Your living standards

My current living standard aren't luxurious but I'm coping. 

Atavachron wrote: I might be persuaded to give up a small portion of income for a greater good, but not things like my home, possessions, etc.   And I'd want to be sure the money would reach its intended targets, which I would be doubtful of.

It's curious that the country with one of the highest standards of living in the world (at least in a sh*t-owned-per-capita ratio) is the one where there are millions of people who think taxes are theft and basically one step short of full blown communism.  

Kepler62 wrote: i think that we all should be like Norwegians.

Dean wrote: Yes, with reservations. Adding a few quid a week to my tax bill and NI contributions to ensure that the NHS and Education remain out of private ownership and that benefit payments are not unfairly sacrificed are perfectly acceptable. I find the mere suggestion that benefit cuts should be used in a punitive way just to appease the blue-rinse brigade to be morally abhorrent. In return for this reduction in my living standards I want government to be far more open and accountable than it currently is as no government should ever be unconditionally trusted regardless of how squeaky clean they are - any government who objects to this has something to hide, which makes them guilty by default.  But most of all I want us to go back to employing and fully utilising "experts" - the current madness of summarily dismissing the advice and recommendations of people who actually know and understand what they are talking about is crass stupidity.

This exactly.

I would be willing to lose a few bucks every month if that means everybody has access to universal health care, for example. Yes, fewer book purchases a month, fewer outing a month, that's fine. 

I might be persuaded to give up a small portion of income for a greater good, but not things like my home, possessions, etc.   And I'd want to be sure the money would reach its intended targets, which I would be doubtful of.

Teach them to fish longer-term, give them fish shorter-term. More importantly, try to ensure that plenty of fish will remain in the sea. Population control, as well as better management of resources, I think are important for the future of humanity. I feel that most efforts to alleviate poverty are merely band-aids, some of which may actually make long-term poverty worse.

Clearly the system is biased for the privileged as they have the power. There would be enough resources to go around for now if people weren't greedy and didn't over-consume. We do need to protect our environment if humanity is to survive and prosper.

It is a major problem that politicians only think to the next election when governments should be thinking both short-term and long-term. I think we have terrible systems that are systemically unfair. I probably won't be alive in another forty years, but I still care about that future, as I think many of us do. And I don't just care because I have kids that will be alive then (I felt guilty about having two kids). Those who are merely struggling to survive, and those that are greedy, may care less globally.

Edited by Logan - April 03 2017 at 10:17

Well, in regards to my living standards, the French government doesn't ask to pay taxes (the Paris municipality and the French public television do, though).
Being unemployed half of the year gives you this kind of, er.... privilege?

By the way, having worked for the public administration many times as an archivist, I could adress some recommendations to the government to save some public funds (and thus, maybe, lower the taxes): stop wasting money on photocopies.

Seriously.