- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,166
And Germany? France? Spain? Italy?
Sir Nick Clegg
- Thread starter robfosters
- Start date
And Germany? France? Spain? Italy?
According to whom? The elite?
I mentioned Germany above.
Can't say France, Spain or Italy are in a particularly good place - for most indexes they are usually below us for quality of life and economy - occasionally ranked above for individual aspects.
Only really Norway is consistently ranked above us and as I said they have significant access to natural resources versus the size of their population.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,166
But do their railways cost a ridiculous amount, what about utilities, what about water?
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,166
According to evidence? Their railways run significantly better than ours for instance?
Should he have proposed capping numbers instead?
You need to take a much broader look at the quality of living and social standards, etc. for instance for Spain:
And that is just transport infrastructure never mind things like unemployment, access to education, etc. etc.
EDIT: Also interesting to look at who profited from the building of those "ghost" airports
Because they subsidise them more. Do you want to pay more tax so other people can get discounted fares?
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,166
Absolutely. A well run public infrastructure benefits us all.
The problem is, your position is about forcing others to pay more too, to subsidise services people may not use or support.
At what point do you draw the line of forcing others to do things for the 'Good of society'
Before you answer, read up on history.
Why don't you answer your own question? And before you do, remember to read up on our happier, healthier, richer, more entrepreneurial continental neighbours.
No-one's arguing for Communism, Dolph.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,166
So you don't believe in paying for a child's education either right?
Depends if it's within reason, I.E the taxpayer should pay for primary/secondary school education, but not people's uni fees.
Have to say it is one area I believe differently - at least in things like STEM subjects, financial/economic disciplines and law, etc. I think people should have a right to free education including university.
I draw the line at the point where there is no alternative of less intervention to the issue, same as I do on all issues of the state having to violate the rights of the individual, and combine that position with an absolute commitment to equal treatment under the law.
If somebody doesn't believe their university course and future career is worth them taking out a loan then why should I believe it's worth me paying for them?
We have a colossal skills shortage in this country today and it's mainly due to previous governments making it easier/cheaper for people to do throwaway uni courses instead of learning a trade as they would have done pre-Blair.
- Joined
- 9 Apr 2012
- Posts
- 13,166
So you don't believe in paying for roads either right?
Hence my post was more nuanced - there are some degrees that I think if people want to pursue that direction then they should invest into that themselves.
It depends, most new local roads in the UK aren't paid for by the state...
The key part though is how much control over the roads the state wants, if they want to control routes, building etc, then the state will have to pay for it. It doesn't follow that roads could not be built or commissioned by private groups or individuals.
A better question is how much control should the state exert over transport and why. Don't start with the default of the state being in control of it, justify why they should be.