UKIP party conference

[Buzzer]

Is it any more ridiculous than Mustafa's "analysis"? At least Pastafarian's was tongue in cheek.

 

[Simster]

i didnt. why do you assume that public will be better? the delivery of service should be what we are concerned with, not the method of ownership of the provider.

as for education, the left wing policies of 50s-60s did more to harm eduction to the poor than any right wing policy could ever do.

It's quite straight forward - the only reason for any essential service to be delivered privately is where competition can drive improvement either through cost, quality or ideally both. It's not rocket science.

The main reason for this is that as soon as private firms are involved, there is already an inbuilt problem - a new group of people suddenly jumps to the front of the queue (ahead of the consumer) when it comes to which stakeholder is deemed the most important - and that group is the shareholder.

 

[piersa]

The worst thing to happen to capitalism was the end of communism - because capitalism no longer had to win over the people.

Right-wing politics was great last century, capitalism was the great bringer of wealth, it was perfect... for that time - again, my criticism of right-wing philosophies is that they fear change and social progression. The great problem burdening this world is inequality, which is increasing exponentially, we all know that - yet that is what right-wing politics stands for.

I am quite sure that your intentions when writing your posts are good ones. However your leftardism is something you should address quickly.

 

[drew]

Is it any more ridiculous than Mustafa's "analysis"? At least Pastafarian's was tongue in cheek.

Probably not. Whilst I would say I lean to the left, i wouldn;t necessarily align myself with Mustafa's somewhat extreme suggestions. Not sure about his comments relating to the end of communism! I presume he is referring to Russia (or in fact the USSR) however that was not a communist state other than in name.

 

[Kevlar]

well I suppose I should take that as a compliment
no cutting and pasting done just a few years familiarity with
Chartalism and Modern Monetary Theory.
You should try it and you to can realise that future generations
never will and never can pay of government sector debt.

 

[Buzzer]

Probably not. Whilst I would say I lean to the left, i wouldn;t necessarily align myself with Mustafa's somewhat extreme suggestions. Not sure about his comments relating to the end of communism! I presume he is referring to Russia (or in fact the USSR) however that was not a communist state other than in name.

Whilst there were many steps still to be taken towards full communism in those countries, I don't think it's particularly fair for the Left to wash their hands of the Soviet era. It was far from 'communism in name only'. They implemented many of the preliminary measures necessary for communism - command economy, class warfare, workers controlling the means of production, dictatorship of the proletariat and banning of opposition parties, compulsory political 'education', the necessary removal and prosecution of reactionary elements and counter-revolutionaries. It may not have been communism but it was certainly a dictatorship of the Left.

It does also make me think that it's unfair when Left-leaning observers make comparisons between Capitalism and Socialism and caveating that by saying that the Socialist system they advocate has never been tested. Let's compare like with like for once. Either Pure Capitalism (never been tried, never been tested) v Pure Socialism or the existing and historic Capitalist model in free market economies such as the UK and USA with a huge degree of social intervention v the existing and historic Socialist models.

The former just becomes a matter of theoretical debate whereas with the latter it seems to me at least that the system that has consistently brought about a more prosperous and fairer society is predominantly free-market but with a large degree of social responsibility - but maybe that's just me being a thick racist scaredy-cat.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

The democratic mandate for decision making at EU level comes from the European Parliament, for which you have the opportunity to vote for every 5 years - most recently last May.

So, if you didn't vote in the European elections last May then you don't have grounds for complaint. The UK turnout at the last European Elections was , wait for it............

35.6 %

Compare that with of 84.6 % for the Scottish referendum, or the 89.6 % turnout last May in Belgium.

If you don't use your vote in European Elections, then you'll get the kind of EU that Other People want. If UKIP got their supporters out then, what did the rest of the electorate want as a result? What they'll get is the kind of EU that UKIP want, basically a 'smash the system' approach.

Simples.

The absence of 65 % of the electorate from the poll tells us one thing, the vast majority of the UK is happy with the 'status quo'. And happy to NOT bother with a referendum. And happy to see the EU wrecked from within.

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

why not? you're talking about how provision is made available in the US, only to those that have paid up their insurance. i dont believe we should see this as all one way, or all the other. we can have private companies providing services to specification, with part of that spec they offer services to all free at the point of consumption. a third way if you will.

And you think politicians are competent enough people in Health, Education and other areas to actually WRITE these specifications?

Just look at rail privatisation and what Railtrack became to see what a specification written by a politician results in.......... What it resulted in was probably one of the most unsafe rail networks possible. The only people that profit from these kind of specifications are lawyers, middle men ( they call themselves rolling stock leasing companies ) and shareholders. The customer / passenger sits right at the bottom of their list of ' stakeholders '.

It took the abolition of Railtrack and restructuring as a 'not for profit organisation', to get Network Rail to actually make the Railways safe again to travel on.

 

[yxee]

So you don't believe in any form of taxation then?

Of course. I believe that there is some middle ground between communism and anarchy...

