end of capitalism.

well this is my opinion so please don't bite my head off!

as im sure your all aware the world is suffering a major backlash due to the so called credit crunch. the whole question of capitalism is in question. the state is having to nationalise banks in UK and US.

so in order to save capitalism falling apart at the seems, the state has intervened here in the UK and in the US. The countries that are suffering the most from this global credit crunch are those that have embraced capitalism the most. The irony being that they need the left wing ideology (nationalisation) in order to save the day.

well my question is do people think that our government here in the UK needs to move to the left. according to the news today 52% support for the tory's. People would be willing to vote for a man who after all is only leader of the opposition but uses a private jet, whilst in the same breath preaches about global warming. Dont get me wrong, i dont like Brown either, he lost any credibility with me when he canceled the last general election.

but i really think we need to take a more left wing / liberal / green approach in the future, in order to prosper in the future. I dont think any party has a complete solution to the current crisis, but all i know is things need to change.

im asking for everyone elses opinions. what do you all think? what would you vote if and election was held tomorrow?

ive added 1 extreme left and 1 right party.

i see two extreme right-wing parties

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by directhex

i see two extreme right-wing parties

---

well ukip aint quite BNP is it! and to be fair there is socialist and respect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

well ukip aint quite BNP is it! and to be fair there is socialist and respect.

---

no? ukip candidate for mayor of london describes rape as fun for all involved as force-feeding a woman chocolate cake?

not sure i'd say they're "not bad", they're the "intelligent design" to the bnp's "creationism"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by directhex

no? ukip candidate for mayor of london describes rape as fun for all involved as force-feeding a woman chocolate cake?

not sure i'd say they're "not bad", they're the "intelligent design" to the bnp's "creationism"

---

sure you have a point, and i agree with what you say, i just think i needed to add them to make the poll more balanced.

Capitalisim has no 'need' for the banks to be saved.

The idea to save Fanny + Freddie is not born from a straight capitalist idea, indeed in true sense they are in-efficient and should fail, clearing the space for a more efficient solution.

What happened was a socalist idea, that was designed to prevent the devistating collapse of the economy that would of followed, such intervention has no place in true capitalisim. It was this that gave the desire to stop people loosing their homes, their jobs, their places of work and the onslaught that would follow.

Capitalism and social development are not diametrically opposed.

The classic story i like, was during the 60s, a russian general who was visiting london asked his host if he could possibly meet with the person in charge of keeping london so very well stocked with bread.

What we should see is capitalisim adapt itself so it can better understand the market, and spread risk (this is a fundamental idea of investment, and a very honorable one) property indecies should be extended. Home owners should be able to buy puts on the appropriate property index, with this they would have protection against negative equity, mortgage companies would have a better insight into market confidence and such.

We're not even close to the problems that where seen during the 30s, the new deal enterprise was far more than socialism in the form of re-distrabution of wealth, quite the opposite, the hand outs where designed to spark economic growth and developement, not to some arrogant rubbishrubbishrubbishrubbish of a PM's personal plan, but wherever the economic free market saw fit. It was economics applied with compassion that saved the USA, not socalisim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

Capitalisim has no 'need' for the banks to be saved.

The idea to save Fanny + Freddie is not born from a straight capitalist idea, indeed in true sense they are in-efficient and should fail, clearing the space for a more efficient solution.

---

lol im sure your right in principle, in practice if a large bank collapses and takes with it peoples savings, and the government cant afford to compensate the people who lost out, your talking meltdown, anarchy and chaos within the rest of the banking system and the country as a whole.

already withdrew all my savings and keeping it as cash for next few months. no more money left in the kitty for the next one that goes bust. would you give me 100/1 on Barclays within 2 weeks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

lol im sure your right in principle, in practice if a large bank collapses and takes with it peoples savings, and the government cant afford to compensate the people who lost out, your talking meltdown, anarchy and chaos within the rest of the banking system and the country as a whole.

already withdrew all my savings and keeping it as cash for next few months. no more money left in the kitty for the next one that goes bust. would you give me 100/1 on Barclays within 2 weeks?

---

Don't forget that all deposits in banks registered with the FSA are covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme up to the first £35,000 per person per FSA registration.

If your "savings" exceed £35,000, then you need to be careful about different trading names that are actually the same organisation, like Abbey and Cahoot, or Halifax and Intelligent Finance, and make sure that you shift it to organisations that have different FSA registration numbers, but providing you do that, the FSA gives a government guarantee for deposits (and it's founded by the banking industry as a whole, not the taxpayer). If they don't exceed £35,000, they're protected anyway, as long as you don't have them in a foreign bank that isn't FSA registered ... and even them you may have protection under similar schemes operated by that bank's home country's regulator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

well this is my opinion so please don't bite my head off!

as im sure your all aware the world is suffering a major backlash due to the so called credit crunch. the whole question of capitalism is in question. the state is having to nationalise banks in UK and US.

so in order to save capitalism falling apart at the seems, the state has intervened here in the UK and in the US. The countries that are suffering the most from this global credit crunch are those that have embraced capitalism the most. The irony being that they need the left wing ideology (nationalisation) in order to save the day.

well my question is do people think that our government here in the UK needs to move to the left. according to the news today 52% support for the tory's. People would be willing to vote for a man who after all is only leader of the opposition but uses a private jet, whilst in the same breath preaches about global warming. Dont get me wrong, i dont like Brown either, he lost any credibility with me when he canceled the last general election.

but i really think we need to take a more left wing / liberal / green approach in the future, in order to prosper in the future. I dont think any party has a complete solution to the current crisis, but all i know is things need to change.

im asking for everyone elses opinions. what do you all think? what would you vote if and election was held tomorrow?

ive added 1 extreme left and 1 right party.

---

What is your definition of Capitalism?

