Revolution ongoing in Europe?

[unclescrooge]

Let us know when they protest for less government spending and less government intrusion.  That will be news.

We need more government.

The Disease of our society in one sentence.

[1714077696]

1714077696

[1714077696]

1714077696

[1714077696]

1714077696

[1714077696]

1714077696

[Findeton]

We need more government.

The Disease of our society in one sentence.

Not, those are bankers, politicians and some businessmen.

[unclescrooge]

We need more government.

The Disease of our society in one sentence.

Not, those are bankers, politicians and some businessmen.

Who use government (and the idea of "we need more state to solve our problems") to live off hard working people

[Findeton]

We need more government.

The Disease of our society in one sentence.

Not, those are bankers, politicians and some businessmen.

Who use government (and the idea of "we need more state to solve our problems") to live off hard working people

That's because our democracy is very poor as of now. We need more direct democracy and a better public educatin, and a more democratic public mass media.

[BCEmporium]

We need more Government to restrict the financial World; I guess none would like to live in a World "bitcoin-like", taken the behavior of the highly speculator-infested up to so far...
We DO NOT need more gvnmt however to impose services nobody wants, "give a hand to the godsons", and alike.

[Findeton]

We need more Government to restrict the financial World; I guess none would like to live in a World "bitcoin-like", taken the behavior of the highly speculator-infested up to so far...
We DO NOT need more gvnmt however to impose services nobody wants, "give a hand to the godsons", and alike.

In order for health to be a right, we need to pay taxes for a cheap socialized universal health care like any important european country, instead of a privatized children-eating expensive health care like the one in the US.

[JA37]

I think what you see in some countries in Europe right now is lack of insight about the disease they're having. The same lack that the US is showing. They've spent money that they don't have and now it's time to pay.
If they do something now, some things can be saved, like pensions for the elderly and other benefits, although not exactly in the shape they're in now. If they don't and continue spending, the effects will be worse.

I understand the protest though. The ones who created the mess aren't the ones who will have to foot the bill. Still, it has to be done and it sucks.

Lack of control and regulations I think. Mainly lack of control. South of Europe is a bit of a mess right now. North is doing quite well however. Germany is the worlds 4:th largest economy and the scandinavian countries are doing very well.

Corrolation or causation, you decice, but the fact is that the northen countries have fairly strong governments, and the southern have weak or non functional governments.

[unclescrooge]

We need more Government to restrict the financial World; I guess none would like to live in a World "bitcoin-like", taken the behavior of the highly speculator-infested up to so far...
We DO NOT need more gvnmt however to impose services nobody wants, "give a hand to the godsons", and alike.

In order for health to be a right, we need to pay taxes for a cheap socialized universal health care like any important european country, instead of a privatized children-eating expensive health care like the one in the US.

Yeah because that works so well in the long run...

(i live in france, just so you know... cheap isn't exactely how i would call our socialized healthcare system...)

[unclescrooge]

We need more government.

The Disease of our society in one sentence.

Not, those are bankers, politicians and some businessmen.

Who use government (and the idea of "we need more state to solve our problems") to live off hard working people

That's because our democracy is very poor as of now. We need more direct democracy and a better public educatin, and a more democratic public mass media.

Why would we want more direct democracy? I don't want my live to depend on what other's choices, I want to choose what I want for me and let others choose to live as they wish.

Live and let live...

We need more Government to restrict the financial World; I guess none would like to live in a World "bitcoin-like", taken the behavior of the highly speculator-infested up to so far...
We DO NOT need more gvnmt however to impose services nobody wants, "give a hand to the godsons", and alike.

Government is the very reason financial world has so much power right now. What we need is a system based on currencies like bitcoin: currencies that can't be inflated by the power that be, and the same rules for the banks than for everyone else. That's all.

