Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (17200)	11/22/2003 9:04:32 AM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793690

Since they aren't going to get rid of the welfare, they need young people out there working hard, instead of hardly working. That's a very pessimistic point of view. If they continue with their welfare state and increase population enough to theoretically pay for it, they will be in an even bigger mess. They will not increase productivity because a welfare system is inherently non-productive. So they will just end up with more "hardly working" plus have such crowding that their situation will be worse. The better solution to the problem is to cut back on welfare to match population. The other route, to use the word of the author you posted earlier, is "doomed." European countries are not well suited to immigration to grow population and they're not producing enough babies of their own to do so. I hope they find the silver lining in that and do the smart thing, which is to change their system to be more self supporting. And hopefully their experience will give us a good model when we hit the population wall. While immigration is a suitable option for us so we don't have quite their problem, we will sooner or later run out of physical capacity here, too.