Welfare... Fucking pisses me off

If people want to be lazy and don't want to evolve let em... Just don't allow them force me to wipe their ass. Let them live in their unevolved, primitive caveman societies by themselves.

Those societies were here before you. So I mean, if you want no part of it, then you're going to have to go somewhere where they aren't already. Either that or learn to live with it, 'cuz it's not gonna change for you anytime soon.
 


I'm a European and I despise welfare and what it does to people. I loathe socilized health care, socialized education and everything else which creates complacency and shitty products.

I'd trade places with an American in a heartbeat. Bitch all you want over there, but you don't get taxed 68% in the US do you?
 
  • Like
Reactions: music4mic
Maybe that definition of "best use" isn't subjective. I can guarantee that's not most people's idea of what "best use" means, however. Perhaps Jake should have defined his terms before asking the question.


Let me clarify. The following is a quote from my earlier post:

All resources used in the production of goods and services are scarce. Thus, it follows that allocating resources to Project A siphons resources away from Projects B, C, D, etc. In funding welfare, the state must decide how to allocate resources in light of their scarcity.

Question for supporters of welfare: how can scarce resources be allocated among competing projects in a manner that is economically rational? For example, how can you determine which of the following represents the best use of limited capital?

1. pay welfare to Group A
2. build 100 elementary schools
3. fund expansion of fighter jet inventory
4. build a moon base

I assumed it would be clear from the context of my question that the phrase "best use of limited capital" should be understood to mean "a manner that is economically rational".

If that was unclear, I apologize.
 
I personally hate this fucking country. The issue is, I don't have the balls to pack my shit and just go. And even if I did have the balls to do it, I worry that I wouldn't find anywhere better and that scares the shit out of me. Because if this is the best place to be...hole lee fuck.

Give me a break...

You spend your days bitching about poor people taking your tax money on an internet forum.

Really rough life you lead.
 
categoryname_233200912175.jpg

Saw buildings in the back left. Want to now play tetris.
 
I assumed it would be clear from the context of my question that the phrase "best use of limited capital" should be understood to mean "a manner that is economically rational".

If that was unclear, I apologize.

Well, I'm not entirely sure what is meant by "economically rational," but I will say that, in my opinion, economic considerations ought not be the sole criteria with which to base those sorts of decisions.
 
Here's a story from the reality of socialized health care. I wanted to get an allergi test done and went to my doctor who wrote me a referral. I wait for two weeks and then get a letter in the mail saying there was more than 10 months wait for such a test. This in a country supposed to be one of the richest pr. gdp/capita in the world.

Would you be ok with that?
 
Here's a story from the reality of socialized health care. I wanted to get an allergi test done and went to my doctor who wrote me a referral. I wait for two weeks and then get a letter in the mail saying there was more than 10 months wait for such a test. This in a country supposed to be one of the richest pr. gdp/capita in the world.

Would you be ok with that?

Which country?
 
Hmm, let me check.. The per capita GDP in Singapore is $10,000 higher than the USA and nearly $30,000 higher than New Zealand. The World Health Organization ranks Singapore's health care system as the 6th best in the world.

While I like SG's healthcare system, it's also a city state. You can't compare it to the USA - maybe compare it to Minneapolis metro area or something.
 
Here's a story from the reality of socialized health care. I wanted to get an allergi test done and went to my doctor who wrote me a referral. I wait for two weeks and then get a letter in the mail saying there was more than 10 months wait for such a test. This in a country supposed to be one of the richest pr. gdp/capita in the world.

Would you be ok with that?

I wouldn't, no. Though I'd rather have that than not being able to get adequate medical care at all, particularly for more serious or chronic conditions.

For every anecdote like this, I've read probably a dozen that described their experience as quick, hassle-free, and cheap or free, in countries in Europe, Asia, the Middle East. And just because you had that experience doesn't mean that it's that way in every country with socialized healthcare. Many people are perfectly happy with their systems.
 
While I like SG's healthcare system, it's also a city state. You can't compare it to the USA - maybe compare it to Minneapolis metro area or something.

Hong Kong and Singapore usually end up 1st and 2nd on economic freedom lists, but you do have to take everything into account. Not flushing a public toilet is a crime punishable by caning in Singapore, for example. Bubble gum is also banned there.
 
What the fuck is this? I live in Canada and you can see a doctor the same day for FREE. So fuck that chart.

There are always more general medicine docs than is really needed since this is the easiest speciality. The real test is how long you have to wait to see a specialist and this is were the long wait time kicks in.
 
There are always more general medicine docs than is really needed since this is the easiest speciality. The real test is how long you have to wait to see a specialist and this is were the long wait time kicks in.

Fair enough and I can't comment on that since I have no clue but the chart is way too vague. All I know is if I need to see a doctor I can see one within a few hours and at least get a diagnosis and appointment setup to see a specialist if needed.