"left wing / liberal / green approach" is going to get you nowhere except a dark future - literally the lights will turn off and you will have no internets. People have to realise that we, in the west, are far too gone to go back to a command economy and subsistence living which is ulitmately what would result from "green" policies. Call me when the US defaults on it's repayments.

The Stock Market crash of the late 20's/30's, whereby the DOW Jones index took until 1954 to regain the market level of 1930 didn't kill capitalism and that was far worse than we see now. Infact one of the reasons for such a deep recession then was the lack of central banks and their governments to make "money" available. We are seeing governments act. It's not pretty, but reform and better regulation will end up being the order of the day and we will have a more secure system (until someone else decides to cut the reins).

A centrally commanded economy is doomed to failure, the USSR is a case in point. There are no doubt hard times ahead and we live in interesting times, but this shock will make people and banks and governments more wary and sensible. That will lead to greater stability in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

Don't forget that all deposits in banks registered with the FSA are covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme up to the first £35,000 per person per FSA registration.

---

Yep, amazing how many people don't know this. Withdrawing your money from the bank is madness!

In my opinion poor financial regulation on the US and UK governments behalf has led to this problem. Allowing the housing market to become so ludicrously overpriced and allowing the banks to make loans to people who couldn't really afford them were the major mistakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

If your "savings" exceed £35,000

---

'Nuff said. Happy days!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saracen

Don't forget that all deposits in banks registered with the FSA are covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme up to the first £35,000 per person per FSA registration.

---

That's very true, but if this situation goes to the extreme that it could potentially do how long do you think that guarantee will last? If Nat West, Barclays and Lloyds went down there's no way the government could afford to give £35k to every customer who had that much on deposit. Compensation would run into the hundreds of billions. I think we'd see that rule change very quickly.

I've already arranged with my financial advisor to get my pension funds out of stocks and shares based investments.

The most annoying thing about this is that the likes of George Soros, who siphoned billions out of the UK economy on "Black Wednesday", will almost certainly be on hand when it all falls over to add even more to their personal wealth at our expense.

I was watching a program with Martin Lewis (the MoneySavingExpert bloke) shortly after the Northern Rock fiasco, and he mentioned this FSA guarantee. But he then research into it and found it only had £4bn or so, and couldn't cover the top 20 banks. Personally, I'm keeping my savings in the bank (HSBC) for the time being. Will be a couple of years yet before I hit the £35,000 mark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Betty_Swallocks

If Nat West, Barclays and Lloyds went down there's no way the government could afford to give £35k to every customer who had that much on deposit.

---

But when it comes down to it, there aren't many people out there who have more than £35,000 in savings. I'd be very suprised if it was more than 0.01% of the UK population. Admittedly, that's still a lot of people, but as it's supported by the international finance, they could probably pull it off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gerrard

I was watching a program with Martin Lewis (the MoneySavingExpert bloke) shortly after the Northern Rock fiasco, and he mentioned this FSA guarantee. But he then research into it and found it only had £4bn or so, and couldn't cover the top 20 banks.

---

Then make sure to read his follow up. The FSA has legislation in place to borrow any additional money required and continue taking payments off other financial institutions until this loan is then cleared.

OT, I don't think this has anything to do with the end of capitalism - it'll only come out stronger as a result. You need some negatives from time to time otherwise you don't actually select for better methods.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

already withdrew all my savings and keeping it as cash for next few months. no more money left in the kitty for the next one that goes bust. would you give me 100/1 on Barclays within 2 weeks?

---

This views do NOT consitute any implied investment advice.

Barcap is sound, they've just bought whats left of Lehman's US (when its been section 11'd they create like a good bank to sell on, and a bad bank that is just going to default.)

Now when you put your money in a regulated UK bank, the BoE guarantees it upto 35k. If you've got more than £35k in a regular bank account you DESERVE to loose it for been a tit.

So taking your cash out isn't really necessary, clever or going to help things.

Now in our "who's next sweep stake" I've got the Yorkshire building society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

Now when you put your money in a regulated UK bank, the BoE guarantees it upto 35k. If you've got more than £35k in a regular bank account you DESERVE to loose it for been a tit.

---

Interesting sweeping generalisation there. What about the self employed? What about small businesses? Many of them will have balances over 35k, but won't be in a position to push that into other assets as they require liquidity and 'safety' for tax reasons.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

Now when you put your money in a regulated UK bank, the BoE guarantees it upto 35k. If you've got more than £35k in a regular bank account you DESERVE to loose it for been a tit.

So taking your cash out isn't really necessary, clever or going to help things.

Now in our "who's next sweep stake" I've got the Yorkshire building society.

---

well its only £35,000 on paper and if what Gerrard says is true about £4bn set aside, that would only have covered a very small percentage of HBOS savers due to the massive funding gap.

as for helping things, i have little money to lose, but what i have i dont want to risk, if panic withdrawals are gonna become part of the problem, id rather get mine out now before the queues start and the "No money left" sign goes up in my banks window.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by b0redom

Interesting sweeping generalisation there. What about the self employed? What about small businesses? Many of them will have balances over 35k, but won't be in a position to push that into other assets as they require liquidity and 'safety' for tax reasons.

---

You generally don't have a regular bank account in those situations!

Where my sweeping generalisation hurts is those who are say buying a house or a car, who have a very temporary need to hold such assets in cash.

Also HBOS was never in any situation where it looked like depositors where going to loose their money, the way the legislation is in place puts depositors above people who hold bonds, the £4bn reserve pile probably wouldn't need to be touched. Also, its worth noting that set asside dosen't mean more can't be relatively easily created.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

well its only £35,000 on paper and if what Gerrard says is true about £4bn set aside, that would only have covered a very small percentage of HBOS savers due to the massive funding gap.

as for helping things, i have little money to lose, but what i have i dont want to risk, if panic withdrawals are gonna become part of the problem, id rather get mine out now before the queues start and the "No money left" sign goes up in my banks window.

---

Where you going to put it? under your mattress?

If you really are worried stick it in Northern Rock - cant get a much safer bank to hold you money in right now :rockon2: <- No pun intended

HAY! i don't see the raving looney party on there :innocent: (tho i would not vote for them)

Why dont they just let the banks fall and sue people who were responsible for bad debts? No, the socialists will use public money to prevent such collapse and to defend those who are responsible for the current crysis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

.....what i have i dont want to risk, if panic withdrawals are gonna become part of the problem, id rather get mine out now before the queues start and the "No money left" sign goes up in my banks window.

---

But your risk is now theft or fire and depletion of value as your money won't keep pace with inflation. For 100&#37; safety (albeit a poor return as the price paid for caution) you could stick your money in National Savings.

I don't give a monkeys anyways cos I ain't got no money - the ex took it all :lol:

As for politics, there are no opposites anymore, current labour party adopted Thatcher's policies for their own and called them Labour policies, which is why that div Cameron can't get elected, there is no Labour Party anymore.

The Lib/Dems will only make their minds up about policies when they're elected, which will probably be never.

The Greens want to stop me driving my big old Mercedes, which I enjoy immensely, so to hell with them. And I'm allergic to horses as well, so double to hell with them :D

As for the BNP I know of plenty of landfill spaces that still have some room left.

Ah yes, capitalism, survival of the fittest.

I was once an idealist now I'm a realist. I've survived so far, so yes, I'd support capitalism because the alternative doesn't bear thinking about.

I think Capitalism with a Socialist safety net (more or less what we have now) is about right.

But politicians - I hate them all :)

My goodness - that was a bit of a ramble wasn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by floppybootstomp

I think Capitalism with a Socialist safety net (more or less what we have now) is about right.

---

i agree with pritty much all of what you said, apart from the last part of this sentence.

how is it about right? its immoral. You cant have a system that allows companies to make obscene amounts of money, and when it gets too greedy and pops, is bailed out by the tax payer. what really gets to me is the fact that the super rich bosses will still get there fat pay packets while everyday people will be worse off. its a joke IMO.

if i had my way, id round up all the super rich, make them wear T-shirts with pictures of the Prophet Mohammad on the front, drop them off in Helmand Province armed only with a bacon sandwich and a copy of Razzle.

i hope you see my point!

j1979. How much tax do you think these people generate?

Do you think that over the last 5 years, including all the bailouts (including things like nrk which in many ways was el Gordo's fault, see other threads for my justifications for such a statement) and guess what, they are still in a net plus.

Whats very worrying is the moral hazard that people such as the directors of Fanny and Freddie get their bonuses after really screwing the pooch, that makes no sense, that is until you understand that these remunerations where arranged long ago. My boss earns about 100 times more than my combined basic + bonus, but, if the desk starts going down under he would be out in an instant, he has risk for his reward, that said, even if he screws up, he's still getting a 7 figure payout. Its simply the fear that he would leave for another company, and loose us a hell of a lot more than his wage that allows him to bargin this. Last year i had a secured bonus as part of the package they used to lure me to them. These practices are common and a necessary way of getting talent.

But then again in economics its all to easy to blame factors as moral hazard without suggesting alternatives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

i hope you see my point!

---

Well yes I do old boy, I do indeed.

Your point seems to be you're filled with hatred over something you can't quite put your finger on. Perhaps.

You see, humans being humans, most people want to be stinking rich.

And when they're not stinking rich, the almost obscene way in which the super rich are massaged by the State does rather irk them, does it not?

Me, I honestly don't care anymore, if I'm clothed, fed, warm, can afford a few beers and play CoD4 online and go see British Sea Power play at the Roundhouse this October, I'm more or less happy.

More or less. I am, shall we say, getting somewhat long in the tooth and I've finally realised it doesn't matter.

It really doesn't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by floppybootstomp

Well yes I do old boy, I do indeed.

Your point seems to be you're filled with hatred over something you can't quite put your finger on. Perhaps.

You see, humans being humans, most people want to be stinking rich.

And when they're not stinking rich, the almost obscene way in which the super rich are massaged by the State does rather irk them, does it not?

Me, I honestly don't care anymore, if I'm clothed, fed, warm, can afford a few beers and play CoD4 online and go see British Sea Power play at the Roundhouse this October, I'm more or less happy.

More or less. I am, shall we say, getting somewhat long in the tooth and I've finally realised it doesn't matter.

It really doesn't.

---

u sound a bit like noel coward. (no offense)

Its not hatred of the super rich, as you will see from my last post and what i would do with em. I clothed them, fed them and gave them some entertainment. id just like to see them have a tougher life or everyone else to have it as easy as them.

the super rich aren't likely to be going cold this winter because they cant afford their gas bill, or spending a night in a cell because they cant afford the council tax, they wont have to get a bus that stinks of piss, or live in a rented shared house, go food shopping every other day after work because thats all you can carry in one go on public transport. they wont have to think twice about getting married due to financial worries, or even raise a family. they wont have to buy dairy milks for xmas presents again. They wont have to bypass social events due to funds and lack of time. they wont have to cut the mouldy parts off food or wear clothes that have holes in. They wont even have to count their penies because they can afford the 10&#37; tax that is charged by the coin sorting machines in supermarkets. they generally wont have to worry about that much in all honesty. The only major financial worry they have is how to keep hold of their money.

im not complaining, i just think we need a fairer tax system, or capped earnings.

Because a &#163;1200 council tax bill is just under 10% of my wages.

20% income tax (after the personal allowance). 1% tv license, &#163;840 on a bus pass 7%. room in a shared house 25% bills 15%. i still manage to save money (desperately awaiting the house price crash) . so im not pleading poverty by any means (even though im well below the official poverty line) i would just like a fairer world, where the poor are less poor and the rich are less rich.

am i only saying this because of my situation? probably.


edit: ohh and i am aware that im a lot better off than the majority of the world population, before theAnimus throws that at me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

j1979. How much tax do you think these people generate?

