If a house rises by 20 thousand in a year, it's a free 384 to the owner; so when we talk about 'spongers' and 'free benefits' can we remember who the key workers are and change the conversation? Because achieving social health depends on us taking the self-serving blinkers off. Is capitalism a kind of socialism which concentrates benefits only for the already wealthier members?
"Pro life" and "pro quality of life" will be directly proportional; thus the route to this traditionally conservative goal is socialism.
If you believe in nations having armed forces, if you believe in the population funding those armies, if you believe that it is alright for soldiers to volunteer for jobs in which they risk death to protect others - you believe in socialism. It would, however, be awesome, if we could all take the next step together and believe in the kind of socialism that brings population health, great educational standards and general wellness. Because to only focus on the "death" side of the equation and not the "life" side of the equation, as any mathematician or science (especially neuroscience) student will tell you, will lead to the sort of obvious imbalances the world is facing.
Keep track of your favorite writers on Descriptionari
We won't spam your account. Set your permissions during sign up or at any time afterward.