 

[34064 Fighter Command]

Whilst there were many steps still to be taken towards full communism in those countries, I don't think it's particularly fair for the Left to wash their hands of the Soviet era. It was far from 'communism in name only'. They implemented many of the preliminary measures necessary for communism - command economy, class warfare, workers controlling the means of production, dictatorship of the proletariat and banning of opposition parties, compulsory political 'education', the necessary removal and prosecution of reactionary elements and counter-revolutionaries. It may not have been communism but it was certainly a dictatorship of the Left.

It does also make me think that it's unfair when Left-leaning observers make comparisons between Capitalism and Socialism and caveating that by saying that the Socialist system they advocate has never been tested. Let's compare like with like for once. Either Pure Capitalism (never been tried, never been tested) v Pure Socialism or the existing and historic Capitalist model in free market economies such as the UK and USA with a huge degree of social intervention v the existing and historic Socialist models.

The former just becomes a matter of theoretical debate whereas with the latter it seems to me at least that the system that has consistently brought about a more prosperous and fairer society is predominantly free-market but with a large degree of social responsibility - but maybe that's just me being a thick racist scaredy-cat.

I think you'll find the Industrial Revolution and the movement of the population from the countryside to the urban areas between 1760 and 1840 was about as pure a form of Capitalism as it's possible to have. The result was a comparative few wealthy industrialists controlling a large proportion of the population in unfettered servitude. Child labour was rife, as was disease and poverty amongst those employed by factory owners. Those who couldn't work were left facing the Workhouse ( ie assistance from the Parish ) as their only means of existance. Oliver Twist should tell you what life was like in those institutions.

 

[Buzzer]

I think you'll find the Industrial Revolution and the movement of the population from the countryside to the urban areas between 1760 and 1840 was about as pure a form of Capitalism as it's possible to have. The result was a comparative few wealthy industrialists controlling a large proportion of the population in unfettered servitude. Child labour was rife, as was disease and poverty amongst those employed by factory owners. Those who couldn't work were left facing the Workhouse ( ie assistance from the Parish ) as their only means of existance. Oliver Twist should tell you what life was like in those institutions.

Whilst I'm not excusing the horrors of the Industrial Revolution and I'm certainly not advocating pure Capitalism - the vast majority of the "results" you refer to were pre-existing conditions and certainly not a new phenomenon peculiar to the Industrial Revolution. Child labour had been rife since before recorded history. Disease and poverty also. The Black Death wiped out huge swathes of Europe, the first pandemic in the 1300s accounting for over 50% of Europe's population. It's noticeable that the huge leaps in scientific and medical understanding also started during the Industrial Revolution and particularly in the UK.

Poor houses and debtors prisons had existed for centuries prior to Oliver Twist's historical setting, you can still visit the Bristol workhouse built over a hundred years before the Industrial Revolution reached Bristol. Well before that, the Elizabethans were passing Poor Laws that effectively gave towns and cities the right to compel the poor into forced work.

 

[Trufflehound]

The democratic mandate for decision making at EU level comes from the European Parliament, for which you have the opportunity to vote for every 5 years - most recently last May.

So, if you didn't vote in the European elections last May then you don't have grounds for complaint. The UK turnout at the last European Elections was , wait for it............

35.6 %

Compare that with of 84.6 % for the Scottish referendum, or the 89.6 % turnout last May in Belgium.

The high turnout in Belgium is entirely down to voting being compulsory there (as it should be in the UK). You risk a fine if you haven't got a decent excuse for abstaining.

 

[geodavies]

Joke party. Might get 1 seat at a GE and it won't be Farage's. They hopefully will take some of the Tory vote at the next GE. Labour appealing to their traditional support will get close to 35% of the vote. Cheers Nigel!

Farage will take Thanet.....mark my words

 

[drew]

Whilst there were many steps still to be taken towards full communism in those countries, I don't think it's particularly fair for the Left to wash their hands of the Soviet era. It was far from 'communism in name only'. They implemented many of the preliminary measures necessary for communism - command economy, class warfare, workers controlling the means of production, dictatorship of the proletariat and banning of opposition parties, compulsory political 'education', the necessary removal and prosecution of reactionary elements and counter-revolutionaries. It may not have been communism but it was certainly a dictatorship of the Left.

It does also make me think that it's unfair when Left-leaning observers make comparisons between Capitalism and Socialism and caveating that by saying that the Socialist system they advocate has never been tested. Let's compare like with like for once. Either Pure Capitalism (never been tried, never been tested) v Pure Socialism or the existing and historic Capitalist model in free market economies such as the UK and USA with a huge degree of social intervention v the existing and historic Socialist models.

The former just becomes a matter of theoretical debate whereas with the latter it seems to me at least that the system that has consistently brought about a more prosperous and fairer society is predominantly free-market but with a large degree of social responsibility - but maybe that's just me being a thick racist scaredy-cat.

Wouldn't necessarily disagree with any of what you have said except with the caveat that the fairer society is a capitalist one with a large degree of social responsibility being the left leaning fraternity with the right seeing a capitalist one with a lesser degree of social responsibility. A totally free capitalist society would have absolutely now form of regulation so the phrase 'caveat emptor' would have even more significance.

