Comment

Comment by hogFeast

Countries with larger safety nets have basically similar levels of absolute poverty to the US (it is kind of tricky because most of those countries in the former are also far far smaller, and have very different population density/growth/migration patterns). And btw...yes, in other countries if you lose your job you can lose your house...this is true everywhere (and the US already has a public health system that is 50-75% of most of Europe)...that is kind of how mortgages and debt work. Saying that you wish you could just repudiate all your debt is very American (ironically, given that you seem to hold a non-American view of govt).

The most effective way to move people out of poverty is to create jobs. Whatever system you have, the only way it goes wrong (as it did for Europe through most of the 90/2000s) is when you cannot create jobs. There is no other option. America has got it 95% right.

And the main issue in the US is: are people willing to accept significant intervention into their working life from the govt? Are people willing to accept living in a society that is run for large corporations (it is funny that most Americans think they live there already, not even close)? Can the US bring immigration down significantly? Can the economy still function with lower immigration? Can the US still function with high prices of basic goods? The answer to almost all of those questions is no. America has a system that suits America...that is why they have it (and btw, if you talk to social policy academics from the countries with higher social safety nets, they will tell you the same thing).

Maybe this is controversial now but it is far easier to suggest that we should tear everything down than work out how to make progress with something that is mostly working.

parent hogFeast 6 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton