Politics got weird because neoliberalism failed to deliver

what i own as a consequence of the money i give to the state is a better,
more humane society which cares for its citizens/participants/residents

Wrong, It’s what the state owes to the citizens participants that matters
because the state won’t be able to fulfill its side of the deal, and the
citizens will be destitute.

Hence the quesiton about debt. How much does the state owe for pensions,
just for the money its received in past and still to be paid.

What you don’t say is how much?

Here’s some numbers for the UK, and I bet its the same in the US scaled for

Amount owed 12,000 bn GBP [Off the books]

Annual rate of increase in that debt, 740 bn. [All bar 100 bn off the books]

Total taxes, 640 bn a year.

Current spending on debt, 30% of taxation.

Current state assets, hospital etc, 2,400 bn. I don’t see how you can sell
to pay the debt.

800 of GDP.

Annual rate of increase 26% [Base off the last estimates by the UK state,

GDP growth? 2% if you are lucky.

£400,000 per tax payer.

Median wage of tax payers, £26,500 a year.

On all measures its completely unaffordable so the creditors, the people
you would like to help, are going to get screwed.

That’s why its an issue. You think you are helping people and because the
debt number is omitted, you think more of the same is a good idea.

Hence its starts will honest accounting

  1. The money Americans pay into social security goes to two things. The
    first is the cost of running the social security administration. The second
    is one of two trust funds that are used to issue payments to people who
    receive social security checks. This is simply how the program works
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Security_(United_States). If you
    don’t think this is how the program works, you should abandon your current

Lack of regulation doesn’t translate directly to freedom. I’m not fighting for my choices on the supermarket shelves; I’m fighting for a choice between being sold down the river, and being actually represented by those in government.

That hasn’t been an option on offer since the 70s.


Have you tried forming a PAC? Giving money to people who would better represent you?

1 Like

I see Bolshevism and libertarianism as being essentially equivalent. They are authoritarian and fascist death cults. The only way they differ is in the pool of thugs they use for leadership: libertarians exclusively restrict their pool of thugs to the wealthy and the wealthy-adjacent. With Bolshevism, it’s just a tendency toward the wealthy adjacent.

That said, I’m starting my vacation and hope you have happy holidays. If we disagree again next year, I hope I’ll be smarter than I am today!

Or maybe the discussion will be equally pointless?

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.