Fireside Chats, Episode 64: In Defense of Socialism

Thank you for listening!

Colin Moriarty

Just thought it was worth seconding Keith’s point on the NHS. Opposing the NHS would be a very fringe view in the UK. Now, there’s a huge variance in opinion on /how/ the NHS should work, including how much should be contracted to private companies, but the core idea that the NHS exists and cares for you “from cradle to grave” is a foundational assumption of British politics. -“cradle to grave” is a pretty common term for the remit of the welfare system over here, i think it was coined by Lloyd George who is thought of as the political father of the Welfare system and the NHS post WW2. -I would offer myself to do a fireside chat on understanding the UK from a right-leaning US perspective, but I work for the Government and I’m not allowed to be very politically active in public to maintain the neutrality of the Civil Service!

Gavin Todd

One of the issues that inflates pricing, as you've mentioned, is when the government gets involved (education, health care, etc) the institutions go crazy on upping the prices because the government is paying. There needs to be a tandem bit of regulation that controls/regulates price increases and markup. I know it's antithetical to free market principles for the government to do something like that, but these are not optional products. Everyone needs health care and education just as they need air, water, food and police and military protection. I don't believe any of those services should be For-Profit institutions. I believe that there can and should be premium versions of various items that can have more traditional pricing structures and principles, but a nation as wealthy as ours, I believe, has a moral responsibility to ensure it's people have access to essentials. Of course, when/if/before we did that - we'd want to get real good handle on immigration. Nothing about this is turnkey, simple or easy. It shouldn't be done flippantly without considering what other aspects of our infrastructure it would impact.

Yeah - my own financial ambitions are more driven by caring for the needs of my wife and son. She wanted to be a homeowner and I want to be able to pay for his college so he can just concentrate on school and get everything out of it possible without having to work at the same time (as I did) or have a bunch of debt on him when he gets out. (all I wanted for myself was just to be able to play the video games I want to play on a nice TV and be able to go to the movie theater at my leisure). I've never minded paying taxes. I like to imagine my portion goes to what social programs we do have. At a certain point though, my wife and I started making enough money that the taxes were high that I felt I should be able to own a home and not be subject to a landlord who can destabilize my finances at any time just because they want to collect more money. A little over a year ago my wife and I were able to make that happen. Now I'd just like to make a little more so things aren't so tight but I'm still fine with my level of taxation.

Thanks for your comments James! Yeah I've been hoping to convey that our experiences truly shape us. It is certainly true that because of my experience I also felt a certain debt to society. I felt that I've been taking care of during time of need by complete strangers so I am as an adult more inclined to help others. That doesn't mean that I don't have my own financial and professional ambitions and I encourage everyone to figure out what is most important to them before acting. I've always been very focused on earning money but I think I do it out of a combination fear of losing my social safety and not becoming a burden to anyone rather than out of greed. This stands somewhat in contrast with the capitalistic ambition of a true entrepreneur and sometimes I wish my motivation were more like that but I am also happy with what I achieved out of the pure desire for survival.

German Efficiency

Thanks Kevin that was my hope!

German Efficiency

Haha, I'm glad at least some people recognized me. :-) It's been refreshing talking about topics other than what I am publicly known for.

German Efficiency

I think you nailed it with this comment Stefan. I think it is unfortunate that a higher quality of living is often conflated with basic housing and health care. For example: There certainly is a major difference in living in a house you afford by your own merits and spending your money on what you want vs. being offered government guaranteed shelter that also bounds you to reporting your expenditures to the government in assurance it is being spend on necessities not luxuries. I think only a very small group of people want to be part of the latter and deliberately attempt to exploit this form of social safety. Germany's social net as it exists today is certainly not communistic wealth-distribution, but given that only 30 years ago a large part of (East) Germany was modeled after just that with the DDR, I can somewhat understand why some people might still think that's how it is today.

German Efficiency

I really enjoyed the conversation. Sean's perspective was refreshing to hear.

Kevin Rood

Just finished listening to this episode. One of the things that impressed me was that Sean felt cared about by his society. I don't think here in the US too many people feel cared about by others. My observations is that there is too much only-out-for-myself attitudes. I think a better economic and social contract does lie somewhere between Capitalism as we have it and Socialism as practiced in some European countries today. My reasoning is fairly simple: because the Captains of Industry are really only trying to increase their personal wealth over anything else, our current model does everything it can to reduce the amount of people allowed to work. If we're not going to allow everyone to participate in the active economy then there needs to be a social net that protects the excluded from homelessness, starvation and other elements that would prevent someone from participating in the workforce if they did find an opportunity. I know it's difficult for entrepreneurs at Colins level and into the early millionaire range to see (because it's not them doing it) but the people making the 10s of millions and beyond are effectively robbing people that work for them by claiming disproportionate ownership of their employee's revenue generation efforts.

