May Day Protests

[Tesco in Disguise]

I don't know a great deal about economics and politics but I see 2 things that would make a difference, regulated capitalism (I fully expect to be told I'm wrong) and people just be more considerate to each other.

As I said I know next to nothing about these issues so if someone wishes to educate me I am happy to listen. I find the world quite upsetting but like most people politics bore me. My degree was in film and I focused on Psychoanalytic theory so if anybody want to hear about masculinity in relation to Memento please don't let me know.

it bores most people, les. i did my degree in political philosophy and i find it dry. politicians themselves are not totally without blame on that one.

you're absolutely right, though. capitalism cannot be avoided. indeed it is necessary at basic levels for the fair distribution of goods and services (the value you put on something will be more than the value others put on it - we are all different, after all). what it does need, however, is heavy regulation. left unabated, the priviledged become stronger and able to further promote and protect themselves, the weaker subject to darwinist termination. but there is no easy answer to this. one idea is massive taxes on the incredibly wealthy (how much money do you NEED, considering there are those go with nothing through no fault of their own). this can only be acheived if there is common policy amongst all countries on earth. which needs a global government. and that just ain't happening.

 

[Parson Henry]

We call them GCSEs now. I have my righting and spulling ones of these.

GCSE is that what you get for turning up for more than 75% of the lessons (In any given subject) you were supposed to?

 

[Les Biehn]

it bores most people, les. i did my degree in political philosophy and i find it dry. politicians themselves are not totally without blame on that one.

you're absolutely right, though. capitalism cannot be avoided. indeed it is necessary at basic levels for the fair distribution of goods and services (the value you put on something will be more than the value others put on it - we are all different, after all). what it does need, however, is heavy regulation. left unabated, the priviledged become stronger and able to further promote and protect themselves, the weaker subject to darwinist termination. but there is no easy answer to this. one idea is massive taxes on the incredibly wealthy (how much money do you NEED, considering there are those go with nothing through no fault of their own). this can only be acheived if there is common policy amongst all countries on earth. which needs a global government. and that just ain't happening.

To me capitalism seems work on two levels. As a skewed meritocracy in western countries and as a free for all exploitation in the developing world. I may be very wrong on this though.

 

[Nibble]

Capitalism doesn't really work unless you have capital in the first place but I wouldn't be so bold as to suggest an alternative any further than saying any system that ignores countries who cannot afford to feed and clothe every one of its' citizens while global corporations announce profits into the hundreds of billions needs a radical f***ing rethink.

 

[Tesco in Disguise]

GCSE is that what you get for turning up for more than 75% of the lessons (In any given subject) you were supposed to?

only if you want an 'a'.

 

[Lokki 7]

I don't know a great deal about economics and politics but I see 2 things that would make a difference, regulated capitalism (I fully expect to be told I'm wrong) and people just be more considerate to each other.

As it happens Les, this is exactly my personal view (rightly or wrongly). TiD assumes my politics but i agree that capitalism in its purest form does not work. The fact is in the real world there is no such thing as pure capitilism so that is kind of irrelavant anyway. The capitalist process promotes advance and that is what provides our standard of living. If you want someone to earn the money that pays for hospitals, education for all and infrastructure such as roads and railways then you need a form of regulated capitalism to provide the incentive. The general population majority is either lazy, greedy or self interested. Capitalism harnessess these traits.

 

[Skintagain 1983]

The Civil Service union (PCS) were out on strike today.
There were quite a few pickets on Edward Street by the Jobcentre.

Thanks for the report Yorkie.

There wasn't much coverage in the news for us (PCS that is) today.

200,000 members out and hardly a word from the press/media.

100,000 job cuts across the Civil Service.

Thanks Mr Blair/Brown. I hope you find out today what the public thinks of that too.

 

[Lokki 7]

Lokki, are you angry all the time?

Very rarely angry. Suffer from random bouts of passion from time to time.

 

[Nibble]

Fair play - I actually agree with your stance here.