[BCEmporium]

This is a short of what went on Spain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWrbAmtZuGc

Raphy,

Lack of regulation was how most of it went down. Will you tell me that when the Bitcoin bubble blasts? Or you really think one thing can trend up for eternity? There're lots of fallacies around neo-liberalism, a reason why it tends to fail after a while... only governments can actually stop or control those "tricks" before further damage.

[realnowhereman]

We need more Government to restrict the financial World; I guess none would like to live in a World "bitcoin-like", taken the behavior of the highly speculator-infested up to so far...
We DO NOT need more gvnmt however to impose services nobody wants, "give a hand to the godsons", and alike.

In order for health to be a right, we need to pay taxes for a cheap socialized universal health care like any important european country, instead of a privatized children-eating expensive health care like the one in the US.

A right that requires something be forcibly taken in order to provide it is not on morally sound ground.

There is no "right" health when that health is provided by taking wealth from another.  A better name would be an "entitlement".

Governments around the world have made it their business to create ever more entitlements (and call them rights).  The financial collapse many of them now find themselves trying to cope with is a direct result of the fact that increasing entitlements require increasing suppliers to provide them; and those suppliers are better off flipping to the "entitlement" side.  Buying votes with voters own money has only one inevitable outcome, and we can already see the beginnings of that outcome happening all over europe.

The fact that privatised health care in the US is a disaster is nothing to do with the privatisation and everything to do with the ridiculous list of laws that allow rent-seeking insurance companies to milk consumers.  There are plenty of countries that have less socialised health care, that works far better than the US or the European states.

[BCEmporium]

There are plenty of countries that have less socialised health care, that works far better than the US or the European states.

Name one...

BTW, There's no Social Security crisis at Europe, the crisis came from credit disorder and sequent bailing out of banking by states...

A right that requires something be forcibly taken in order to provide it is not on morally sound ground.

Ignore the others' ain't either... morale keeps bouncing and has no ground at all. «I don't want to pay taxes», but probably you want roads, infrastructures... because some folks don't know how to behave in a social environment it takes some measures to teach them. Nothing out of the ordinary, all sorts of primates, from monkey to man, now and then have to kick some butt.

[unclescrooge]

This is a short of what went on Spain:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWrbAmtZuGc

Raphy,

Lack of regulation was how most of it went down. Will you tell me that when the Bitcoin bubble blasts? Or you really think one thing can trend up for eternity? There're lots of fallacies around neo-liberalism, a reason why it tends to fail after a while... only governments can actually stop or control those "tricks" before further damage.

OK, not sure I understood what you meant...

Forget about bitcoin, let's say gold, it has a proven history of exchange medium. What I meant was that today, our monetary system is based on inflationary currencies with no intrinsec value that some regulators manipulate at will. It is the reason of the great bubble and crisis of the recent years, it is the reason the financial world is hypertrophied (come on, banks can access money almost for free from BCE, and lent money they don't have >> hyper speculation, then the people pay with inflation). If you want more explanations, the austrian school of economic is saying this since long before our current crisis. And governments all over the world love this inflationnary system, because they can give more "free" services, more "free money", without actually raising taxes.

The typical response of our gouvernment to problem it has created is more government intervention. But no matter what new regulations they will come up with, i can promise you that it will eventually make things worse. And then people will want even more regulations to solve this new problem. And This is the tragedy of our time. The road to serfdom and misery.

You want more government regulations? Lucky you, you'll get this. But don't blame the misery that will continue to increase on everything else. Neo-liberalism? I don't know what it is, but i know that classical liberalism, free market and all the usual suspects of socialists of left and right wings have long gone from our societies.

[unspy]

Let us know when they protest for less government spending and less government intrusion.  That will be news.

We need more government.

The Disease of our society in one sentence.

More government = less freedom
More freedom = less government

The big banks have sold us out.
Democrats and Republicans have sold us out.
No one is defending our interests.
Our future is going up in flames.

It’s time for us to stand up and defend ourselves.

