GOVERNMENT AS "CHARITY" I don't know how it happened, but I gather most Yanks think exorbitant Income (that become massive Wealth) is somehow "forgiven" if benefactors contribute to charity or build a dorm for a university. Funding "charitable causes" is what governments do in Europe as a matter of course. It is at the heart of the notion called Social Democracy. One might like also to think the National Health Service is a "charitable cause", and Bernie tried to convince us that free Tertiary Education is another charitable cause well worth government funding. Charity is mutual and extensive in Social Democracies - not just for the poor and hopeless. It is at the heart of tackling the problem of inherent Income Disparity that any capitalist market-economy engenders. So, what's the hitch? We, in America, are not used to such "social charity" funded by governments. Whereas in Europe, the difference between the functions of police-work and firefighting and healthcare and providing the basic levels of Maslow's Hierarchy of needs show no stark dividing lines. They are all the responsibility of national governments. All such "services" are considered necessities of a modern lifestyle typical of a national collective existence. After all, if the nation can ask your son or daughter to lay down their lives to protect the nation, is it to safeguard Bill Gates' fortune? (Sorry Bill, I'm sure you earned every dime of it! ;^) OUR COLLECTIVE EXISTENCE We humans have been banding together in a "collective existence" for thousands upon thousands of years since our forebears walked upright out the savannahs of East Africa towards Europe and the Far East and on the American continents. That was at first for collective mutual protection, but we learned that by work-specialization we all benefited by "mutual exchange of products/services". (Which went eventually beyond "barter" finally to "money" as a means of exchanging worth.) These are the origins of our market-economy everywhere on earth. And every time some dimwit wanted to change the basics of such exchanges - for instance the inane notion that the state should own everything and manage all production of goods/services - we reverted inevitably to the market-economy of competitive exchange which proved easiest to most natural. WHAT WENT WRONG? Where we got it wrong in America is the fact that exchange of goods/services inevitably means "income", and we still have not got National Taxation right. In fact, it is aberrantly wrong. As the next four years will continue to show. POST SCRIPTUM A great portion of American voters are distraught with the way Donald Dork stole the election in the Electoral College (having lost the majority popular-vote); and now he is imposing his Executive Might upon the nation (guided by his hardliner guru Senator from Alabama Jeremy Sessions). Something has gotta give and that does not bode well for societal tranquility. First signs that "not all is right in the land of milk-'n-honey" from here: * Poll: Most Americans Don't Think Donald Trump Can Handle Being President (Jan 02, 2017) *Americans Think Trump Will Be Worst President Since Nixon (Jan. 26, 2017)
It's not rebuttal. Just sarcasm, and very prevalent with those who have no real factual response in rebutting an argument. Some guys just have to have the last word. Allows them to sleep nights ... ?
Having lived in both "political systems" I can see the stark differences between what some call a "do-it-yourself" America and a "pampering EU". The differences result in stark outcomes, as we a seeing in the US - where, after a bitterly contested popular-vote resulted in the election of Donald Dork who has (manifestly) no "mandate" from the American people. HIs presidency will make for interesting times, but largely lost time as regarding "bettering America". The ideals of a Social Democracy have evolved particularly since the end of WW2 - when Europe decided key provisions of a Social Democracy were: *Whilst state ownership of the all the means of production was not proper for an efficient market-economy, neither was the fact that "ownership of the means of producing some public services" should be restricted to only private entities or even that there should be a "market" for such services. *Meaning that, just like police or fire departments, healthcare and education were also to be delivered by means of civil-service management. Furthermore, *Their provision should be as low cost as government management was able to obtain, since both were key attributes of any social democracy" - to the point, if necessary, of interfering in the market-economy to stipulate the cost of certain public services. In larger terms, what European social-democracies were aiming to accomplish was the responsibility to assure, in different measures for different people, the attributes of the two bottom bedrock-levels of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs: All further levels higher up, were a matter of both desire and personal ambition. However, given the recent evolution of world commerce, more and more are asking "As regards 'self-actualization', when is enough enough and when does too-much become too-much?" in an earthly existence that is functionally "collective" in nature.
It is Serbia. And Germany. And Ukraine. Very good thing happen for my interest. Trump's three trades.
