Falklands In Light Of Crimea Rhetoric

[Redpossum]

Ps..ayn rand is nearly a godwinism now? Half baked me fein ( bit of irish for you) guff.

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=me%20feiner

 

[Dublin2BuenosAires]

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=me%20feiner

Thanks, but I dont need urban dictionary to tell me what mé fein means mo chara!

 

[Redpossum]

Thanks, but I dont need urban dictionary to tell me what mé fein means mo chara!

OK, fair enough. So how does speaking up in defense of the poor make me a selfish person?

 

[Dublin2BuenosAires]

OK, fair enough. So how does speaking up in defense of the poor make me a selfish person?

It doesnt? Ithink you've assigned a comment to yourself which was directed elsewhere...

 

[Redpossum]

It doesnt? Ithink you've assigned a comment to yourself which was directed elsewhere...

Cool! That's a good enough answer for me, Thank you

 

[camberiu]

In other news......

Darth Vader Will Run For President of Ukraine In perhaps the most unexpected turn of events in Ukrainian politics, RT News says that Darth Vader, Sith Lord of the Galactic Empire, has declared himself a candidate in the Ukrainian presidential election. The political force is strong with this one.

 

[Redpossum]

Dear GOD! The Russians have grown a sense of humor, we're all DOOMED...

 

[EdRooney]

Vader doesn't have a chance-- he wasn't approved by Victoria Nuland.

 

[Redpossum]

Vader doesn't have a chance-- he wasn't approved by Victoria Nuland.

"Luke, I am your father!
"Whoa, really?"
"Well...it was the 70's, I knew your mom, it's complicated..."

 

[thorsten]

That's a brutally callous attitude, and malicious as well. You are assuming that people waste energy, while providing no evidence. And you ignore the poor, who won't be able to afford electricity and water at all. Yet you blithely endorse depriving them of the basic necessities of life.

No doubt Ayn Rand would be very proud of you.

Redpossum, I think you are wrong on this one. You probably will find a lot of applause here in Argentina as many people believe there is only a choice between what they call Peronism or the completely unrestricted capitalism (even though that does not exist in any country in the world...).
It's easier to split the question into 2 parts:
1. Do we want that poorer people should have access to electricity and water as part of the basic needs? I think the overwhelming majority would agree here - including people with a more liberal point of view on the economy.
2. Are subsidies in the current form the right mean to reach that goal? And here we will find probably split opinions.

Personally, I think the subsidies are not the correct solution (there are a few areas where subsidies make sense in my opinion, this is not one of them). Basically any tax or subsidy has an effect on the allocation of resources - that's their goal. While taxes make products more expensive and thus invite people to either substitute the product or reduce its consumption, subsidies go the other way. The problem with a direct subsidy on water/electrivity as opposed to e.g. a general "life support" for poorer people are twofold:
1. You are subsidizing people that don't need the support. For instance, I get these subsidies indirectly by living here and consuming water/electricity, but I think Argentina should not subsidize me - nor a lot of other people who earn enough money.
2. There are effects of direct subsidies on the consumption - if you call it "wasting energy" or not is your choice. For instance, assume I am considering buying a new AC which will function 5 years. Model A costs 5000 pesos and uses 1000 energy units per 5 years, Model B costs 7000 pesos and uses 500 units. If the fair price for an energy unit is 10 pesos, Model A will cost me 15000 pesos over the 5 years, while Model B is only 12000 pesos, so I will go for the "greener" Model B. If the state subsidies electricity directly with say 90%, however, Model A will be at 6000 pesos and Model B at 7500, so I probably take Model A. Even though I don't turn on the AC more or less based on the price, my choice of appliance affects how much resources I will use and the direct subsidies - given I want to minimize my spendings - force me to go for the worse model.

If you would have no direct subsidies on energy/water and would spend the money saved here to directly support the people you want to support, you will end up in a win-win situation: the poorer people would have access to their basic needs, but can also decide how to spend their increased budges, while the state subsidies only the people that should get supported.