 

[cunning fergus]

The democratic mandate for decision making at EU level comes from the European Parliament, for which you have the opportunity to vote for every 5 years - most recently last May.

So, if you didn't vote in the European elections last May then you don't have grounds for complaint. The UK turnout at the last European Elections was , wait for it............

35.6 %

Compare that with of 84.6 % for the Scottish referendum, or the 89.6 % turnout last May in Belgium.

If you don't use your vote in European Elections, then you'll get the kind of EU that Other People want. If UKIP got their supporters out then, what did the rest of the electorate want as a result? What they'll get is the kind of EU that UKIP want, basically a 'smash the system' approach.

Simples.

The absence of 65 % of the electorate from the poll tells us one thing, the vast majority of the UK is happy with the 'status quo'. And happy to NOT bother with a referendum. And happy to see the EU wrecked from within.

It’s a fair point, however what’s the point voting for the MEPs when they don’t make any the laws of the EU? They are merely the gaudy bauble to provide the weak minded with an illusion of democratic legitimacy.

It’s the European Commission that makes the laws, so if we are going to have “democracy” that is who the electorate should vote for, and they should be accountable to the voters.

Did anyone vote for a policy of EU enlargement to incorporate Ukraine or possibly Turkey?
Did anyone vote for a policy of an additional 2.5% on all VAT
Did anyone vote for a policy of shit light bulbs and underpowered vacuum cleaners?

Those who are making these decisions are accountable to who?

The political structure of the EU is not democratic, it’s not been designed that way, even when referendums have gone against them they have barrelled them through anyway. A system where the powerful chose other powerful people is a politburo…………….when (or if) we get a referendum I suspect (like in Scotland) as these issues become clear there will be greater engagement.

 

[beorhthelm]

It's quite straight forward - the only reason for any essential service to be delivered privately is where competition can drive improvement either through cost, quality or ideally both. It's not rocket science.

the only reason? how about expertise, efficiencies, economcy of scale. not always applicable in all cases, the NHS is large enough to run many of its own services at scale, for example. I also dont believe competition is necessarily always suitable or productive. i do take your point though that typical private enterprise approach might not be suitable.

however i believe its possible to structure a business/public engagement so that profit are only a reward for success rather than an outright, overriding driver. as it is government goes to the private sector for money to pay for alot of the public sector anyway, with a premium repaid, so why do some cry so much when this is done on a more direct fashion? one way to view this is that government borrowing guarantees a profit, while a company would have to successfully deliver to see a profit. seems to me ideology is getting in the way of benefitting from the latter.

And you think politicians are competent enough people in Health, Education and other areas to actually WRITE these specifications?

a fair point, though those same politicians are still writing policy, so we'd be hosed eitherway.

 

[piersa]

Cheers. They are. I genuinely believe that equality and environmentalism should be the most important thing in politics - not just for our own quality of life, but certainly for those of our children who, if things continue as they are, will grow up to live in an extremely bleak era.

Capitalism has evolved into a corporatocracy, an oligarchy, where everything from the worlds resources, to world politics, to our individual lives, is dictated by the few who can afford it. Wealth is power, we need to return it to the people.

Capitalism is far from perfect but it's the most workable type of society that exists.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

If their record on MEP's expenses is anything to go by, the last thing we should be doing is let them anywhere near the Westminster system - it's only just been tightened up. I'd expect the first thing Farage would do as PM is award himself a huge pay rise and then make sure his MP's can claim for everything they can get away with.

Like Labour and the Tories have done you mean...er UKIP are not in power,so who is responsible for MPs getting a £9,000 extra then.
It has not been tightened up enough...they now employ family members as reseachers on £50,000...politicians, whatever party are corrupt enough. Why pick on UKIP...they are no worse than others.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Whilst I'm not excusing the horrors of the Industrial Revolution and I'm certainly not advocating pure Capitalism - the vast majority of the "results" you refer to were pre-existing conditions and certainly not a new phenomenon peculiar to the Industrial Revolution. Child labour had been rife since before recorded history. Disease and poverty also. The Black Death wiped out huge swathes of Europe, the first pandemic in the 1300s accounting for over 50% of Europe's population. It's noticeable that the huge leaps in scientific and medical understanding also started during the Industrial Revolution and particularly in the UK.

Poor houses and debtors prisons had existed for centuries prior to Oliver Twist's historical setting, you can still visit the Bristol workhouse built over a hundred years before the Industrial Revolution reached Bristol. Well before that, the Elizabethans were passing Poor Laws that effectively gave towns and cities the right to compel the poor into forced work.

You can still visit the Brighton workhouse/asylum....Brighton General Hospital.
My mother told me about racedays when the workhouse inmates used to look over the wall and hoped the punters would throw pennies at them.

 

[Czechmate]

Capitalism is far from perfect but it's the most workable type of society that exists.

Not sure capitalism has done much for family social life , Sunday always used to be for families to get together , now so many people work or watch sky sports down the pub so takes away the family environment . Bring back Sunday closing !! No chance so many large corporates have so much influence on the governments .