---

not enough?

paying 40&#37; of their 7 figure salary, is not justification for their wages. a tax system can be changed. also 100 people earning &#163;10k each will put just as much back into the economy due to the distribution factor and the fact they will be paying 100 lots of none means tested taxes like council tax. Also the system is full of tax loopholes for the super rich.

BNP - 1 vote..

Who was it? lol I bet you posted in the "muslim youths" thread ;)

if only the green party and the bnp had been the other way around in the poll...

then it would all be the right colour :)

was it intentional?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

not enough?

paying 40% of their 7 figure salary, is not justification for their wages. a tax system can be changed. also 100 people earning £10k each will put just as much back into the economy due to the distribution factor and the fact they will be paying 100 lots of none means tested taxes like council tax. Also the system is full of tax loopholes for the super rich.

---

:lol: http://listentotaxman.com/index.php?...th&vw%5B%5D=wk :rules:

So thats 1.2k per 10k person per year.

Now, every person who just scrapes 6 figures, will pay in £32k?

So, thats the same as 29 10k per year people.

Be grateful for these people, they're paying for all the squandered money in the NHS.

Have you by chance been at a conference in Manchester this week? Do you think socialism is a remotely good idea? (not to be confused with compassionate capitalisim)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

:lol: http://listentotaxman.com/index.php?...th&vw%5B%5D=wk

Be grateful for these people, they're paying for all the squandered money in the NHS.

Have you by chance been at a conference in Manchester this week? Do you think socialism is a remotely good idea? (not to be confused with compassionate capitalisim)

---

ill say it again, the current tax system is not justification for obscenely high wages!!

And your political view point seems to be slightly obscured, if you think the labour party are in any way socialist. the Labour party are not even left of center anymore, but i would expect that from a suspected BNP voter.

i'm a BNP voter am i?

Sir, i might be many things, a fascist perhaps, but a racist no.

If you want to pay more tax, work harder.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

i'm a BNP voter am i?

Sir, i might be many things, a fascist perhaps, but a racist no.

If you want to pay more tax, work harder.

---

QFT

you sound just like Nick Griffin

really, i'm showing no signs of nationalism, far far from it, i'm instead a capitalist.

If you can't see the distinction then try harder! (either that or your just dumb).

But likening someone unjustly to a antisemitic turd, is a bit harsh really.

Especially considering how my grandfather died in Auswitch concentration camp.

(he fell out of the guard tower!) <-- is this a joke too far?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

QFT

you sound just like Nick Griffin

---

Sorry, where on earth did you pull that from- he sounds like a conservative with strong capatilist views but nothing more extreme than that.

You, on the other hand are some sort of communist who doesn't quite understand the political situation in the early 21st century. Its not the late 19th and early 20th century you know.

And as for argueing on the internet, you fail miserably and just sound like a sad envious person.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

really, i'm showing no signs of nationalism, far far from it, i'm instead a capitalist.

If you can't see the distinction then try harder! (either that or your just dumb).

But likening someone unjustly to a antisemitic turd, is a bit harsh really.

Especially considering how my grandfather died in Auswitch concentration camp.

(he fell out of the guard tower!) <-- is this a joke too far?

---

ok im sorry, i shouldn't have accused u of being the one who voted BNP in the poll,

it was below the belt, and i appologise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

Sorry, where on earth did you pull that from- he sounds like a conservative with strong capatilist views but nothing more extreme than that.

You, on the other hand are some sort of communist who doesn't quite understand the political situation in the early 21st century. Its not the late 19th and early 20th century you know.

And as for argueing on the internet, you fail miserably and just sound like a sad envious person.

---

emmmm. well, im not sure anyone knows the political situation as it stands. The USA is on the brink of financial meltdown and is asking the public for an average of $2000 for every man/woman and child that lives in the country. The money to be used to pay off bad debts, due to irresponsible lending. Sorry if im the only one who thinks thats unfair.

as for the Nick Griffin comment, he also thinks hes not Racist. (read the whited out bit in theAnimus's reply) although it was a joke!!?!

as for my understanding of the future political system, a major shift to the left in world politics or more war, thats what the future holds i guarantee you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

emmmm. well, im not sure anyone knows the political situation as it stands. The USA is on the brink of financial meltdown and is asking the public for an average of $2000 for every man/woman and child that lives in the country. The money to be used to pay off bad debts, due to irresponsible lending. Sorry if im the only one who thinks thats unfair.

---

Unfortunately that is not what the rest of your posts portray. Your hatred of the rich says something else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

emmmm. well, im not sure anyone knows the political situation as it stands. The USA is on the brink of financial meltdown and is asking the public for an average of $2000 for every man/woman and child that lives in the country. The money to be used to pay off bad debts, due to irresponsible lending. Sorry if im the only one who thinks thats unfair.

as for the Nick Griffin comment, he also thinks hes not Racist. (read the whited out bit in theAnimus's reply)

as for my understanding of the current political system, a major shift to the left in world politics or more war, thats what the future holds i guarantee you.

---

The political situation? Do you think that every man woman and child hasn't benefited by $2k? Do you think that these institutes since the last bubble burst haven't contributed that much in taxes?

A major shift to the left, have you ever heard of New Deal? Not the ****ty new labour thing, but the original 1930s design to pull america out of the great depression which had been caused by capitalisim. Guess what the answer was, un-adulterated capitalism thats compassionate. Capitalisim isn't designed to screw over the little people, far from it, it makes more sense to have more people earning more money because they can buy more things which makes more jobs more money for people to buy more things and means that we're not all starving.

If you don't share that view, just go on holiday for 1 week to a communist country.


Also don't confuse a marcarbre joke for racisim, there where plenty of people killed during those years, i'm actually been rude and insulting the memories of all of them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

The political situation? Do you think that every man woman and child hasn't benefited by $2k? Do you think that these institutes since the last bubble burst haven't contributed that much in taxes?

