08-21-2009, 11:46 PM
Quote:Why not socialize energy usage? Why not socialize food distribution? How about shelter? If people have an inherent right for education, or health care, then they have a right to eat, to heat their home, and to have affordable housing. If the government can provide the most efficient administration of health care, then why not these other life sustaining functions?Socialized energy production makes sense to me. (What socialized energy usage would be, I have no idea. The government turns on my toaster for me?) It's a high-volume, infrastructral product where new market entrants face almost absurdly prohibitive entry costs.
Socialized education (k-12) is already a reality in all developed countries. Do you object to that?
People already spend their bottom dollar on food, and always will. So it isn't necessary to provide it equally, so long as you provide some baseline income for the extremely poor.
Shelter is a tough question, but at the very bottom, it seems clear that at least some homeless shelters are a necessity to prevent serious social problems (streets that can't be walked at night, overcrowded prisons). Beyond that, I'm not sure socialized housing has been a huge success, but there have been cases where it's been done well enough.
The point I'd emphasize is that all markets are different. Some products lend themselves very well to being publicly provided, and some do not. Each should be judged on its own merits.
-Jester