Quote:
Originally Posted by Sangetsu
Tsuwabaki, would you rather pay more in taxes for government services? Or would you rather pay less taxes so you could afford those services yourself, if and when you need them? For every $1 you pay in government taxes, you will be lucky if you collect 10 cents in benefits, whereas if you had your own money to spend, 100% of it would go toward your health care, retirement, or whatever. If you take it a step further, why collect any money at all for your work? Why not just give every penny you make to the government and collect whatever benefits they can afford to give you. You can be just as much a serf as those who existed in the middle ages.
|
Short answer: Yes, I would.
Long answer: I believe in socialism. I don't believe it's a dirty word. I don't believe it is unfair to pay more into a system since I make more to help support those that make less. I am not interested in a social safety net because I need it
now, but because I may need it in the future. I've spent short amounts of time jobless, in debt, even close to homeless (I had couches I could sleep on at friends' houses). If it had continued for more than the seven or so months I had of this, I would have eventually worn out my welcome, ran out of friends, and still been homeless, jobless, and in debt. I would have had no healthcare. I would have badly needed government assistance.
I was luckier than a lot of folks; at the end of 2007 this came to an end when I finally managed to get a teaching job. I have avoided most of the recession, paid off my debt, and even have a large savings/retirement/investment portfolio. But I strongly believe it was "but by the grace of God, there went I" moment.
It is a moral imperative for me to pay into a system that covers all a nation's citizens and protects them from becoming permanently unproductive. It is in everyone's personal interest to increase the total productivity of our population. The private sector will not do this as profits cannot be realised immediately, nor are individual firms interested in protecting employees of other firms, even if it will increase profitability for all. When the private sector refuses to do what is right, government must play referee.
Socialism is not communism. I am not supporting taking all my money; I want leisure activities, I want to acquire certain entertainment goods. For that reason, I find your argument about "from each what he can do, to each what he needs" spurious and irrelevant. Communism discounts the human need to make choices and to have personal property. Socialism establishes certain public property and benefits for common use, but it does not interfere with other forms of property. Socialism and capitalism can work together.