Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:It's official: back in recession | |
Posted by: | Jonathan Bingham | |
Date/Time: | 24/05/12 13:13:00 |
'....Welfare state...' But just because countries don't have a welfare state doesn't mean that people in that country don't have to support people who don't work. So if it's more efficient to use a welfare state to support the workless cf to individual efforts then we WILL be competitive. The US don't have an NHS system, but actually their privately funded system is LESS efficient than ours and therefore costs more to their economy overall. or, the retirement age in China is 60 for men and 55 for women, but the life expectancy is 74. Someone has to feed and care for those people and if the money comes out of individual pockets instead of general taxation it's still a cost to the economy. Which is more efficient - a state-funded retirement home or people having to work hard just to keep their parents alive and not being able to invest in their own future?. |