Rebel Against Economic Tyranny on June 14th
A99 Operation Empire State Rebellion
http://ampedstatus.org/network/groups/a99/

http://goo.gl/SV8mQ

[realnowhereman]

There are plenty of countries that have less socialised health care, that works far better than the US or the European states.

Name one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthcare_in_Singapore

BTW, There's no Social Security crisis at Europe, the crisis came from credit disorder and sequent bailing out of banking by states...

Ha!  Social security in every country everywhere is one giant Ponzi scheme.  It's not a crisis, as it's not going to hit suddenly, it is going to be a gradual erosion.

Besides, pretty much every European government has a large structural deficit (i.e. it's not going away after the recession ends).  Part of that structural deficit is the massive social security costs.

I agree that bailing out banks was a bad call; but even if you subtract the massive debts they've taken on on behalf of these banks, the countries are still not financially sound.  The credit crisis was the pin, not the bubble.

A right that requires something be forcibly taken in order to provide it is not on morally sound ground.

Ignore the others' ain't either... morale keeps bouncing and has no ground at all. «I don't want to pay taxes», but probably you want roads, infrastructures... because some folks don't know how to behave in a social environment it takes some measures to teach them. Nothing out of the ordinary, all sorts of primates, from monkey to man, now and then have to kick some butt.

Wow; you also caught me in your clever web of words there.  Could it possibly be that there is more than one way to get infrastructure than tax-and-spend?

I still want roads, and I still want a social environment.  It is simply my opinion that that can be better achieved with voluntary cooperation instead of enforced cooperation using the monopoly power of force.

As an example (although there are many): in the UK; there used to exist organisations called friendly societies.  Workers would gather together and pay (voluntarily) into a mutual fund.  When one of the members got sick, or lost a job, or suffered some other misfortune, they would be paid out of this mutual fund.  Since the other fund members were usually friends and neighbours, there was a lot less corruption of the system, since it's much harder for people to steal from their friends than it is for them to steal from the amorphous blob that is government.  These friendly societies were growing in popularity and solving a real social problem, without intervention from government.  Can you guess what happened next?  The government stepped in and legislated for publicly provided welfare, and being a monopoly provider killed the friendly societies pretty quickly.

People who think the answer to any question is "more government", can rarely imagine that alternatives are possible.  Usually because, despite what they espouse in their politics, they have far less faith in humanity than the libertarians.

"Eaten up with envy, you become a Socialist, blind hatred makes you a
Nazi - while self-confidence and love of one's neighbour makes the
capitalist." -- André F. Lichtschlag

[BCEmporium]

We had mutuals on the past too, and still have, also cooperatives and all sorts of community-assets.
Singapore is a Fascist state, I wonder what can be "more state" than that. Health prices and savings are enforced by the government. To not mention it's quite small.

However we're 6 billion humans, that view is just valid for really small communities where everybody knows everyone. More Democracy doesn't quite means more or less state, but to input more of cooperation into society and less "ownership of few". Small communities are naturally Democratic, btw.

[realnowhereman]

We had mutuals on the past too, and still have, also cooperatives and all sorts of community-assets.
Singapore is a Fascist state, I wonder what can be "more state" than that. Health prices and savings are enforced by the government. To not mention it's quite small.

Ah right so my "name one" wasn't good enough?

The Singapore health system is universal and is state funded, but is provided 100% by private contractors.   I wasn't providing it as an example of "perfect country", I was providing it as the example you claimed didn't exist... namely a health care system that was less socialist that many others and still provided good outcomes.  When I do so, you decide that it's not an example of that because it's "too small". Whatever you like...

However we're 6 billion humans, that view is just valid for really small communities where everybody knows everyone. More Democracy doesn't quite means more or less state, but to input more of cooperation into society and less "ownership of few". Small communities are naturally Democratic, btw.

Well, you're moving the goalposts now.

