Comments on: Financial Paternalism as Self-Defense http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2004/10/19/financial-paternalism-as-self-defense/ The Sweet Release of Reason Thu, 09 Feb 2012 18:11:50 +0000 hourly 1 By: Frank McGahon http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2004/10/19/financial-paternalism-as-self-defense/#comment-1410 Frank McGahon Wed, 20 Oct 2004 16:52:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=460#comment-1410 It strikes me that the left ought to prefer forced savings over outright wealth transfer in at least many cases. I can't see how a welfare liberal can account for the justice of transfers in cases where people become deprived in old age due to their own failure to plan and save Isn't there a rather charitable assumption here of intellectual consistency in the left? Surely, after the recent "desert" discussion you initiated, you should realise that those on the left strongly resist any distinction between "deserving" and "undeserving" poor? It strikes me that the left ought to prefer forced savings over outright wealth transfer in at least many cases. I can’t see how a welfare liberal can account for the justice of transfers in cases where people become deprived in old age due to their own failure to plan and save

Isn’t there a rather charitable assumption here of intellectual consistency in the left? Surely, after the recent “desert” discussion you initiated, you should realise that those on the left strongly resist any distinction between “deserving” and “undeserving” poor?

]]> By: Gareth http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2004/10/19/financial-paternalism-as-self-defense/#comment-1409 Gareth Tue, 19 Oct 2004 19:52:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=460#comment-1409 Well, as a social democrat, I was raised with a belief in universal social insurance, not redistribution. Those of us with Sweden as our ideological motherland were always opposed to means testing. So, in our self-conception, we aren't redistributing money from the rich to the poor. We are forcing everyone to put money away for their own sickness, old age, etc. The state does it because it's the best at doing it. Of course, we are happy to force the rich to contribute, but they should get their benefits when and if the time comes. Social insurance isn't about redistribution any more than the interstate highway system. Well, as a social democrat, I was raised with a belief in universal social insurance, not redistribution. Those of us with Sweden as our ideological motherland were always opposed to means testing.

So, in our self-conception, we aren’t redistributing money from the rich to the poor. We are forcing everyone to put money away for their own sickness, old age, etc. The state does it because it’s the best at doing it.

Of course, we are happy to force the rich to contribute, but they should get their benefits when and if the time comes. Social insurance isn’t about redistribution any more than the interstate highway system.

]]> By: Gareth http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2004/10/19/financial-paternalism-as-self-defense/#comment-1407 Gareth Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=460#comment-1407 Well, as a social democrat, I was raised with a belief in universal social insurance, not redistribution. Those of us with Sweden as our ideological motherland were always opposed to means testing. So, in our self-conception, we aren't redistributing money from the rich to the poor. We are forcing everyone to put money away for their own sickness, old age, etc. The state does it because it's the best at doing it. Of course, we are happy to force the rich to contribute, but they should get their benefits when and if the time comes. Social insurance isn't about redistribution any more than the interstate highway system. Well, as a social democrat, I was raised with a belief in universal social insurance, not redistribution. Those of us with Sweden as our ideological motherland were always opposed to means testing.

So, in our self-conception, we aren’t redistributing money from the rich to the poor. We are forcing everyone to put money away for their own sickness, old age, etc. The state does it because it’s the best at doing it.

Of course, we are happy to force the rich to contribute, but they should get their benefits when and if the time comes. Social insurance isn’t about redistribution any more than the interstate highway system.

]]> By: Frank McGahon http://willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2004/10/19/financial-paternalism-as-self-defense/#comment-1408 Frank McGahon Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/?p=460#comment-1408 It strikes me that the left ought to prefer forced savings over outright wealth transfer in at least many cases. I can't see how a welfare liberal can account for the justice of transfers in cases where people become deprived in old age due to their own failure to plan and save Isn't there a rather charitable assumption here of intellectual consistency in the left? Surely, after the recent "desert" discussion you initiated, you should realise that those on the left strongly resist any distinction between "deserving" and "undeserving" poor? It strikes me that the left ought to prefer forced savings over outright wealth transfer in at least many cases. I can’t see how a welfare liberal can account for the justice of transfers in cases where people become deprived in old age due to their own failure to plan and save

Isn’t there a rather charitable assumption here of intellectual consistency in the left? Surely, after the recent “desert” discussion you initiated, you should realise that those on the left strongly resist any distinction between “deserving” and “undeserving” poor?

]]>