U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-21-2018, 11:16 AM
 
1,211 posts, read 1,287,566 times
Reputation: 1556

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ottomobeale View Post
yawn.

They want to emulate Sweden, not Venezuela.
The only reason countries like Sweden can do what they do is because of the security generously provided by the US worldwide. They are not pulling their own weight in the global war on terror against enemies of the free world. They directly benefit from the taxes of our citizens and the blood of our soldiers.

If we pulled out they would quickly have to devote all their resources toward the military as the Islamic extremists recapture Spain/the Iberian Penisula and use it as a base of operations to plan and execute terrorist attacks against Sweden and conquer all of Europe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-21-2018, 01:38 PM
 
26,705 posts, read 14,959,097 times
Reputation: 12548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
COUNTRIES WITH THE HIGHEST STANDARD OF LIVING

Based on these factors
  • Basic Human Needs, which includes medical care, sanitation, and shelter.
  • Foundations of Wellbeing, which covers education, access to technology, and life expectancy.
  • Opportunity, which looks at personal rights, freedom of choice, and general tolerance.
Finland
Canada
Denmark
Australia
Switzerland
Sweden
Norway
Netherlands


https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/...uality-of-life


The United States ranks no. 20 on the list. To improve our standard of living, we'll need to adopt more democratic socialist programs to improve our access to affordable healthcare, college, housing, etc. Capitalism + socialism + democracy is the best model to follow and is proven to work in the countries listed. We should follow them.
What you are saying is we need to make people poorer through taxation so we can improve their quality of life.
Many countries on the list have freer economies than we do and dont try to size their military to defend planet earth. Also many are scaling back on the welfare schemes because they cant keep up with them.
And every sector the govt meddles in here sees prices skyrocket, so what on earth are you thinking when you expect the guv to make healthcare, college and housing more "affordable", when all evidence points to the contrary?

Last edited by Frank DeForrest; 09-21-2018 at 01:47 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 01:44 PM
 
26,705 posts, read 14,959,097 times
Reputation: 12548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewjdeg View Post
If the market price doesn't reflect the external costs to society then the market has failed. That's why we have taxes and regulations but is still have efficient outcomes.
Example?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 01:45 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
526 posts, read 412,145 times
Reputation: 945
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winterfall8324 View Post
Orwell was a democratic socialist.

Socialism is the workers controlling the means of production, not state capitalism.
There has never been a time in history, under a Socialist economy or Socialist government, where the "workers" controlled the means of production. It is always the state that controls the means of production. The big lie is to always blame Socialism's failure on "state capitalism". How come there has never been a country, controlled by Socialists, where Socialism has produced prosperity? And before someone responds..........."but, but, Scandinavia....." , the Scandinavian countries have a high degree of social welfare programs funded by high levels of taxation, but their economies are very successfully Capitalist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 02:14 PM
 
2,027 posts, read 814,730 times
Reputation: 1787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest View Post
Example?
Cigarettes. The cost of a pack of cigarettes as determined by supply and demand excludes the external cost of smoking to society. When you look at things like lost productivity, second hand smoking, and other health care costs related to smoking, the yearly cost is estimated to be around $300 billion.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4862676/

That's why we have sin taxes; if we didn't, cigarette companies would be overproducing - they would not have be accounting for the true cost of their good. Overproduction is a market failure - sin taxes align the markets to reflect the true cost of a good to society.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 02:19 PM
 
225 posts, read 81,010 times
Reputation: 466
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elliott_CA View Post
[...] Capitalism + socialism + democracy is the best model to follow and is proven to work in the countries listed. We should follow them.
Why don't we just do away with the "ism" and call it a social market economy? It worked extraordinarily well for Germany up until it got gutted by neoliberals during the first decade of this century. An "ism" always indicates the absence of common sense. Common sense and doing what gets our society ahead should be the guiding principle. Hard work and smart decisions need to be rewarded on an individual basis, but at the end of the day we all sit in the same boat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 02:24 PM
 
Location: Manchester NH
6,235 posts, read 1,731,958 times
Reputation: 2055
Quote:
Originally Posted by NeutralZone View Post
There has never been a time in history, under a Socialist economy or Socialist government, where the "workers" controlled the means of production. It is always the state that controls the means of production. The big lie is to always blame Socialism's failure on "state capitalism". How come there has never been a country, controlled by Socialists, where Socialism has produced prosperity? And before someone responds..........."but, but, Scandinavia....." , the Scandinavian countries have a high degree of social welfare programs funded by high levels of taxation, but their economies are very successfully Capitalist.
Catalonia in the 1930s:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Catalonia
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 02:28 PM
 
5,573 posts, read 2,119,011 times
Reputation: 2901
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drewjdeg View Post
Cigarettes. The cost of a pack of cigarettes as determined by supply and demand excludes the external cost of smoking to society. When you look at things like lost productivity, second hand smoking, and other health care costs related to smoking, the yearly cost is estimated to be around $300 billion.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4862676/

That's why we have sin taxes; if we didn't, cigarette companies would be overproducing - they would not have be accounting for the true cost of their good. Overproduction is a market failure - sin taxes align the markets to reflect the true cost of a good to society.
That doesn't represent a failure in the market though.

And cigarette companies would still be producing according to demand and the profit model, as they do even with a sin tax in place. This is a reflection of the market working, albeit is with an artificial force applied to the price point because of government meddling. Take away the government meddling, and the cigarette market would simply work more efficiently.

Also, sin taxes are not what lower the demand for cigarettes. Laws against smoking cigarettes almost anywhere but inside your own house is what limits that demand. And even with those laws trying to de facto ban the product itself, ~15% of the country still demands that product, artificially high prices and punitive laws and all.

But the externality of cigarette smoke is not a failure of the market for supplying the demand of cigarettes. That market for cigarettes is alive and well, although functioning less efficiently than it would were the government meddling removed. A negative externality is not a measure of a market's efficiency. Things like profit margins, volume and velocity are measures of market efficiency and health.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 02:46 PM
 
2,027 posts, read 814,730 times
Reputation: 1787
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volobjectitarian View Post
That doesn't represent a failure in the market though.

And cigarette companies would still be producing according to demand and the profit model, as they do even with a sin tax in place. This is a reflection of the market working, albeit is with an artificial force applied to the price point because of government meddling. Take away the government meddling, and the cigarette market would simply work more efficiently.

Also, sin taxes are not what lower the demand for cigarettes. Laws against smoking cigarettes almost anywhere but inside your own house is what limits that demand. And even with those laws trying to de facto ban the product itself, ~15% of the country still demands that product, artificially high prices and punitive laws and all.

But the externality of cigarette smoke is not a failure of the market for supplying the demand of cigarettes. That market for cigarettes is alive and well, although functioning less efficiently than it would were the government meddling removed. A negative externality is not a measure of a market's efficiency. Things like profit margins, volume and velocity are measures of market efficiency and health.
It is a market failure, that's literally what an negative externality model describes; the price is too low and the quality supplied is too high. I don't smoke, but if 15% of the country smoking causes my health insurance premiums to rise - the cigarette companies ought to incur that external cost.

Global profits of cigarette companies are far less than the external costs of their products; yet - they are still in business. That is a market failure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-21-2018, 02:54 PM
 
Location: South Carolina
2,792 posts, read 1,676,577 times
Reputation: 1725
Why are people on here saying what we have now is good? Are they just avoiding all the people who are homeless or on foodstamps or even the people who are just one bad thing happening to them from losing all they have? Just because people who are poor are overweight does mean much. Poor people tend to eat fattening food because it is cheap and easy to get and that is only one thing what about where they live or what they drive?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top