cruz737 wrote...
Drifter995 wrote...
On the bern subject, I have my doubts free healthcare, education and the likes will cost anywhere near the trillions.
From an outside perspective, he does seem like the best candidate from what I've seen. America lacks quite a lot of things that other first world countries have (Healthcare that isn't shit, accessible education, etc. Granted, if the education isn't on a similar route to us, where you pay it back out of your earnings automatically after you earn over a certain amount, I can see it being a bit odd. But, eh)
On the other end of the scale though, trump is a joke to most countries from what I've seen. Still trying to figure out how he expects mexico to pull 30bill out of their arse for a wall, and how he thinks it'll solve the issue a fence didn't.
Still, shitty politics aside, year hasn't been too awful so far
I feel like you're the type of person who would compare apples to orange without really thinking about it.
Our healthcare isn't shit, it's just not cheap for some people. And by education, if you mean "higher education", it was at one point but going into why it's more or less accessible (You didn't even bother asking about acceptance rates) you'd have to look at monetary policy spanning over 40 years to see why it's gone up, even higher than our inflation rate. A very simplified explanation.
America = More people than your inmate death continent
More people = wider pool of people trying to achieve higher education
More people in college = bigger colleges
Bigger colleges = More staff, faculty and
Administration
More staff, faculty and administration = more cost
more cost = more student loans given out and taken
more student loans = higher incentive for govt. to partake
more govt. action = sloppy, risky policies take place
You should be able to figure out the rest, no?
The sad reality is that there are more people in US colleges than there should ideally be. And I blame the education system, where there's somewhere around 19% of students who leave high school being technically illiterate. So for me, it's kinda hard to take people who want more govt. involvement seriously.
The irony is despite that we still have the best universities in the world.
Generally size doesn't matter, because you can usually scale it up somewhat. Sure it costs more short term, but long term it usually works out as well.
The healthcare is pretty shit from what I've seen. Instead of paying a lot less through your tax, you're paying a lot more externally. Which means people can't afford to pay for it. If it comes out of tax, you're pretty sorted. That's how it works in most places. It's part of the tax, and it pushes it up sfa, but you're not limiting healthcare to those in the top like 75% or whatever it is. To be fair though, it does sound like trump may have something up his sleeve for that, from what I read. Not sure how he'll go about it, but it's a positive.
As for educatiom; again, should be able to scale up. More affordable college/ university (by means of a hecs style system, which is what I mentioned by paying it off as you work) would in theory mean more people can afford, more people get the jobs, it gets paid back, blah blah blah. All theory. How it goes in practice, you'd get more people going there to see what they want to do, sure. But, it does seem like a better option. Again, short term it'd cost more, but long term it'd work itself back to the green.
Difference in population means sfa, other than you just need to scale things up. That's how it goes when you use a smaller test sample. Usually you scale it up again, and then when you're at a reasonable test sample size (10+% is a pretty reasonable test sample size for things), you just scale it up for realistic results. Pretty commonly done