A major shift to the left, have you ever heard of New Deal? Not the ****ty new labour thing, but the original 1930s design to pull america out of the great depression which had been caused by capitalisim. Guess what the answer was, un-adulterated capitalism thats compassionate. Capitalisim isn't designed to screw over the little people, far from it, it makes more sense to have more people earning more money because they can buy more things which makes more jobs more money for people to buy more things and means that we're not all starving.

If you don't share that view, just go on holiday for 1 week to a communist country.


Also don't confuse a marcarbre joke for racisim, there where plenty of people killed during those years, i'm actually been rude and insulting the memories of all of them.

---

i didn't take your joke as being serious, ive edited my post to show that!

i would just like you to answer 1 question. In this capitalistic society, where does the money come from, who feeds us, who clothes us?

We do. We earn money for the clothes and the food. If we cannot afford them ourselves the state can help- that was the nice edition of the welfare state. However if you are not earning yourself you cannot expect to live like those that do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

In this capitalistic society, where does the money come from, who feeds us, who clothes us?

---

You work. You get paid. You spend your money on clothes, food etc which are provided by other people who work, and are paid.

its a simple way of motivation and making people want to better soceity. In a communist society they've often had problems with people who are pushing themselfs, getting no more than someone who works as a dustbinman. But the dustbinman actually has 8 children, which are all un-rulely and poorly educated, so they actually get more resources than the two teachers, who are raising only 2 children, but who's children actually know and understand things, and can be teachers or even more useful themself in one day.

Whilst in some ways its distastful to say some people are more useful to society than others, its a simple fact that THEY ARE!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by b0redom

You work. You get paid. You spend your money on clothes, food etc which are provided by other people who work, and are paid.

---

well you could call it getting paid i suppose! i wrote a report on fair trade some years back, focused on a major coffee shop chain. Well to cut a long story short, a coffee that was sold at the time for &#163;1.75 per cup of which less then 1p went to the grower, quite a bit less then 1p actually. it worked out as 1/1000th of a penny per &#163;1.75 cup.

it changed the way i thought forever. There was no hope for the grower, or his children for a future or even basic education. so sorry if everyone sees me as a "commie" but ive seen what our life in the west does to people in poorer parts of the world.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

its a simple way of motivation and making people want to better soceity. In a communist society they've often had problems with people who are pushing themselfs, getting no more than someone who works as a dustbinman. But the dustbinman actually has 8 children, which are all un-rulely and poorly educated, so they actually get more resources than the two teachers, who are raising only 2 children, but who's children actually know and understand things, and can be teachers or even more useful themself in one day.

Whilst in some ways its distastful to say some people are more useful to society than others, its a simple fact that THEY ARE!

---

the dustbin man example is perfect.

two parallel universes; in one of these all the GPs went on strike. and in the other all the dustbin men went on strike. in both universes people would die as a result! im willing to bet that more would die in the dustbin men strike. and im guessing here, but i recon there are probably about equal numbers of both GPs and dustbin men/women

what do you recon?

You can't keep moving the goal posts.

Farmers don't HAVE to provide coffee for 1st world nations. They could use the land to grow crops for local enconomies, but the fact is that they make more money selling coffee.

Consumers are well within their rights to only buy fairtrade coffee, but not everyone can afford, or will want to do so.

I really don't understand your argument. Are you saying that everyone should earn the same, no matter what they are doing? Who mandates what gets done then? Whoever is in charge will want to be paid more.

Communism will never work as some will always be more even that others, and it requires someone in the centre to mandate what is created, and how it is distributed rather than what the market demands, so you might end up with millions of tonnes of concrete which can't be used when you should have been making bread.

Extreme capitalism will never work because then I could go out and kill an entire village and pay off the police/judges etc and the populous as a whole would never sign off on that. It also allows for no form of social reponsibility which IMHO is a requirement of a developed country. What you can't do, however, is say that because someone earns more than you do, you have a right to have their lifestyle too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

the dustbin man example is perfect.

two parallel universes; in one of these all the GPs went on strike. and in the other all the dustbin men went on strike. in both universes people would die as a result! im willing to bet that more would die in the dustbin men strike. and im guessing here, but i recon there are probably about equal numbers of both GPs and dustbin men/women

what do you recon?

---

I reckon you're not the sharpest tool in the box.

Are you seriously telling me that you think that Doctors are dustbin men are interchangable? If there was a mass dustbin man strike, people would take their own rubbish to the dump, or councils would have other people come in and do the work.

No disrespect to dustbin men, they do an essential job, but it doesn't require years of training.

If all the doctors in the UK went on strike, you would have mass fatalities. Who's going to prescribe drugs? Who is going to set bones? Who is going to operate on people? Who would man the A+E to patch up people who had been in road traffic accidents?

j1979, you really have no idea, do you? Your arguements are rather off, especially as you can be a capitalist and ethical. If it concerns you then buy fair trade- I try to whenever possible.

And if dustment went on strike the army would step in. Not something that could happen with striking doctors. Not that doctors would these days- you might get a work to rule but our social conscience tends to kick in.

Really- your arguements are flawed and that of a GSCE student and no more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by b0redom

You can't keep moving the goal posts.

Farmers don't HAVE to provide coffee for 1st world nations. They could use the land to grow crops for local enconomies, but the fact is that they make more money selling coffee.
.

---

he didn't have a choice, coffee plantations were sold as an ideal to the growers many years ago, the traders come and take the coffee and exchange for $$$ the same traders then sell food back for the same $$$$.

they couldn't start any other crops any more than i can pull a 2 bed flat out of my arse. they were trapped and it was deliberate.

