this post was submitted on 03 Nov 2024
1127 points (98.5% liked)
AMUSING, INTERESTING, OUTRAGEOUS, or PROFOUND
679 readers
185 users here now
This is a page for anything that's amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
♦ ♦ ♦
RULES
① Each player gets six cards, except the player on the dealer's right, who gets seven.
② Posts, comments, and participants must be amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound.
③ This page uses Reverse Lemmy-Points™, or 'bad karma'. Please downvote all posts and comments.
④ Posts, comments, and participants that are not amusing, interesting, outrageous, or profound will be removed.
⑤ This is a non-smoking page. If you must smoke, please click away and come back later.
Please also abide by the instance rules.
♦ ♦ ♦
Can't get enough? Visit my blog.
♦ ♦ ♦
Please consider donating to Lemmy and Lemmy.World.
$5 a month is all they ask — an absurdly low price for a Lemmyverse of news, education, entertainment, and silly memes.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Attributing the failures of social security to Reagan and the GOP shows how uninformed you are on the issue. Reagans actions were in response to social security ALREADY being almost out of money. His plan obviously didn't work. My point is that social security's failure was (and still is) inevitable since governments, as an organization, simply can't run programs like that on this scale due to: bureaucratic inefficiency, lack of knowledge (see central planning), political motivations outweighing the objectives of the program in decision making, lack of accountability, lack of flexibility and responsiveness to changes, and unstable funding.
What do you call the excessive bureaucracy, lack of accountability, political motivations, and unstable funding associated with private health insurance?