Home Forums

    • Forum
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Last Post
    • Ensured that elders are cared for
      I wonder if there was a time when society participated in wrap-around services that support all members of society at all stages of life. When States and localities were required to provide education to all citizens from the early years until the time they can become contributors to society. [K-12 public education] Employers were required to provide living wages and protection for employee's well-being while they work and after they are no longer able to work. [Social Security and/or Defined Benefit during retirement] This struck a chord with me today because I've been following the UK spot election.  The pitch battle is between the conservative party (Boris) and the labor party (Jeremy). The issues are things like social services vs. not? The question for me is one of reducing the role of government and allowing capitalism to step in and provide any services that the government will no longer provide.  Home health care and nationalized health care are examples.  vs. Continuing to have government oversee/regulate the delivery of those services. I suggest we look to the US and the EU for good comparisons. I also fully expect that one's perspective on this question will be largely influenced by their vantage point.  Specifically, if you're a publicly traded company providing those services, or if you're a financially comfortable individual who can afford to pay whatever is demanded, you probably want the government out of that business.  If you are a consumer of the services who is not dependent on investment growth for your income then you probably want the government to continue providing the services and improve how those services are managed and delivered. My two cents
    • 0
    • 0
    • No Topics