Socialism is NOT about everyone being equal. That's communism.
Yes, everyone should be TREATED equally, but I fail to see how that's different from capitalism. If you're super rich, should you be allowed to kill your neighbour? No. Murder is murder.
Socialism is about helping those who are unable to help themselves. If they are able but unwilling, then you don't help them.
Also, I didn't watch the vid lol just replied to the description.
@elfwall Haha it's kind of long so I dont blame you. Check it out you may get a good laugh- especially if you know who Janet Reno is. You're right, communism is much more equality-centric, but what about core socialist demands like free college or free healthcare? Is that not about giving everyone an EQUAL OPORTUNITY? Will those things not come at the expense of the wealthy too? It all comes back to property rights- should people have a right to their property or does government trump that righ?
@andyconomics Free healthcare isn't free. It's paid for through taxes, just as your healthcare is paid for through your monthly premiums to private providers. The difference is that our system doesn't require a profit to be made on the service. It's cheaper to run and operate then a private healthcare network. Well, if the government isn't totally corrupt. So I doubt it would actually work in america, as your government would attempt to earn a profit from it.
@andyconomics Free college... I'm against free college, but for free education. If you want to learn in order to improve your life, then take a free class. If you want a degree or certificate in order to earn a salary in the work force, then that should have a cost attached to it. The cost should be limited, but still there. Can't just be "whatever the market can bear", and allow tuition to skyrocket. A cost yes, but also a limit to it.
@elfwall It's actually really interesting that you brought up college prices. It was our American gov who tried to make it "fair" for the poor and minorities by offering low interest college loans. All that did was increase demand thereby exploding prices and making it unaffordable for the people it was supposed to help. It isn't the free markets fault, once again it is overbearing government. What's the difference between free education and college? Free classes just for the sake of fun?
@andyconomics Free classes are where the information will be used on your household. There are no certificate of completion, or tests to prove your knowledge. While college/university provides the student with proof of knowledge in the form of a certificate or degree, which is then used to secure a job. Nearly every job here, requires some sort of certification. You can get the knowledge for free, but that doesn't provide you with the certificate which is required for work.
@elfwall That exists. It's called the internet. I bet I could become a novice nuclear physicist with the info on the web. Joe Blow sure as heck can learn how to balance his check book with it too. Besides, that's what K-12 SHOULD be doing. Not multicultural studies. Not gym. Not Art. Those are electives. Every kid should have to take a budgeting class and basic life skills class. I swear people today would starve to death if it werent for processed food.
@andyconomics My government takes a different approach to things typically. Rather then help pay the cost through a complicated system of grants which ultimately raise the price. The government will pass a single law. "Universities can not charge more then #% of the average income." It is then up to the university to figure out how to remain competitive within the limitations placed upon them.
@elfwall The problem with setting a maximum tuition is that now a school who provides a top quality "product" is forced to lower that quality to keep in budget. They would cut the best profs, the best facilities, and the best equipment to teach their customers. Can you imagine how crappy BMW cars would be if they were told they could not charge more than Toyota? They can't build them that cheap so quality goes down. That's why a free market works better and why people used to flock to US for edu
@andyconomics And not placing a cap, forces those top schools to lower their quality, in order to stay within budget. What happens when the "smart" students are unable to afford the tuition? Well, lower the entry requirements. Which lowers the end product as well.
My system makes it affordable to more, which allows the schools to skim off the top. Yours makes it affordable to few, and the schools must take what they can get.
@elfwall Exactly the opposite happens my friend (oh and Merry Christmas!) Here's why: The top school's in our country e.g. Harvard, Princeton, Yale all make FAR more money from donations from graduates than from current students tuition so they want the best students who will earn the most later in life, not the ones who can pay now. That's why they give scholarships. Also, banks loan the money via student loans to the best and brightest since those are the students most likely to repay the loan
@andyconomics Merry christmas to you too lol even though I'm a day late. What were we talking about in this video? Ah guess it wasn't important. *goes off to grab some more eggnog*
Socialism is NOT about everyone being equal. That's communism.
Yes, everyone should be TREATED equally, but I fail to see how that's different from capitalism. If you're super rich, should you be allowed to kill your neighbour? No. Murder is murder.