Fortunately the grower in the report is now part of a co-op and life is improving for him although 2 of his children did die. The coffee chain now sells fair trade goods also, which is a small step in the right direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

he didn't have a choice, coffee plantations were sold as an ideal to the growers many years ago, the traders come and take the coffee and exchange for $$$ the same traders then sell food back for the same $$$$.

they couldn't start any other crops any more than i can pull a 2 bed flat out of my arse. they were trapped and it was deliberate.

Fortunately the grower in the report is now part of a co-op and life is improving for him although 2 of his children did die. The coffee chain now sells fair trade goods also, which is a small step in the right direction.

---

You don't seem to see the flaw in your own arguement. There can be ethical treatment within a capitalist system. Your ideas drag everyone DOWN to the same level rather than up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

And if dustment went on strike the army would step in. Not something that could happen with striking doctors. Not that doctors would these days- you might get a work to rule but our social conscience tends to kick in.

Really- your arguements are flawed and that of a GSCE student and no more.

---

get a grip, im talking about a hypothetical world!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

get a grip, im talking about a hypothetical world!!

---

And therefore one that does not have any bearing on this discussion. You need to get a grip my friend. You are living in your own hypothetical world!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

You don't seem to see the flaw in your own arguement. There can be ethical treatment within a capitalist system. Your ideas drag everyone DOWN to the same level rather than up.

---

yes there can be a fairer world, thats why i fight for it.. thats why we get somewhere.

it wouldn't of happened if people didn't fight for it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

yes there can be a fairer world, thats why i fight for it.. thats why we get somewhere.

it wouldn't of happened if people didn't fight for it.

---

A lot of us are in our own way. However you see to be advocating some pol-potesque society dragged back down to the lowest common denominator.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

And therefore one that does not have any bearing on this discussion. You need to get a grip my friend. You are living in your own hypothetical world!

---

sorry maybe i imagined a world where people die from starvation and curable diseases..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

sorry maybe i imagined a world where people die from starvation and curable diseases..

---

Hehe, you really are in a bizarre little place of your own. That, as you describe is the real world, not the strange example you used in your hypothetical situation. No one denies that there are inequalities in the world and that we all need to do something for that.

You really need to think before you type, you are tying yourself in all sorts of knots!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dragonsden/img/.../peter_226.jpg

There's no arguing with some people, and for that reason alone - I'm out.....

....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

Hehe, you really are in a bizarre little place of your own. That, as you describe is the real world, not the strange example you used in your hypothetical situation. No one denies that there are inequalities in the world and that we all need to do something for that.

You really need to think before you type, you are tying yourself in all sorts of knots!

---

if you cant distinguish between the hypothetical situation i made up and the real experiences i was talking about, thats your issue mate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

You are living in your own hypothetical world!

---

the above quote is probaly why your confuddled

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

if you cant distinguish between the hypothetical situation i made up and the real experiences i was talking about, thats your issue mate.

---

I think you need to stop mixing up the 2 and then trying to argue them from strange standpoints- you make no sense.

Some advice- some of your views/beliefs come from a good place but they have become confused with jealousy etc. Take a step back and evaluate what you think and why you think it. This will help make your discussions coherent. They certainly are not now. And with that little pointer I can no longer be bothered to argue with you on the internets as at the moment as it is like banging your head against a brick wall :angst:. Have fun!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

I can no longer be bothered to argue with you on the internets as at the moment as it is like banging your head against a brick wall :angst:. Have fun!

---

no worries. :surrender: but im open to your ideas, i just don't see the world the way you do. perhaps because i don't live in London.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by b0redom

I reckon you're not the sharpest tool in the box.

Are you seriously telling me that you think that Doctors are dustbin men are interchangable? If there was a mass dustbin man strike, people would take their own rubbish to the dump, or councils would have other people come in and do the work.

No disrespect to dustbin men, they do an essential job, but it doesn't require years of training.

If all the doctors in the UK went on strike, you would have mass fatalities. Who's going to prescribe drugs? Who is going to set bones? Who is going to operate on people? Who would man the A+E to patch up people who had been in road traffic accidents?

---

sorry mate i said GPs not Doctors!

and all the GPs work could be done by other medical staff! like i said its hypothetical anyway.

:lol: your come back cant be "we will hire more Binmen". the job just doesn't get done in the hypothetical situation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

the dustbin man example is perfect.

two parallel universes; in one of these all the GPs went on strike. and in the other all the dustbin men went on strike. in both universes people would die as a result! im willing to bet that more would die in the dustbin men strike. and im guessing here, but i recon there are probably about equal numbers of both GPs and dustbin men/women

what do you recon?

---

Quite easily from illness that can't be treated. The vast majority of the population is capable of emptying rubbish bins. It takes YEARs to become a doctor, even then they often have to refer to consultants which have taken multiple decades of continued learning to get too the knowledge state they have.

A more interesting example is fire fighters, when they strike the army (who are paid less) come in, and have to manage fighting fires with inferior gear, and without spending all their time training to fight fires. This is a good example of how strike can be ignored if the quality of the work done isn't good enough.

Oooh Fair Trade, this is one of my pet hates. Anything that as a brand has to mention something that you would assume, is by definition somethign created by a lieing sack of poo. I call this Alex's rule of how marketiers are all lying runts.

So first off, what is un-fair about current trade in food produce? the CAP the Common Agricultural -lets not let france have to sack some farmers regardless of what it does to the poor people- Policy. This has the frankly perverse effect of meaning that in africa a tin of french tomatoto's will cost less than a tin of locally farmed ones. Given the difference in Land, Labour etc, this is just plain wrong and unfair.

Its the direct result of someone meddling with the freemarket, the french, rather than just drinking wine, eating cheese and surendering have caused a skew, by subsidising their produce to save a small industry, they are inflicting poverty and preventing economic developement in much poorer countries, contries that would better benefit from the jobs and money (because it would be a bigger relative jump... this point is highly debateable).

So what does fair trade do to stop this? Nothing. Oh dear.

