Better for all, Capitalism or Socialism?

[Kasz216]

SamuelRSmith said:

HappySqurriel said:

SamuelRSmith said:
I don't think you've specifically said this, Mafoo, but the way that you're using space exploration as an example is telling me that you're happier with the Government taking away your money to put a man on the moon (which is nothing more than a penis-size thing) than you are with the Government taking away your money to actually help people.

Well, this really depends on how you define "Help People" doesn't it?

Some elements of government spending towards (insanely) large products can produce technology or infastructure which is valuable to private companies and individuals for generations ... In contrast, social spending can prevent people from making decisions that would be far more beneficial for them in the long run because the consequences of maintaining their current (negative) path has been reduced.

 

You know, when I read this, I thought to myself "what part of the space race really helped mankind in any kind of beneficial way", and then it hit me: satellites! I forget what country it is that got satellites into space first.

Oh, and I'm not against the Government spending money in getting people into space, or satellites, and for things like this, I agree with Mafoo's way of determining how the Government spends its money. However, I also think that the Government should spend a lot of money on welfare and healthcare.

That way, the Government helps people in the long run and in the short term. Everybody wins!

Actually the space program led to all sorts of useful technology that effects nearly all parts of life.

By the way.  I think what your missing is what Mafoo is saying.

The Healthcare analogy here isn't Healthcare vs no healthcare.

It would be Healthcare like the NHS

vs a Universal Healthcare system that would take bids from private companise.

AKA

"We're going to auction off 17-20 males in California.  How cheap can each of you insurers provide us coverage for?"