When a child grows up homeless, malnourished, and uneducated, how do they have the same opportunity as someone who does? The socialism proposed by most of us lefties is providing the most *BASIC* housing and healthcare. So those who through no fault of their own, which are born into unfortunate circumstances are able to have a place to sleep at night, have three meals a day, and not die from third world illness because they are afraid to go to a hospital for fear of a debt they cannot hope to ever pay off.

Stefan Catinella

I'm totally softening on universal health care as I get older. I just need to see the logistics and the price tag. Between medical, dental, and vision, I pay $500+ a month. If the government could parlay that $6,000 a year or so into taxes that get me the same level of care, then I wouldn't stand in the way of that. My fear is that my tax increase will well outstrip what I pay for insurance, and that I'll get worse care. In fact, I'm pretty much positive that's what's going to happen.

Colin Moriarty

It's all relative, which I think was really a theme of this episode. I, for one, am open-minded to some of the things you guys do in the UK. I just need someone to show me how it'd work and how much it'd (really) cost.

Colin Moriarty

I agree with your point about the poor state of American health, and would argue that there are many incentives and benefits that could be implemented in a socialized health care system to target that issue. One of the benefits many talk about is the long term economic benefits of free check ups. By allowing (or incentivizing) individuals to more frequently interface with doctors they will ideally take better care of themselves and reduce the necessity of much more expensive emergency or life saving procedures. I think the primary (and more pragmatic) point of my story though, is that you ARE (whether you like it or not) paying for other people's health care in our society. People are not denied healthcare in emergency or lifesaving situations in our society which are by far the most expensive procedures in health care, and if they can't or are unwilling to pay that cost, it is still being passed on to people that can or will. This is part of the reason why health care in America is so expensive, and is particularly punishing to the middle class. Also, American healthcare has massive administrative fees (appears to be around 30% of costs) which is partially because all the players (hospitals, health insurance companies, ambulance companies, debt collectors, etc) have to figure out how to chase down and juggle the payments of people who do and don't pay, and try to pull a profit out of all of it. In other words, there are lots of hidden costs due to the incongruence of our desire for a modern society where everyone is taken care of, but our unwillingness to directly contribute to it.

desperateLuck

One of the issues we have is Americans, in general (not speaking for everyone), don't treat health the same way. The American diet alone leads to so many problems. Americans don't really take their health, in a day to day instance, as serious. Health care is obviously helpful, but decreasing obesity and having people workout and be healthy would solve much more health problems. I'm also not speaking to your specific example. Reading your comment just got me thinking. That's one thing I've taken much more serious in the past two years. I got to be what I consider pretty heavy and decided that needs to stop because I don't want the consequences down the road. I'm by no means the pillar of health, but my health is much better. It boils down to a personal freedom for me. I would easily choose to help people who need help with their health due to no fault of their own. But I would choose to do that. I don't feel I should have to forcibly pay for someone's Healthcare when their lifestyle choices lead to their health problems (obesity or smoking). That goes for myself as well. I don't think someone should have to pay for me because I decided my health wasn't important.

Jimmy Valentine

I agree with Sean's point about the importance of framing and nuance when talking about these programs. Not all socialization is created equal. For example, I think socializing health care makes a lot of sense, because we live in a society where people get emergency care regardless of whether they can pay for it or not. I remember when I was younger and quite poor my brother went to the emergency room and my mother spent the next several months (years?) dodging debt collectors and settling over all the various ambulance and medical bills that she could never afford. In the end she only paid a small fraction of what she owed, but ended up wasting a ton of her (and other people's) time, and most of that economic cost was certainly taken on by people who are more financially responsible and care more about their financial records. Multiply this scenario by millions, and there is a ton of inefficiency in the existing system that can be certainly helped by all the benefits of socialized health care (everyone paying in ahead of time through taxes, increased incentive for preventative health care, collective bargaining, etc). To lump something very pragmatic, like socialized health care, with far fetched ideas such as UBI or free college is fairly absurd.

desperateLuck

With all due respect, how is taking my money to give everyone - even those who don't work for it - the *same* Healthcare, the *same* quality of housing, etc not equality of outcome? You're not giving them the OPPORTUNITY to have good healthcare or housing, right? You're literally giving them the outcome. So........?

Dave Carsley

Really enjoyed this conversation. Its sometimes weird when Socialism is discussed in America, using Europe as a base, because as a UK person, the mix of capitalism and social welfare practiced over here doesn't feel like much to do with what I see on a day to day basis. Extreme socialism is different (like the old China and USSR) but citizens of most European companies loathe that kind of socialism. Its much more like we take this from capitalism, that from socialism, and we'll find our own middle ground country to country. While Europe is more lefty than America, it still feels essentially centrist with its people.