There was an intresting case study done on a major trainer manafacturer in Vietnam i was reading whilst at uni, here Nike where paying something like $0.30 an hour. This ment the labour cost in a trainer worth $100 retail was less than $1. I bet your going to be thinking OMG they should pay them more. In fact no, they shouldn't be. Quite the reverse, they had caused such problem to the local economy because everyone wanted to work there, their average wage was simply too high for the local population to absorb. Teachers and Doctors could all earn more at the factory. Why on earth work a much harder job, where you get to see your kids less, when you can have an easyer job, and spend more time with your kids. The result was the local economy around it collapsed, the only surviving economy was a service based one, devoted to serving those who worked at the factory, as they where the only ones who could afford the services.

The coal miners. During this time of change it was found that coal could be MUCH easyerly obtained by mining in other parts of the world, often instead of going thousands of meters in dangerous underground labyrinths they could simply excavate with a JCB. This had a nock on effect to the price of coal, it became cheaper, so the miners in the UK had to be paid less.

But that didn't go down well with some people, its understandably hard to be told your job can be done a lot easier else where, in a place where people work all day for less than you get an hour. So they put the nail in the coffin. Either the government would of had to put tax on imported coal, subsidies UK coal (see french and the CAP been un-fair) or let the industry perish. The latter was the only logical choice thats fair for the world, and the UK in the long term. However luckily for the (then labour) government they really speeded up the demise by striking demanding more pay. At a time when the work you do is worth less, asking for a pay rise is a great way to stop you having a job tomorrow. By the time the strike ended, the UK coal industry had been devistated, largely replaced with african coal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

well you could call it getting paid i suppose! i wrote a report on fair trade some years back, focused on a major coffee shop chain. Well to cut a long story short, a coffee that was sold at the time for £1.75 per cup of which less then 1p went to the grower, quite a bit less then 1p actually. it worked out as 1/1000th of a penny per £1.75 cup.

it changed the way i thought forever. There was no hope for the grower, or his children for a future or even basic education. so sorry if everyone sees me as a "commie" but ive seen what our life in the west does to people in poorer parts of the world.

---

So lets get back to the BRAND that is Fair Trade. Ok why don't i like it been a brand? Well if its a concept then it should be awarded to anyones produce which meets requirements, not just those that pay them to be.

But more importantly, taking Coffee, the reason its so cheap is because there is millions of hectares of land it can grow on, where labour is cheap, people are so poor many are starving. So what happens if you try to pay more than the market rate? Remeber the trainer example (very extreme) or the french example? You in effect start playing god, saying this area should live, this one should die. In the coal example it made sense for UK to loose and Africa to win, because its easier to mine? But with this fair trade concept that choice isn't made rationally by who can do it the cheapest (which is a key concept of 'efficency' in economic theory) been a fair measure, but by some company.

I trust letting everyone decide via freemarket, more than letting one person decide via the dictatorship that is Fair Trade (which is probably is, if you can get it).

So what do i say we do instead? Simple the countries involved must bring in, and enforce basic laws, children should be school, people shouldn't be coersced into working etc. The problem is how to persuade the countries involved into doing this? It took us in england been at the forefront of the economic and industrial revolution to be in a situation to bring in such pleasantries. Putting on trade restrictions wouldn't help would it?

So hopefully that will of explained the folly of fair trade. Its a brand, a most cunning in an evil emotive way that regrettably seams to be fooling more than just the average Gardian reading Pot smocking Che Gavura shirt wearing uni student, who's funded by daddy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by b0redom

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dragonsden/img/.../peter_226.jpg

There's no arguing with some people, and for that reason alone - I'm out.....

---

Im going to make you an offer. I'll give you £5 for a 95% equity stake in you're company. Thats a great deal, you would be mad to turn it down!

http://www.thespeakersagency.com/upl...annatyne07.jpg

[QUOTE=menthel;1528276]Sorry, where on earth did you pull that from- he sounds like a conservative with VERY, VERY strong capitalist views but nothing more extreme than that.
[QUOTE]

It would seem I had you nearly right, TheAnimus!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

sorry mate i said GPs not Doctors!

and all the GPs work could be done by other medical staff! like i said its hypothetical anyway.

:lol: your come back cant be "we will hire more Binmen". the job just doesn't get done in the hypothetical situation.

---

If you've been able to understand my last post (which did while away a lot of my lunch hour, luckily i've got very boring tests to run!).

Right, Doctors are a subset of General Practitioners. And No, they're work can't be done by other medical staff, a consultant radiologist whilst able to prescribe any drug doesn't have the broad knowledge that a GP should possess.

And why dosen't hiring more Binmen get done in this hypothetical? If we assume there are only 5 working people on our planet. Bin men get £15k GPs, £75k, it might work, but if you then said Bin men get £20k GPs get £20k, try and find someone willing to do the extra work? Its not going to happen, and if all 5 are binmen, you need to tempt, only just enough (no more, thats waste and ineffeciency in a freemarket should be evolved out) until the gap is big enough to tempt people accross.

So going back to the hypothetical quoted, if that scenario happened, yes more bin men would be hired, or the army would come in, or even volenteers from the community who are sick of the smell. Why wouldn't they? They exist don't they? If GPs striked, where would all the replacements come from? Its not so easy to find. Hence they get paid more.

The same way people who clean sewage pipes get paid more because few people want to do it, even thou there are plenty of people who possess all the skills, people just don't like doing it, so they have to be paid more otherwise noone would do it.

I think i would still vote Labour but only if Brown wasn't at the helm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

Sorry, where on earth did you pull that from- he sounds like a conservative with VERY, VERY strong capitalist views but nothing more extreme than that.

---

It would seem I had you nearly right, TheAnimus!

---

I really never come across a system that makes me think that capitalisim when done properly isn't the best solution.

