tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3294580951502585066.post8622427562946225485..comments2023-10-18T19:32:44.252-07:00Comments on It's just my opinion, I could be wrong: Standing Semi-CorrectedNickhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05587036619182019599noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3294580951502585066.post-40656104342557109022012-03-21T14:30:05.526-07:002012-03-21T14:30:05.526-07:00Unions, at one point, were beneficial entities, wh...Unions, at one point, were beneficial entities, which served as a valuable counter-force to abuse from business. Perhaps not surprisingly, I largely blame the government for their denigration, both in benefit to workers and public perception. If not for laws which forced participation in labor unions, open-ended bribery allowances under the guise of "campaign finance", and lack of transparency within union organizations, unions would probably still be fine today, instead of the symbols of incompetence and corruption which they have become.<br /><br />As for government plans, I do think that plan would be fine. As I've said before, I have no issue whatsoever with government support programs, provided the cost (or more specifically, the state-sanctioned theft from the people with wealth in the society) is contained. For example, say the US had a fixed, limited, maximum tax rate of, say, 15% of income plus 1% of net worth, and the government was forced (through Constitutionally-mandated and court-enforced automatic cuts) to maintain a strict balanced budget. Under that scenario, if the government wanted to pay for health care coverage for 100% of the population, and they were able to fit it into the budget, I would be all for it.<br /><br />My problem is with the taxation limits and spending controls, not the distribution of funds within the government's budget. If you can fix the former problem, the latter will work itself out automatically (that is, the government will spend money on the things which are most important for the society as a whole, in general).Nickhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05587036619182019599noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3294580951502585066.post-35367144231963095682012-03-20T18:37:21.205-07:002012-03-20T18:37:21.205-07:00Interesting read. EFMs seem so much faster and mo...Interesting read. EFMs seem so much faster and more efficient than waiting for elections to boot the bums out and then vote similar bums in. If only we had an EFM that would do something sane about the federal deficit. But that might require a new federal agency (people will scream about big government) or UN / World Bank intervention in US affairs (Fox News anchors' heads would probably explode). I can dream.<br /><br />If only unions would self police better, fight internal corruption, and demand fair benefits, not max benefits. In the US, say "union", and so many just think "entitlements" and "mob ties" and *gasp* socialism. (not saying you do, just many people) Because some unions go overboard, people lose sight of the good unions have done, and why they're needed. Wish they'd compare the safety record of US coal mining companies with unions and those without, just one example.<br /><br />While in no way defending the government of Greece, nor their ghastly mismanagement of the economy, I submit Sweden's economic reforms of the 1990s as an interesting case study. They had huge, harmful welfare burdens, high unemployment, a sluggish economy. So they cut benefits, raised the retirement age, increased privatization, just as you recommend. However, they did not cut benefits / services to the high degree I believe you recommend, if I understood you correctly. It was a badly needed correction and a big shift to the right, politically and economically. However, it was not an abandonment of the socialist system and they're still very left leaning compared to the US. I believe that's in line with your "whatever works, so long as it works, and is responsible" ideal. Not really arguing with anything you said, just pointing out one can have high benefits and government services that are sustainable, they needn't be only either excessive or low. <br /><br />I really should read up on Norway and the current situation in Poland, and the pros/cons of the British Labour party. I'm sure people get sick of hearing Sweden all the time. ;)<br /><br />In case this interests you, I think these are worth a read. If not, no worries. I'm glad I looked for these, because now all those economy references in Girl With the Dragon Tattoo make more sense.<br /><br />http://www.economist.com/node/18805503<br /><br />stripe.colorado.edu/~steinmo/bucking.pdf<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_SwedenMonikahttp://haventgotone.netnoreply@blogger.com