Peter Campbell

Is that his nickname? LOL.

Colin Moriarty

The NHS is such a foreign idea to us here in the States. Thank you for listening!

Colin Moriarty

Thanks! I'm glad to hear it. =)

Colin Moriarty

To be fair, nothing is being sold on Fireside Chats! Just exposing you to some new and different ideas, is all. What your takeaway is -- if you even have one -- is entirely subjective, and up to you!

Colin Moriarty

Remember: Fireside Chats is merely about exposing new and interesting ideas. You certainly don't have to agree with anything that's being said.

Colin Moriarty

Hi Dave, they're aren't many (outside the extreme fringes) who are making the argument for pure socialism. Mr Clinton certainly wasn't making that case either... What most left-leaning people like myself believe in (who Jordan Peterson refers to as "the reasonable left") is a fairer system that maximises equality of opportunity (not equality of outcome). This could be achieved through socialistic programs such as universal healthcare, publicly owned utilities (gas,electric not telecoms), improved public education, public housing, public transport etc... Improving the standard of living for the most needy in society benefits everyone via reduction in crime, less toxic public debates, higher overall levels of education to make your country more competitive on the global market, higher happiness index of your populous, increased tourism, more money flowing in your economy (people at the bottom save less and spend more)... I'm not trying to convince you, or anyone, to my way of thinking. But realise that left-leaning politics is a legitimate (and I think intrinsically better) POV and not immature utopian fantasy that would inevitably lead to a Stalinist or Maoist regime...

Toddie

damn, I was listening to mr. german efficiency himself that whole time? neat!

Michal Dudic

Really interesting podcast. Damn, when you hear stories like how this dude grew up it really puts thing in to perspective, got to respect he managed to get through it. Just wanted to quickly say when you were thinking out loud “some people in the UK must not like the NHS” (paraphrasing), honestly it feels like people here in the UK don’t question it... it’s just there, like police and firemen. The only time it is ever brought up in that sense is a party suggesting they would privatise the NHS and it’s always met with massive backlash from the public. There must be some people out there but I can honestly say I’ve never heard someone in person suggest we would be better off privatising it. Not suggesting what is better either way, just letting you know it’s not really a discussed topic over here. Keep up the good work !

Keith Farrell

This was awesome. The Fireside Chats with normal people are so interesting to listen to.

Lockmort

I enjoyed it. I learned alot and it was very interesting. It's nice hearing upbringings from other parts of the world and philosophies they have. Especially from the community of CLS! Very cool. Can't wait till the next episode.

Marcus Brown

Wow this is gonna be a hard sale but like to think I keep an open mind :-) look forward to listening and thanks again Colin for making these conversations happen :- )

Matthew Perry

Nope. I don't buy it! Socialism is a naturally tantalizing system of governance to civilized and empathetic human beings. I don't really blame anyone who's attracted to it. That said, EVERY time it's been tried, it's never resulted in anything other than hardship, starvation, death, power-intoxication, and usually, bloody revolution (pay special attention to the power-intoxication part; this unchanging aspect of the human condition is why socialism can never really work). Any place in which "socialism has succeeded" -- people often like to bring up the Nordic countries -- it's because it's not actually socialism. Those are very much capitalist countries with SOME socialist programs and tendencies. In my opinion, the modern liberal educational system in America has committed no greater offense than making socialism "cool" again. Education is supposed to prevent us from repeating the bloody mistakes of the past, not encourage us to make them all over again. All that said, as misguided as I believe him to be, I strongly commend and respect Mr Clinton for having the courage to publicly defend his sincerely held beliefs in front of an audience which I'm sure he knew would predominantly be unfriendly towards them. I also respect Colin for having him on. We are starved of civil exchanges of ideas like this one, and it's killing our national discourse.

Dave Carsley

LOL.

Colin Moriarty

I certainly thought it was! But I'll leave the verdict to you.

Colin Moriarty

Let us know what you think. =)

Colin Moriarty

I hope you enjoy!

Colin Moriarty

Thanks for coming through, Sean! You did great.

Colin Moriarty

Can't do it without whiskey... You're testing me Colin 😂

tejotl

Sounds fucking interesting

Edwin Garcia

This shall be interesting. Can't wait to listen.

Marcus Brown

Really dig this topic! Can’t wait to listen!

Marius Skarsem Pedersen

Colin, it was great being on the show, thank you! I had a great time and would love to explore more topics with you in the future. You make for a great conversation buddy. You can find me at @SeanEfficiency on twitter for feedback and comments.

German Efficiency