He mentions most of the points in article in this video - http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Friedman
Average Is Over
171–180 of 254 posts
Re: Average Is Over
#172Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nope. I actually take a National healthcare system for granted, ideally working under proper scrutiny. I'd rather have what we have here in the UK than what's in place in the US (as far as I know about it). I was talking about this other idea: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basic_income_guarantee
It's not a completely wingnut idea. I first bumped into it in Hayek, who was in favor of it and not much of a socialist. The rationale works like this - given that some less-fortunate members of society will need assistance at some point in their life, and given that 'conservative' != 'asshole' and we don't want to just let them die in the street, we have to provide some form of limited welfare state. Since we have t…
"... or we could simply periodically cut everyone a small check."
And what do you do when they drink the check and once again lie dying in the street?
I really do agree with you - society can pay up to some point and no more. But at some point people must be allowed to die. For example, today I would not be opposed, in the case of cancer, to society providing payment for all necessary pain medications and hospice care to the point of death rather than paying for (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation) treatment. Lifespans would be shorter, death quicker but it is IMO a reasonable and far less expensive option.
Nobody really survives cancer although they may die trying. We need to terminate the cancer industry (but maintain cancer research). They are an industry selling pure hope with no significant probability of a cure today. They are a cancer on our economy.
Re: Average Is Over
#173Ridiculous. The solution to average people becoming less relevant in the economy (which I don't dispute, btw) can of course never be to make everyone above average as that is by definition impossible. It's a feel good message for average folk that papers over the truth, which is that average folk that used to make a decent living doing average work will become poor. All of them, eventually. How poor exactly? Well, yo…
The solution is none. There is no "solution" because it, in itself, is not a problem. The problem is that everybody feels entitled to a top 10% salary and many would kill for "their fair share" when nowadays even the lower 10% have their basic needs covered and some left for leisure. The problem is that a society where everybody have similar incomes is somehow fairer, when there is no logical chain leading there and…
>The problem is that everybody feels entitled to a top 10% salary and many would kill for "their fair share" when nowadays even the lower 10% have their basic needs covered and some left for leisure.
Nonsense. Everybody doesn't feel entitled to a top 10% salary: most would be happy with the kind of jobs that were commonplace a few decades ago before globalization enabled the economicly fortunate to sell their fellow citizens out.
Re: Average Is Over
#174Welcome to Peak Capitalism. This is the peak of our current socio-economic system, and I'm fairly certain that everyone in the White House is now well-aware and convinced of what's likely going to happen over the course of the next 10 years. I hope they're preparing for it right now. I believe the coming collapse of the capitalistic-democractic system is imminent, and America needs to very seriously start planning fo…
Because that worked out so well for Russia and China. Command economies have never efficiently allocated resources, and they never will. Economies are just too complicated for a single central authority to control successfully. They can never have enough accurate information, and can't be flexible enough to rapidly changing circumstances. Just look at the hopeless response to the financial crisis from European leader…
If the alternative does turn out to be unemployment on a massive scale due to automation, the Soviet Union doesn't look so bad in comparison. It's probably not optimal, but at least we know that it works (badly, no doubt, but life went on under the Soviets). I seriously doubt Friedman's idea of sending everyone to college would work at all.
Re: Average Is Over
#175This is pretty obvious stuff.
Re: Average Is Over
#176This is pretty obvious stuff.
[deleted]
Re: Average Is Over
#177Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also worth noting that it's never been as affordable or easy to escape "average" as it has been today - interestingly enough, thanks to technology.
What is this "average"? Obviously, it is a statistical measure. But what does it mean in terms of people? In those terms, "the average" is just a narrative of what the average person would be like. Which seems to be breaking down. Sure - you can make a list of specific things that every person needs or desires, as there is a lot of commonality between people. Aside from that commonality, we do different things, which…
Er by "escape" I meant "opt-out."
A while ago, if you were average, there were too many barriers to not being average to let you to escape the middle and it was easy to just "be."
Now, with the internet, the barrier to escape has been lowered to a laptop + an internet connection.
Re: Average Is Over
#178I think he meant "ordinary" not "average". Average has a specific meaning and as many have pointed out, you can't make everyone above average. What we've got to figure out is how to keep the large mass of ordinaries from being made into Eloi by a combination of welfare states, machine productivity, and wealth disparity. Or, failing that, find a way to prevent the Morlocks from eating the Eloi when it suits them.
you can't make everyone above average
Yes, you can, because there's an infinity of dimensions and each person only has to be above average on one of them.
I'm really surprised how many people here aren't getting this.
Re: Average Is Over
#179Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not a completely wingnut idea. I first bumped into it in Hayek, who was in favor of it and not much of a socialist. The rationale works like this - given that some less-fortunate members of society will need assistance at some point in their life, and given that 'conservative' != 'asshole' and we don't want to just let them die in the street, we have to provide some form of limited welfare state. Since we have t…
"... or we could simply periodically cut everyone a small check." And what do you do when they drink the check and once again lie dying in the street? I really do agree with you - society can pay up to some point and no more. But at some point people must be allowed to die. For example, today I would not be opposed, in the case of cancer, to society providing payment for all necessary pain medications and hospice car…
Nobody really survives cancer
For many cancers this is simply not true. I know many people who are 5-10-15 years out from when they were declared cancer free after treatment. Should we have let them die when first diagnosed?
Re: Average Is Over
#180Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also worth noting that it's never been as affordable or easy to escape "average" as it has been today - interestingly enough, thanks to technology.
What is this "average"? Obviously, it is a statistical measure. But what does it mean in terms of people? In those terms, "the average" is just a narrative of what the average person would be like. Which seems to be breaking down. Sure - you can make a list of specific things that every person needs or desires, as there is a lot of commonality between people. Aside from that commonality, we do different things, which…
And "average" now, is what you can expect as the default, if you make all the "safe" choices.