Total Posts:8|Showing Posts:1-8
Jump to topic:

Social Security Insurance?

Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2010 10:41:56 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
This is a spin off from my welfare thread in which someone raised what appears to be the eminently sensible idea of using insurance to replace (supplement) welfare.

This seems like a brilliant idea, someone can pay just a few pounds a month into a scheme, which gives a payment or a salary in the event of sudden unemployment.

What are the problems with this?

Well for starters it only works if the premiums are affordable, will the market provide this or does the Government need to set a price maximum or even run the scheme itself.

Will it be a legal requirement that people join such a scheme, or will people be left to their own devices?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
mongoose
Posts: 3,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2010 10:46:39 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/23/2010 10:41:56 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This is a spin off from my welfare thread in which someone raised what appears to be the eminently sensible idea of using insurance to replace (supplement) welfare.

This seems like a brilliant idea, someone can pay just a few pounds a month into a scheme, which gives a payment or a salary in the event of sudden unemployment.

What are the problems with this?

Well for starters it only works if the premiums are affordable, will the market provide this or does the Government need to set a price maximum or even run the scheme itself.

Will it be a legal requirement that people join such a scheme, or will people be left to their own devices?

If its not market, it can't work. The government would ruin it. See Social Security.
It is odd when one's capacity for compassion is measured not in what he is willing to do by his own time, effort, and property, but what he will force others to do with their own property instead.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2010 10:48:53 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/23/2010 10:46:39 AM, mongoose wrote:
At 7/23/2010 10:41:56 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This is a spin off from my welfare thread in which someone raised what appears to be the eminently sensible idea of using insurance to replace (supplement) welfare.

This seems like a brilliant idea, someone can pay just a few pounds a month into a scheme, which gives a payment or a salary in the event of sudden unemployment.

What are the problems with this?

Well for starters it only works if the premiums are affordable, will the market provide this or does the Government need to set a price maximum or even run the scheme itself.

Will it be a legal requirement that people join such a scheme, or will people be left to their own devices?

If its not market, it can't work. The government would ruin it. See Social Security.

No price fixing or compulsory schemes?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2010 10:50:04 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Unemployment insurance? Sounds good. It would require safeguards to prevent ause, such as proof of trying to find work and a limit to the benefits.
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2010 10:50:45 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
Oh, but there is the problem of recession, in which case more and more people would be using the insurance, andn the insurance would seem more and more unprofitable.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2010 10:53:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/23/2010 10:50:45 AM, mongeese wrote:
Oh, but there is the problem of recession, in which case more and more people would be using the insurance, andn the insurance would seem more and more unprofitable.

True, but then insurance is a gamble after all. Insurance companies need to be able to factor in the periodic boom and bust. Of course when an insurance company goes bust not quite sure what will happen but nevermind.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2010 11:34:57 AM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 7/23/2010 10:41:56 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This is a spin off from my welfare thread in which someone raised what appears to be the eminently sensible idea of using insurance to replace (supplement) welfare.:

Well, being that SSI is bankrupt and broken system that we were promised we'd never have to pay in to if we didn't want it and now it is compulsory (sound familiar with ObamaCare?), just about anything is vastly better.

As for the government's role, it exists to protect consumers against fraud.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)