CLASS WARFARE The above, as you put it, is simply not the case. All those products you see for sale from "other countries" assures that it is not the case. When you drive in your new car, with parts made in either Canada or Mexico, that too proves that it is not the case. All the griping in America is happening in one social-class - the one that crossed boundaries, from Democrat to Replicant, and voted for Donald Dork. His BigBudies (who financed his campaign) came from BigBusiness that wants, above all, that the Upper Income Taxation System remains unchanged! Because at present tax-rates of 15/20% (after deductions), our homegrown plutocrats are raking it in. Better yet, Trump will lower the taxation on companies, so they can earn even more from dividends and stock-options! Of course, you will think, "Aint nuthin wrong with that!". After all, what counts most is the muney, right? Wrong, because it is shortsighted. Class-warfare (of the worst kind that kills people) has always been triggered historically by ignominiously high Income Differentials in a country. That's the reason that sparked the revolution against the Russian Czar and installed Communism. (For which, history is now free to repeat itself with Russia's New Plutocrat Money-Czars - including the richest of them all, Putin himself! Who some think is the richest man on the planet.) It was post-WW2 Russian Communism that convinced the European countries that, if they wanted to prevent its rise, they had to first increase taxation on the rich. But also reduce Income Disparity by providing free (or nearly free) National Health Care as well as a nearly-free Education up to and including a postsecondary degree. It is the latter that boosted most family incomes in Europe. Wakey, wakey - if you think that America is immune to Class Warfare, then think again. We are perhaps just slower on the uptake ...
What "trades"? (That's a term typically applied to stock-markets.) Or do you mean simply "commerce"? And, there, I do not see why Serbia would be at all in the same class as Germany. Please explain ...
Firstly, I'm not really arguing against free-trade, but I observe it can result in winners and losers (eg well-paying 1st world manufacturing jobs being replaced by low-paying service jobs, a direct result of free trade with low wage third world and developing countries).. And as you know, I believe the only way to change that pernicious result, is to change the the architecture of the international trading system. [btw, thanks for commenting on my outline of a new global financial system. I accept that it's unrealistic at this stage. Apparently the billionaires (at Davos recently) didn't even broach the subject of the unsustainable increase in wealth and income inequality - they (the most 'powerful' people in the world) are breathtakingly indifferent, or out of touch with reality.] I agree with your analysis explaining how growing imbalances eventually result in revolution. On class warfare, note this comment from another thread: So you see what you are up against. If it did come to class warfare I'm on your side, but I believe it's avoidable; and the election of the non-ideologue Donald Trump may well be a catalyst for bringing the real issues more clearly into the public debate. (There is considerable confusion around his political stance, with some people even saying he is a liberal in disguise. He may inadvertently cause some of the adversarial left-right delusions to be be exposed). ------------ btw, here is my reply to the 'life is not fair' paradigm, as seen by the right: Yes, that's an aspect of reality that's not subject to change; we all have to accept that. Those are all amenable to change, and none of us have to accept them. the discussion about white privilege is a diversion.
A SAD FACT Do you know that when mills were set up in New England in the 18th-century to make cloth from the cheap-power that river-sources provided, the US took serious business away from English-mills. Many mills in England closed down because they could not compete with America (that was getting its cotton cheaply from the south). What is happening today has been going on in the world for a long, long time. All that has changed is now Uncle Sam is the complacent one and many Americans think that the competition is "unfair". It's a Brave New World we live in as we transit from the Industrial Age to the Information Age - and where Manufacturing is not but 13% of our total GDP. Employment by major industry sector (from the BLS here for 2014): *Non-agriculture wage and salary (92.9), of which, **Goods-producing, excluding agriculture (12.7) **Services-providing (80.1) **Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting (1.4) **Nonagricultural self-employed workers (5.7) **Total = 150.5M employed (100%) And so? Making things is restricted to a very high-skilled sector. Providing services is the major "producer" of our economy. The latter typically require a much higher skill-set in order to obtain a decent-job with decent-pay. Which is why Bernie and Hillary had got it right. We must graduate more of our kids from a postsecondary education and given its cost, we must do it at free state tertiary schooling for families up to $100K annual income (which is about the average American wage of both parents working in a family). At present, the percentage of all high school graduates obtaining a tertiary degree is at most 48% - the other half are facing some difficulty in finding a decent level of income. Now, shall we tweet that sad fact to Donald Dork? (Will he even care ... ?)
Mine is infinitely simpler. Tax the hell outta them! We will see, once upper-income taxation becomes severely progressive (up to and including 100% confiscation after a certain level) that the entire nation settles into a pattern where there are no multi-billionaires and 40 million American men, women and children no longer live below the Poverty Threshold ($24K annual income). We will still have the rich sunning themselves on luxurious Miami Beach properties, but if you want to stroll around parts of Northwest Miami you will no longer get mugged. Now, just expand that simple thought to the rest of the nation ...
Trades I maybe will with Cruz or Clinton(if maybe) as elected or Haley(if maybe) after 2020. - - - Updated - - - The first female president 2017 or 2020. Cruz are so far only close to win.
It are Latvia in Baltic then Germany and Poland in north Europe Trump wanted now the prediction for free trade in Europe. In Europe Trump wannabee.