Socialism is about helping those who are unable to help themselves. If they are able but unwilling, then you don't help them.
Also, I didn't watch the vid lol just replied to the description.
elfwall 2 months ago
@elfwall Haha it's kind of long so I dont blame you. Check it out you may get a good laugh- especially if you know who Janet Reno is. You're right, communism is much more equality-centric, but what about core socialist demands like free college or free healthcare? Is that not about giving everyone an EQUAL OPORTUNITY? Will those things not come at the expense of the wealthy too? It all comes back to property rights- should people have a right to their property or does government trump that righ?
andyconomics 2 months ago
@andyconomics Free healthcare isn't free. It's paid for through taxes, just as your healthcare is paid for through your monthly premiums to private providers. The difference is that our system doesn't require a profit to be made on the service. It's cheaper to run and operate then a private healthcare network. Well, if the government isn't totally corrupt. So I doubt it would actually work in america, as your government would attempt to earn a profit from it.
elfwall 2 months ago
@andyconomics Free college... I'm against free college, but for free education. If you want to learn in order to improve your life, then take a free class. If you want a degree or certificate in order to earn a salary in the work force, then that should have a cost attached to it. The cost should be limited, but still there. Can't just be "whatever the market can bear", and allow tuition to skyrocket. A cost yes, but also a limit to it.
elfwall 2 months ago
@elfwall It's actually really interesting that you brought up college prices. It was our American gov who tried to make it "fair" for the poor and minorities by offering low interest college loans. All that did was increase demand thereby exploding prices and making it unaffordable for the people it was supposed to help. It isn't the free markets fault, once again it is overbearing government. What's the difference between free education and college? Free classes just for the sake of fun?
andyconomics 2 months ago
@andyconomics Free classes are where the information will be used on your household. There are no certificate of completion, or tests to prove your knowledge. While college/university provides the student with proof of knowledge in the form of a certificate or degree, which is then used to secure a job. Nearly every job here, requires some sort of certification. You can get the knowledge for free, but that doesn't provide you with the certificate which is required for work.
elfwall 2 months ago
@elfwall That exists. It's called the internet. I bet I could become a novice nuclear physicist with the info on the web. Joe Blow sure as heck can learn how to balance his check book with it too. Besides, that's what K-12 SHOULD be doing. Not multicultural studies. Not gym. Not Art. Those are electives. Every kid should have to take a budgeting class and basic life skills class. I swear people today would starve to death if it werent for processed food.
andyconomics 2 months ago
@andyconomics My government takes a different approach to things typically. Rather then help pay the cost through a complicated system of grants which ultimately raise the price. The government will pass a single law. "Universities can not charge more then #% of the average income." It is then up to the university to figure out how to remain competitive within the limitations placed upon them.
elfwall 2 months ago
@elfwall The problem with setting a maximum tuition is that now a school who provides a top quality "product" is forced to lower that quality to keep in budget. They would cut the best profs, the best facilities, and the best equipment to teach their customers. Can you imagine how crappy BMW cars would be if they were told they could not charge more than Toyota? They can't build them that cheap so quality goes down. That's why a free market works better and why people used to flock to US for edu
andyconomics 2 months ago
@andyconomics And not placing a cap, forces those top schools to lower their quality, in order to stay within budget. What happens when the "smart" students are unable to afford the tuition? Well, lower the entry requirements. Which lowers the end product as well.
My system makes it affordable to more, which allows the schools to skim off the top. Yours makes it affordable to few, and the schools must take what they can get.
elfwall 2 months ago
@elfwall Exactly the opposite happens my friend (oh and Merry Christmas!) Here's why: The top school's in our country e.g. Harvard, Princeton, Yale all make FAR more money from donations from graduates than from current students tuition so they want the best students who will earn the most later in life, not the ones who can pay now. That's why they give scholarships. Also, banks loan the money via student loans to the best and brightest since those are the students most likely to repay the loan
andyconomics 2 months ago
@andyconomics Merry christmas to you too lol even though I'm a day late. What were we talking about in this video? Ah guess it wasn't important. *goes off to grab some more eggnog*
elfwall 2 months ago