital without oversea's insurance and pay like 100 dollars for 2 medication, doctors visit and a scan in the hospital. While the same scan alone already cost 400+ in america.

[XangXu]

Well it’s mostly just in America...

Other countries have many of the things the OP mentioned.

This is an example of American ignorance. They can’t realize that the world is literally moving on without them.

[Najnaj]

I like in the UK, the NHS is not high quality healthcare. People die waiting in corridors here, GP's get closed down all the time. You have to wait 2 weeks to see a Doctor on average if it's not an emergency. Most ambulances fail to respond in less than 8 minutes (which if you're in a serious life-threatening situation severely cuts your chance of survival) Switzerland has the same problems - you cannot sustain a high quality healthcare system if you say everyone has access and they don't have to pay - it simply does not work.

...and you are claiming that ambulances in the US are faster? Or that it is somehow customary to let people die in corridors when you have universal healthcare?

Your reasoning lacks all merit and is just your normal fear mongering from the US health insurance lobby. If you take a 30 sec statistical tour on Google you will quickly notice that out of all the wealthiest nations in the world, only one does not have universal healthcare. It is of course the US and it is at the bottom of the heap when it comes to all issues of healthcare (except breast cancer for some odd reason.) They also pay almost as much per person as the UK for universal healthcare ...without getting it. On average they pay 5 times more to get roughly the same coverage.

...and why do you have a problem with waiting for 2 weeks for a non urgent doctors appointment?

- - - Updated - - -

You can have high quality healthcare, you can have universal healthcare or you can have free healthcare - pick two out of three.

Well it isn't free. It is financed with taxes so... I pick universal and high quality then.

[Deleted]

Bullshit, in Europe its exactly the same. Money over people. Its one of the main reasons goverments desperately keep incrementing the population while we are already drowning in people in north western countries.

Sure, that's why you see people going into crippling debt by getting an education or receiving treatment for various diseases. Oh, wait. That doesn't happen in Europe. In some countries they'll even pay you to go to school. I got sick in Italy, severe kidney stones, I had to have surgically removed. Cost? Nothing but the cup of coffee I had in the hospital café on my way out. Totally the same.

[Utinil]

...and why do you have a problem with waiting for 2 weeks for a non urgent doctors appointment?

Because many things can go from being or at least seeming to be non urgent to extremely serious in the span of a couple days. Staying on top of things prevents them from becoming catastrophes. It is easy to mistake the symptoms of something like Ecoli for a common cold, which wouldn't be urgent.