Either you have wealth redistribution, or you don’t. A lower amount is still wealth redistribution.
You can have a government, or you don’t. A smaller government is still a government.
So if someone wants some wealth redistribution, and some government. They are just arguing how much of a Libertarian Socialist they are, not how much of a anarcho-capitalist they are.
I personally am a Social Democrat. Capitalism is good most of the time, just make sure you’re holding the reigns tight so it goes in the right direction. Skip capitalism altogether for specific industries where it just doesn’t do very well and have the government run those ones directly.
I’m neither a libertarian socialist, nor an anarcho-capitalist. Not even close to either of them, because again, it isn’t a spectrum.
A georgist could use a land value tax to fund a minimum income program. Can social welfare programs be rolled out mostly (but not completely) outside of the state through ngos and non-profits?
It depends on what you mean by social welfare programs.
A basic income system requires very little administration, and what parts of it are required wouldn’t make sense to have it sitting outside the government.
I’d rather see a basic income than need non-profit food banks needing to exist. Grocery stores already exist, are reasonably competitive, and are enormously more efficient if people have the money available to use them.
For things like helping people with disabilities, where economies of scale are mostly irrelevant, ngos and non-profits can make more sense because they can specialize according to the need.
The administration of a basic income sitting outside of the government?
The government already has a list of every citizen registered via birth or immigration, and provides identification for people. They’re always going to need to do that. There’s really no reason to replicate that level of information outside of the government.
Most people would just go online and register where you’d like your money to be sent (Direct deposit, Mailed cheque)
However, you would still need a few call centers to handle issues, and If someone needs in-person support, the government already has common government service offices like DMVs and service centers that can provide in person service if required, saving significant money on needing dedicated service locations just for this one service.
Tl;dr Economies of Scale matter, and it doesn’t make any sense to replicate the parts that the government already does and has to continue doing.
What would it be a spectrum of? Either you think society needs to be ruled by elites (right wing) or you think society should run itself based on universal rights (left wing).
Class systems predate governments so, no I don’t think governments as we know them are a prerequisite for class systems. Class systems are always perpetuated with violence so when a state has a monopoly on violence then class systems can only be upheld with state approval.
There’s no such thing as the middle. It’s not a spectrum.
Sometimes things are actually just distinct beliefs.
You can’t be in between Christianity and Hindu for example. They aren’t attached to each other, they are distinct.
Why is it not a spectrum?
Why would it be?
Different ngos would compete for a govenment funding contract.
If sugar is on the left, and salt is on the right, what would be in the center?
Because you can’t really have parts of both.
Either you have wealth redistribution, or you don’t. A lower amount is still wealth redistribution.
You can have a government, or you don’t. A smaller government is still a government.
So if someone wants some wealth redistribution, and some government. They are just arguing how much of a Libertarian Socialist they are, not how much of a anarcho-capitalist they are.
I personally am a Social Democrat. Capitalism is good most of the time, just make sure you’re holding the reigns tight so it goes in the right direction. Skip capitalism altogether for specific industries where it just doesn’t do very well and have the government run those ones directly.
I’m neither a libertarian socialist, nor an anarcho-capitalist. Not even close to either of them, because again, it isn’t a spectrum.
A georgist could use a land value tax to fund a minimum income program. Can social welfare programs be rolled out mostly (but not completely) outside of the state through ngos and non-profits?
It depends on what you mean by social welfare programs.
A basic income system requires very little administration, and what parts of it are required wouldn’t make sense to have it sitting outside the government.
I’d rather see a basic income than need non-profit food banks needing to exist. Grocery stores already exist, are reasonably competitive, and are enormously more efficient if people have the money available to use them.
For things like helping people with disabilities, where economies of scale are mostly irrelevant, ngos and non-profits can make more sense because they can specialize according to the need.
Why would it not make sense?
The administration of a basic income sitting outside of the government?
The government already has a list of every citizen registered via birth or immigration, and provides identification for people. They’re always going to need to do that. There’s really no reason to replicate that level of information outside of the government.
Most people would just go online and register where you’d like your money to be sent (Direct deposit, Mailed cheque)
However, you would still need a few call centers to handle issues, and If someone needs in-person support, the government already has common government service offices like DMVs and service centers that can provide in person service if required, saving significant money on needing dedicated service locations just for this one service.
Tl;dr Economies of Scale matter, and it doesn’t make any sense to replicate the parts that the government already does and has to continue doing.
What would it be a spectrum of? Either you think society needs to be ruled by elites (right wing) or you think society should run itself based on universal rights (left wing).
How would you have elites without government?
Are you asking why governments exist or what classes are?
I believe in universal rights.
Class systems predate governments so, no I don’t think governments as we know them are a prerequisite for class systems. Class systems are always perpetuated with violence so when a state has a monopoly on violence then class systems can only be upheld with state approval.
Because it’s an axis
Did you mean “gradient” instead of “spectrum”?