Are you implying that in America we don't have this?erianaiel wrote:Then there is the social-democratic basis for most of the political centre parties in europe (not to be confused with the national-socialist parties which are a different beast entirely). These are basically de-radicalised versions of the early worker unions. These political parties work from the premise that society has an obligation to provide a minimum standard of living and support for every member, regardless of their abilities and situation. It leads to higher taxes and a certain amount of coddling by the state (it is questionable how much of the oft vaunted by advocates of the American way 'loss of dynamic' effect actually exists and how much a society truly is harmed by or benefits from that affect). The flip side of that coin is that nobody has to go without medical care because they can not afford it, no children need go without education because it is too expensive for their parents (and I am aware that the USA has an extensive grant system in place but those are charity that could be ended at any moment, not rights of the children to the best education they are capable of following). It means that all roads and streetlights are maintained, not only the ones in rich neighbourhoods. It means people do not have to fear losing their job and sinking into homeless destitude with their family quite so much.
I assure you, rich people in New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, and so on, pay billions in taxes that are funneled directly to poor communities all over the South. We pay for their food, their roads, their schools, their health care (which they need a lot of, because they're morbidly obese). We even give them extra spending money on top of that.
All things considered, we are probably more socialist than you are.