Cynthetiq

As you stated they can be traded and sold off to corporations, so there is a dollar figure associated to it. Each individual has a claim to a certain amount of fish. It is these that are bartered and traded. I'm sorry if I'm confusing the ideas of "claim" and "stock" since the "stock" is the actual inventory of fish that is depleted and not replenished. Each Icelander has a birth right claim to an amount of fish. Since this commodity can be bought and sold, is regenerating each year, it gives a "bigger" value to the individual on top of the normal taxation revenues such as sales and income.

Again, this information is anecdotal from my outside conversations and "studies" I have yet to corroborate this information with treaties and laws.

So each individual has a contribution to the social system even if they are disabled, elderly, young and not working.

another note for the Icelander observations:

Icelanders aren't filling in the jobs that are required for their base industries. Fish factories are increasingly relying on outside labor (something you are studying as well ). Aluminum smelting factories are faced with the same issues.

From one of the studies I read, Icelandic teens interviewed stated they were not interested in working in either sector, that alone is problematic and will require outside the labor pool.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

guyy

As opposed to say... hmm... US-style cappy-happy-talisme where you work your ass off before, during, and after college so the Bush twins can drink their way through it?

What gets lost in debates like this is the nature of capitalism. Even capitalism has to allocate a certain amount of overhead for infrastructure and systems of social reproduction. Without these, it would melt into air. So, much as i hate to break it to you, you are already paying for the education of others.

Attacking from another angle, you could also call "working your ass off after high school to pay for -- egads! -- SOMEONE ELSE to go to college" "being a middle class parent."

ASU2003

This is a tricky subject. There is more to life than just working and making money. And there is a lot of luck in capitalism, along with the possibility of working hard to move up. Socialism takes out some of the risk, but limits how many people can reach a life of wasteful exuberance. Socialism is more adaptable as a long term solution, where in capitalism, you will see the top 5% succeed, but the bottom 95% fade away as they can't afford to keep up.

From age 0-25, socialism makes a lot more sense. You shouldn't be defined by who your parents are, but what you do with your life. I grew up in an area that was very similar in income, but went to school with the richest of kids and very poor immigrants.

From age 25-50, capitalism can let you keep more of your money. You can choose what you want to do in life and buy whatever you want. You might even save some money. In socialism, you have a more stable life where you don't have to worry about the stuff the government provides. You don't have to work the crazy long hours and give up family life and personal time to work for some corporation.

From age 50-death, the 401k in modern day capitalism is a hope that some people will be able to take out money from the stock and bond market to pay for their retirement. I would be worried that the market will crash if a large group of people keep taking out their money year after year, instead of putting it in year after year (and not taking it out) like they are right now. Social security is a lot like socialism, where the workers and companies are paying for the retirees based loosely on what they earned. Socialism has to government taking care of the retirees and is less risky, but also doesn't allow for them to gamble with having a big payday from betting your individual 401k will go up a lot.

So, I view capitalism as more you are on your own, but you might choose wrong, or may never be in the position to suceed in the first place. While some others will be economic winners just because their parents have money. Socialism protects you from some greedy people, but will tax you and make your life a little easier. Yet it takes away some incentive to create new stuff.

100 years from now is when things get interesting. There will be a large push to eliminate workers and replace them by machines. I have written some programs at work that would have caused more work for me or made it necessary to have another employee. But what happens when 25% of the current jobs get replaced by a computer, robot or terminal?