A basic income for everyone? Yes, Finland shows it really can work

My ass we pay more, I have not been to a quak in 30 years , except for employeer mandate drug test..why do you refuse to acknowledge the hidden taxes in Europe to pay for it ?

 

There are NO HIDDEN TAXES. Besides, the Europeans love their National Healthcare Services.

Costs much less than in the US, and the coverage is 100%. In fact, because pharmaceutical prices are fixed by the government, since it is a NHS that buys them, make only a modest profit in Europe.

So, off they go to the US to gouge.

I'm through with you and your blind ignorance of the facts.

You go on Ignore ...

 

Oh god...

VAT tax

A value-added tax (VAT), known in some countries as a goods and services tax (GST), is a type of general consumption tax that is collected incrementally, based on the surplusvalue, added to the price on the work at each stage of production, which is usually implemented as a destination-based tax, where the tax rate is ...
Value-added tax - Wikipedia

 

You didn't understand socialism. Your reference to social democracy is nothing but a misinterpretation. And your excuse? You try to blame the Americans.

Sorry, won't wash!

 

From WikiPedia: Social Democracy:

'Nuff said? (I doubt it ...)

 

Nothing in that to support your claims on education and health (which are just as valid for liberal democracies). Also note that wiki has been darn inconvenient and failed to support your comments on socialism. You'd have to assume that social democracy provides a means to produce an outcome where "the means of production are owned by the government". Was it our intention to attack social democracy?

 

No it doesn't. How many times do you have to be told and have it explained to you? Cuba is one of the very few, if not the only, government that is stil actually striving for socialism. And now they are easing into worker-owned co-ops in order to advance toward socialism. They will tell you that with government ownership of production they don't yet have a socialist economy. I have also given you evidence from Marx, himself, and still you parade this falsehood around. And you have not challenged me on this point yet to explore the truth. What does it take!!???

 

From your quote: "Social democracy is a political, social and economic ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy...... Social democracy thus aims to create the conditions for capitalism to lead to greater democratic, egalitarian and solidaristic outcomes[/quote] .
Note that it defines "social democracy", which it also says is not yet "socialism". So you contradict your own sources of preference.

 

And in addition, and in spite of the Wiki description of "social democracy", we see today in most every Scandinavian country sporting social democracy or democratic socialism that the right is staging a comeback and beginning to do great damage in places.

Marx said that the economy is the foundation from which everything else, -culture, politics, the body of laws, the justice system, etc., spring. All develop in service to the economy in effect at the time. So any attempt to establish a "socialist" government first, from which a socialist economy is expected to spring, says that the government is the foundation from which the economy springs. This is obviously the opposite of what Marx said. As was so common during the establishment of capitalism when it replace feudalism, the real answer here is to first establish a socialist economy, one small step at a time. And that is done with worker-owned, worker-run cooperatives.

 

And you prove once again that you do not know how to read English ...

You go on IGNORE - the list of ignoramuses is long, so enjoy the company ...

 

I don't know what planet you live on, but this idiocy ends here.

You are on IGNORE.

 

Then obviously you did not read it.

In the Liberal Democracy of the US, both healthcare costs an-arm-and-a-leg (literally!) and post-secondary education escapes about 40% of any high-school graduating class in any given year.

We are creating a nation of dunces.

No wonder so many voted for Donald Dork ...

 

So you don't want to debate, except be queen bee ...interesting ..

 

The US doesn't fit comfortably with the tag liberal democracy. Economists will often use the tag 'anglo saxon capitalism' to account for the higher inequalities (and class systems) in the likes of the UK and the US. Also most European countries will be classified as Liberal Democratic, so you're using the US to compose false argument.

 

The distinction between a Liberal Democracy and a Social Democracy lies in the fact that the former believes in absolute freedom for individual choice, whilst the latter believes that society as a whole must benefit from a market-economy and not just a select minority.

That capitalism is the key factor in a market-economy, under social-democrat principles the outcome of welcome sharing must be progressively fair and not absolutely concentrated in just one select upper-strata of the population.

At the moment, in the US, it is absolute. That is, as economic research has shown 0.1% of the population has obtained the same magnitude of Wealth (20%) as the other 90% of the population. (See here.)

That very great disparity between the two must not be allowed to happen. And the means for assuring it does not happen is higher upper-income taxation.

That should be very clear to anyone who abhors unfair distribution of Wealth. On the other hand, if one prefers to believe that in a free market-economy, "that's the way the cookie crumbles" then they remain blind to an sense of collective fairness.

Abhorrent collective economic unfairness of monarchic systems in Europe up to the 19th century was at the very heart of the revolution that brought down said monarchies and instituted at first both socialist and communist regimes - and finally after WW2 social democracies - which have since replaced communist regimes in Europe.

The US rid itself of a monarch but a hundred years later was not the least bit influenced by advances in socialism. On the contrary, in the latter half of the 19th century the Industrial Age was creating great fortunes and no-one in the US was favoring the fair sharing of the spoils.

(And in some circumstances the public insurrections prompted considerable deaths in the US. The list of what the US calls Civil Unrest, a euphemism, is long - see it here. Not all the riots were instigated by labor strife, but a good many striking workers actually died. And I would say that labor-protection is still far more developed in the EU than in the US.)

My Point: The US is NOT a Social Democracy. It's is Liberal Democracy - with all the attributes of a "democracy". But unfortunately also with the blot of being grossly unfair in terms of sharing the economic Wealth generated by all ...

 

Given the fact that Uncle Sam exported the Great Recession to Europe, that comparison means nothing at the moment ...

 

You ARE lucky nobody is monitoring the nonsense in this so-called "debate forum".

 

This is just another error. You're confusing liberal democracy with classical liberalism (even then you're wrong, such as the egalitarianism of someone like Adam Smith)

This is meaningless.

Again, the US simply cannot be compared with European liberal democracy. Your fixation with the US has led to basic error. Essentially you've been arguing that Europe is social democratic and US liberal democratic. That is nonsense.

The US has an outcome that can only be compared with the likes of the UK. As I said, that's the very reason that 'Anglo Saxon capitalism' is distinguished from European liberal democracy

 

So you criticize your own quoted text???? LOL!!!!!
I guess you are afraid to discuss the subject. Wonder why.

 

Blah, blah, blah.

Borrrinnnngggg ... !

 

Don't forget Finland has much lower rates of immigration than other nearby countries to the West.

 

Redistributing wealth has never succeeded in the long term. The poor who elevate from poverty do so by individual effort in education, motivation, creating opportunity and other skill usage.

 

To be fair, this has been the 'quality' of your posts throughout. You can put it right mind you. Anyone can learn political economy. Its opens to all

 

And so?

The basic wage in question is given only to Finish citizens.

Europe was flooded by a horde of people out of North Africa and the Middle-east. It put them into shelter. They are not getting a minimum wage. (But Germany IS training them because it needs the manpower.)

Frankly, in Europe, if you have no reason to be there, you won't find a job. It's not like the US, because there a people who check the identity-papers of workers in specific lo-wage industries.

And they actually put them on a flight back to their country. Second time around, when they get caught they end up in jail for two years.

America's solution to the problem is a jerk-sheriff in Arizona who puts them into a Concentration Camp ...