In society

Good intentions

March 4, 2013 Julia Latynina

With good intentions, as you know, the road to hell is paved. The Bolsheviks had very good intentions: to exterminate envy, evil and cause of them - private property, and build parades on earth. Instead of paradise, they built a gulag. But they had good intentions.

European Social Democrats have very good intentions: to give everyone, regardless of the level of intelligence, performance, decency, etc.-the right to vote, food, housing, pension, medical care and education.

That is, to build the same free paradise on Earth, with the only difference being that the Bolsheviks suggested that there would be no private property at all, and social democrats suggest that private property would still be. It will have a disgusting and subt into the class of greedy industrialists, who, like honey bees, will produce the national product, which will then remove good social democrats from those who work and give to those who do not work in exchange for votes.

This beautiful picture rests on two problems: firstly, who will work if it is more profitable not to work? And secondly, what, in fact, is the total cost of this social support?

I often hear the question: “Yes, the world has reached such a level of development that workers can easily feed non -working ones. Do you really feel sorry for the money for them for food? ”

So. First, about food. It does not mean bread with water. Good intentions require that the parasite does not only eat, but at a dignity eat. The minimum European pension is 500 euros. A person who has worked all his life at low -paid work will receive 500 euros. A refugee in Holland, who did not work for a minute, will receive about 600 euros in his hands. For food. This is rather big money. In China, Podushva GDP is $ 500.

Secondly, in addition to food, housing is needed. Housing in the modern world is one of the most serious consumption articles for any earning person.

I know in the West a lot of people - nurses, drivers, maids who work from morning to evening and cannot afford to buy housing. But if they do not work, they will receive it for free!

They can tell me: this is the housing of the worst class. I think that anyone who has seen Western social housing will agree that it is much larger than the meter of the Khrushchev five -story buildings. True, the residents very often turn this housing into a life -threatening cloac: syringes in the porches, stabbing, broken light bulbs, pungent streets and a naked lawn in front of a two -story cottage, which a compassionate English state allocated a drug addict with three children. But you must admit, the state here is already powerless.

Housing is no longer “500 euros per month”. This is already 100-200 thousand euros, which cannot be given a parasite without taking away from the worker, including the one who works all his life, but he cannot afford his own. It’s good when one parasite, and ten working. And when there will be ten parasites, and one working one?

Thirdly, except for housing, education is also needed. A modern European trend is a trend in the equation and reducing the level of education. This is again wonderful good intentions: let's give each child, regardless of the environment, the welfare of parents, the level of training and the level of intelligence, the chance of a decent education.

The problem is that the principle of universality and equality does not lead to a decent education, but, on the contrary, prevents it. The first thing that the child assimilates with universal, free and equal education is that he has the right to receive everything, and not to achieve it independently.

Nothing corrupts and does not act as disastrously on a 7-8-year-old child as an understanding that he can skip, rude, steal, smell the glue in the toilet and beat the vehicle who, a bitch, thinks a lot about himself and is interested in mathematics-and he will not be anything. No one will throw him out of school, and he will learn to do nothing for 11 years.

As a result, schools are divided into two types. One is de facto elitist, in which children are selected. And others - who produce lumpen. They release people who despise education and educated, but know that everyone should.

Free and equal education is a terrifying injustice in relation to talented children who not only do not receive education at the age when knowledge is especially absorbed, but become victims of terror from small lumpen. And this is a terrifying injustice in relation to those who could really escape from social lower classes, if he had not been made to understand from childhood, at school, like at home that he should not study, he should not work on himself, but they must humiliate and trample those who imagine a lot about themselves. "

Spending on education is no longer a “dime for food”. Society does not spend billions not to tear people out of social lower classes, but, on the contrary, in order to prevent them from breaking out of there with the help of universal and free education.

And finally, the fourth and most difficult. Medicine. We will be frank: in order for a person to live in a full-fledged life in seventy, he must spend at least 5-10 thousand dollars. In a year on medicine-just for checks, for starters.

The saying “He cannot buy health” is hopelessly outdated. Health - you will buy. Not always, but often.

Modern clinics are high -tech production, where a high -tech product is created called “Health” .CTSCANNE can be free. Cancer medicine cannot be free. Already now there are medicines that act only with a certain DNA. Let's say a cure for cancer, which acts remarkably, but only 4% of the population with such and such genes.

Of course, we can say, as the authors of the OcCupy Wall Street manifest, that bad corporations produce medicines that are sold for money and order to distribute this remedy for cancer for free. But the next remedy will not be.

The surgeon is studying all his life to become a good surgeon. Of course, we can say that in connection with the invaluability of human life, he must work for free. Here the janitor should receive money, because it is non -commercial - not to remove the yard, and the surgeon who studies all his life should work for free.

But after all, the stent that the surgeon puts can not be obtained for free. And the titanium joint cannot be free. That is, of course, you can go further and oblige the company that produces these joints to supply them for free, but then it will completely stop working. And no one will sell her titanium.

The problem is that life - especially after a certain age - is very expensive. Do you want your parents to be alive and well? Do you want to be alive yourself? You have to pay.

At the same time, the same injustice arises with medicine as with housing. The main victims of free housing for the poor are not billionaires with villas. The main victims of free housing for the poor are poor people who work a lot, but cannot afford housing, which is not for those who do not work for free. The same thing with medicine: the biggest money in the United States for medical care is paid not unemployed, which is all covered by the inspection. The biggest - completely crazy - the money is paid by just the one who receives, say, $ 2000 per month.medicaid, he does not have a complete insurance, and he will have to lay out $ 10 thousand for an accidental visit to the hospital, which he will pay ten years.

But the most important problem with medicine is as follows. Firstly, the cost of a high-tech goods called "Health" will only grow. The price of the iPhone will fall, and the average price of each next year of life will only grow. Secondly, medicine is really the area where only everyone can be treated. A modern hospital is a conveyor. You cannot collect Mercedes for one conveyor for one conveyor, but for another Lada. You cannot give a medicine that acts on 4% of patients, only to those who agree to pay for it. It will never pay off. You need to make sure that all 4% pay for treatment.

And this is the most important thing. If you look, what is the total amount of expenses for medicine, education, housing and worthy meals, then you will see that the total volume of these expenses just coincides with the amount of money that the representative of the middle class earns.

And this means that if a person says “they should” and does not work, then modern society simply cannot secure a normal standard of living that it could ensure if everyone, except, of course, those who really cannot work for objective reasons, and not because politicians want to gain votes of voters due to the promise of a freebie, which is paved to hell.

The simplest and most sad truth about socialism, in any of its forms, is that with a significant number of parasites, people live much lower than the level that they could achieve. Specific people sitting on the needle halaves do not receive the development as a person that they could receive if they had not accustomed the stamping of social drugs, and the whole society - including those who work - have a much lower level of medical care and less life expectancy than it could.

Photo by ITAR-TASS/ Mikhail Fomichev

.