 

[Tesco in Disguise]

The capitalist process promotes advance and that is what provides our standard of living.

it promotes advance, but at too great a cost. i would happily sacrifice the exponential growth of, say, computer memory storage, for a bit more social justice.

and 'our' standard of living is misleading. the western middle classes, sure.

 

[Buzzer]

i'd have to disagree with you there, southy. capitalism (if we are to take it in its purest form, i.e. no economic protectionism, no welfare state whatseoever) is an awful idea in theory and hellish in practise. thankfully, it has rarely been put into this kind of practice (though buzzer's heroes thatcher and nixon made a good fist).

like so many ideas about the best way to run a society, the dreams that they may give on paper are soon quashed when faced with the realisation of the selfish, apathetic, ignorant and corruptable beast that is the human race.

i still bleat on about it because i think it's important to express your views and spread ideas but in terms of making any significant change to the way the world is, i've long since learned just to give up.

Still making assumptions TiD. You assume Thatcher is my hero. Never was and never will be. Try von Hayek, Popper and of course Nixon who was a damn sight more liberal than a lot of lefties would have you believe. Economically; morally; socially I'm a libertarian - something that was an affront to Thatcherism. My bibles are von Hayek's the Road to Serfdom which is a damning rebuttal of an expansive public sector and Adam Smith's the wealth of nations - the best argument for private enterprise ever written.

As Lokki said, capitalism in its many forms may not be right but its the best and fairest system that we have. What's right for me isn't necessarily right for you and capitalism allows people to be individuals. That's why in the US, people are allowed to criticise the Government and the Government is open to public scrutiny whereas in Cuba, Zimbabwe and North Korea they murder government opponents. Socialism can only work if capitalists keep it afloat.

 

[Tesco in Disguise]

Still making assumptions TiD. You assume Thatcher is my hero. Never was and never will be. Try von Hayek, Popper and of course Nixon who was a damn sight more liberal than a lot of lefties would have you believe. Economically; morally; socially I'm a libertarian - something that was an affront to Thatcherism. My bibles are von Hayek's the Road to Serfdom which is a damning rebuttal of an expansive public sector and Adam Smith's the wealth of nations - the best argument for private enterprise ever written.

As Lokki said, capitalism in its many forms may not be right but its the best and fairest system that we have. What's right for me isn't necessarily right for you and capitalism allows people to be individuals. That's why in the US, people are allowed to criticise the Government and the Government is open to public scrutiny whereas in Cuba, Zimbabwe and North Korea they murder government opponents. Socialism can only work if capitalists keep it afloat.

ok, sorry buzz. that was an unfair assumption (and just so you know, if you didn't spot my correction earlier, the insulting comments i made were not directed at you).

i think we can perhaps agree that capitalism (or at least, theoretical, state-of-nature, free-market economics) stifles competition - the proposed advantage of a capitalist system. and that intervention is needed for a truly level playing field. it seems sometimes, capitalism is it's own downfall.

i sadly think you are wrong, however, to hold up the u.s. as being a beacon of free speech and governmental transparency. sure, there are totalitarian regimes around the world that are nothing like the states, but the u.s. certainly has a long way to go.

as i'm sure you have, i've done this argument to death with friends, family and colleagues alike. the arguments rest on basic tenets that i fear we will never agree on. so if it's ok by you, can we just kiss and make up?

 

[Buzzer]

You're still my valentine

 

[Les Biehn]

Making up is always the best part.

 

[Tesco in Disguise]

I'd take Oirish all day long.

he's my wife, now.

 

[Les Biehn]

he's my wife, now.

If you had ever seen him you wouldn't even say that as joke.

 

[Hatterlovesbrighton]

Thanks for the report Yorkie.

There wasn't much coverage in the news for us (PCS that is) today.

200,000 members out and hardly a word from the press/media.

100,000 job cuts across the Civil Service.

Thanks Mr Blair/Brown. I hope you find out today what the public thinks of that too.

The strike might have been well supported in Scotland but down here it was patchy at best. There were about 2 people out on strike on my floor and far more PCS members were in than were out. I think most people are begining to see the PCS as far too politically motivated, especially with Serwotka speaking on a Respect platform.