A minute ago it was impossible.  Now it's impossible for big communities.  A minute ago Singapore was a fascist state that was too small.  Now it's "small communities are naturally democratic".

You're pulling this stuff out of the air.

[BCEmporium]

Singapore is a rather small town-country, which manages to be independent only because it is under UK protectorate. Leave that alone and Malaysia will occupy that in seconds, same for Brunei and Indonesia. So it actually exists due to a big country-empire...
Singapore is small, but still not THAT small, Sg is small in the countries context, the communities you're referring and where an idea such as yours can work, are villages.

«The Singapore health system is universal and is state funded, but is provided 100% by private contractors.» = This isn't even near US's reality, which is both private and non-state funded.
We've however those too, "Private State Funded Hospitals" around, and the result so far is a disgrace... we're not under Fascism, the Fascist State of Singapore has that advantage of being more repressive... also its size allows more repression with less expense. For a "libertarian" you're taking examples of the opposite...

[JA37]

These friendly societies were growing in popularity and solving a real social problem, without intervention from government.  Can you guess what happened next?  The government stepped in and legislated for publicly provided welfare, and being a monopoly provider killed the friendly societies pretty quickly.

So, the government saw something good, wanted to extend it to everybody, did so and ... what? Outlawed friendly societies? Or were they just made obsolete? Could you not just start one with your neighbours and friends today?

[speeder]

Here we have two arguments:

More goverment vs. Less government

Well, I believe that when a government has good leaders, more government is fine (ie: Singapore), but more government when it has crap leaders, is very bad (most of other governments).

Interestingly, we do have some people with no government and it work (Xeer people, that unfortunately for them, live on Somalia, and the UN says they are forced to be Somalian, instead of Xeer...)



More democracy vs. Less democracy

That depends solely on who the voters are, what they know, how intelligent and wise they are. In Brazil for example democracy is a trainwreck, only 3% of the population for example completed, or is inside, a university-level course. And the average IQ in Brazil is lower than in several other countries... In the last elections, the winner was Dilma, from the Workers Party, she got a landslide victory in the poorest states, the states where most of the population fit inside welfere programs that give free money. Those people, are not well educated, and their life is short, to them, having some more money in short term, is much more important than whatever the industrialist guy is doing on the south, in fact several of them never had a computer, and several of them have no idea for example how a native american in the rainforest live, or how a Gaucho exports meat in the south, or how a Mineiro makes his classic Minas cheese using milk from his own cows.

Then you wonder: Is it right, that the people that live in a desert, can pratically choose the president for people that live in forest, swamp, grasslands and in mountains?

Even in a smaller state, is it right for someone with no education to choose presidents that will decide how future education will work?

According to UN, we have one of the worst education of the world, public or private (although private is "less worse"), yet if you ask parents here, our education is wonderful.

Why?

It is because, parents here, never went to school, thus to them, crap education is superior to no education (although with even that I would disagree).

Yet, it is those parents that end voting for the education policy, even if indirectly.




So, what is better, more, or less democracy? It really depends on several factors, among them the education of the population, and how much different cultures it has to manage.








Now, here in Brazil, I want less democracy (ie: I am monarchist), OR less government (then I can claim I am libertarian), both would solve the problem of the current situation, the Brazillian Imperial Family, is known for being highly educated,  but to also visit in person several areas of Brazil, they know what the people need. (and several has business and etc... and know exactly the hardships of the commoner...). Or with less government, maybe a true federation (currently we live in a fake federation, where all provinces are forced to be "states" and follow a rigid set of federal laws that give almost no power to them, in fact here 90% of the laws that matter in your daily life are federal laws...), because the current government has sufficient power to grab the taxes, but it does not use them properly (ie: one person here mentioned you need government to have roads... Well, where I live, we pay our own roads, security, education, health... AND we pay taxes :/ Thus I can certainly say, if we did not needed to pay taxes, our life would be better, since we would have all the stuff we pay for, and more free money to invest in business and etc...)