"No one in Finland dies of hunger, Kela takes care of that. If you don't get food, that's your own stupidity!!! I say this because you losers who're waiting for support with your hand outstretched without getting your ass out of that chair, you deserve your poverty,"
Someone didn't mince their words. And that someone is the assistant of Finland's Minister of Social Affairs and Health. And despite this social media tirade, they are going to keep their position. Which I agree with, since I believe everyone should be able to hold their own opinions on any type of topic - and since they weren't publicly elected, it is up to the minister who hired them to decide whether to keep them on or not.
The assistant backtracked the post saying that it wasn't meant for all unemployed, rather the "Ideologically unemployed" - and while heavy handed, I agree with him. If people consistently choose not to work and take social security to get through life, then poverty is their own fault. After all, social security will never make someone rich and will only ever keep a person floating around the poverty line. If someone wants more than that, they are going to have to do something different than live off of social security.
It is pretty simple.
So if someone does want to live off of social security, that is fine, but they can never really expect more than what that provides, which is likely going to not be much. Not only that, it is also accepting that they are going to live at the whims of government, and governments are continually in a phase of "savings" to improve their bottom lines. This means that social services will keep declining, even if the "average" economy is improving.
A lot of people want to find a way to live where the economy is more socially-minded, but the unfortunate truth about this, is that if it was ever to work, it would require people to add value to society. And it can't be any value, it has to be something that provides for people to be fed. It doesn't work if everyone wants to follow their passion as a painter or a poet. The fantasy that many have where people can do as they please and everyone lives in harmony, is only possible under very narrow conditions - and that is that technology does everything for us.
It would need to provide everything, from what we need from production, to all kinds of healthcare and services. And, even if this was achieved, it would mean that anyone who wanted to provide what the technology is, will have to do it at a far worse level than the technology can. A technologically provided existence is the cleanest, most dystopian system we could build. But, everyone would be provided for, and they would then be able to pursue any dream activity they wanted.
Within the boundaries of what the technology will allow.
We know that centralised socialism doesn't work, because the centralised power will ultimately be corrupted. But, an "incorruptible" centralised decision maker doesn't work either, because it will become increasingly efficient until we are completely controlled, and the freedom we have craved, will be even further out of reach.
The answer has to be some kind of hybrid approach, where corruption can be severely limited so that resources can be distributed well, but that there is still not "too much" optimisation, so there are places for humans to exist and add value. Add value, not just for the want of it, but because there is a need for it. I feel a lot of people underestimate the personal impact of being able to add value to a community. If machines and programs do all the important tasks to keep us alive - we will spiral from irrelevancy.
But, going back to the opening quote, while I agree people need to do more. I also agree that governments aren't doing enough to improve wellbeing of society - which is their main role - though we seem to have forgotten it. The governments job isn't to balance finances - it is to improve the opportunities for the populations it has been chosen to govern. But, all around the world, they are failing dramatically, after they have been corrupted into chasing financial success at the expense of the people.
I understand why so many want to opt-out of this highly flawed system, but at the same time, they also need to opt-in to something other that provides true value for society, not just survive for themselves. Only then will things start to change, because people will build and support systems that are healthier than the current governance structures, and actually want to contribute more.
Are we heading that way?
There are a "lot of asses in chairs" at the moment. But it doesn't come down to having a job or not having a job, it is about what we are all doing in this world. Are we doing what is required for a stronger, healthier society - or are we improving the status quo system - the one that is failing?
Taraz
[ Gen1: Hive ]