It has short comings when conduct isn't fair or is particularly one sided, when people con people etc. But laws can be created to address these short comings and keep the playing feild fair, a classic example is the APR, the in US (which let us not forget has seen hundreds of thousands of complex loans sold to home owners, which where cons) they don't have such a simple idea. Compound interest isn't understood by most people, they can't compare and contrast different peoples loan offers.

So they got shafted onto mortgages by sales people, who didn't care that they wouldn't be able to repay them, they where looking for a fast buck, which they made, but they weren't conscious of the damage that would ensue.

Your never going to be able to do anything about these little sh!ts, but you can legislate in a way that levels the playing feild, and tries to prevent problems that fit the classic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

So i'm conscious of the failings, its just the best solution we have by a long way, and the way to address the shortcomings we've seen of late (the US housing bubble burst which has lead to the miss trust between banks, the dispising of ratings agencys, etc) could easily be prevented from happening again by property indecies. The Subprime Solution is a coffee table fodder explanation of one persons idea how.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

There was an intresting case study done on a major trainer manafacturer in Vietnam i was reading whilst at uni, here Nike where paying something like $0.30 an hour. This ment the labour cost in a trainer worth $100 retail was less than $1. I bet your going to be thinking OMG they should pay them more. In fact no, they shouldn't be. Quite the reverse, they had caused such problem to the local economy because everyone wanted to work there, their average wage was simply too high for the local population to absorb. Teachers and Doctors could all earn more at the factory. Why on earth work a much harder job, where you get to see your kids less, when you can have an easyer job, and spend more time with your kids. The result was the local economy around it collapsed, the only surviving economy was a service based one, devoted to serving those who worked at the factory, as they where the only ones who could afford the services.

---

yes i see, so why didn't nike support the whole community? they can surely afford it, why dont they help the community to develop?

because they are ruthless thats why!

and fair trade is a marketing tool but like i said its a small step in the right direction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

I really never come across a system that makes me think that capitalisim when done properly isn't the best solution.

It has short comings when conduct isn't fair or is particularly one sided, when people con people etc. But laws can be created to address these short comings and keep the playing feild fair, a classic example is the APR, the in US (which let us not forget has seen hundreds of thousands of complex loans sold to home owners, which where cons) they don't have such a simple idea. Compound interest isn't understood by most people, they can't compare and contrast different peoples loan offers.

So they got shafted onto mortgages by sales people, who didn't care that they wouldn't be able to repay them, they where looking for a fast buck, which they made, but they weren't conscious of the damage that would ensue.

Your never going to be able to do anything about these little sh!ts, but you can legislate in a way that levels the playing feild, and tries to prevent problems that fit the classic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons

So i'm conscious of the failings, its just the best solution we have by a long way, and the way to address the shortcomings we've seen of late (the US housing bubble burst which has lead to the miss trust between banks, the dispising of ratings agencys, etc) could easily be prevented from happening again by property indecies. The Subprime Solution is a coffee table fodder explanation of one persons idea how.

---

I have to agree. I am all for what I would call ethical capitalism. Then again, I spend a lot of time thinking about ethics and ethical problems so I may be slightly preoccupied.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

yes i see, so why didn't nike support the whole community? they can surely afford it, why dont they help the community to develop?

because they are ruthless thats why!

and fair trade is a marketing tool but like i said its a small step in the right direction.

---

Please read the rest of my post before commenting.

Namely the CAP, and coal points.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

a consultant radiologist whilst able to prescribe any drug doesn't have the broad knowledge that a GP should possess.

---

no but google and a big medical book does.

if you suffer from a condition for a long time it will soon become clear that you will probably know more about the condition than your GP.

also id like to point out here, i dont think GP and Binmen should be paid the same, but i would like to see a smaller gap!

ROFLMAO

Are you SERIOUSLY saying that you'd trust a doctor who looked up your symptoms on Google?

Honestly, are you a troll?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

no but google and a big medical book does.

if you suffer from a condition for a long time it will soon become clear that you will probably know more about the condition than your GP.

also id like to point out here, i dont think GP and Binmen should be paid the same, but i would like to see a smaller gap!

---

I'd like to hope one day technology (as a keen technologist) can be used to address the poverty gap we see around the world with access to medical resources.

But with a view like that, i'm going to have to follow in the footsteps and say
http://www.corporate-training-events..._paphitis.jpeg
I'm out.

(and we're rapidly running out of good dragons... I wanted to be Peter Jones, or the scotish one)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by b0redom

ROFLMAO

Are you SERIOUSLY saying that you'd trust a doctor who looked up your symptoms on Google?

Honestly, are you a troll?

---

thought you were out? :lol:

and yes my current GP does!


after the last 3 misdiagnosed me for years with excema when i have got psoriasis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

But with a view like that, i'm going to have to follow in the footsteps and say
http://www.corporate-training-events..._paphitis.jpeg
I'm out.

(and we're rapidly running out of good dragons... I wanted to be Peter Jones, or the scotish one)

---

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNQRfBAzSzo

your all falling faster than lahman bros! :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

get a grip, im talking about a hypothetical world!!

---

A hypothetical world where there are no substitute for binmen/a binmen strike. I don't see the point in that. Such scenario has no practical use given a key component determining the value (and pay) of a profession is the availability of substitutes.

And no, I wouldn't trust any medical staff to do the job of a GP, nor have I caught my GP Googling during his job. If you don't trust your GP and find him/her incompetent, you can should just go to another one. I am sure I am not the only one who is reasonably happy with my GP.

There are no perfect systems, but I'd rather take my chances with a capitalist leaning system than a socialist leaning one. With the former, there is at least a chance for a hard working and/or talented individual to find the opportunity to move upward. With the later, you will not end up with 'everyone leading a comfortable life', but 'everyone leading a mediocre one', unless you can somehow find a solution to convince people under such system to be as productive as they would have been under a capitalist system.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TooNice

A hypothetical world where there are no substitute for binmen/a binmen strike. I don't see the point in that. Such scenario has no practical use given a key component determining the value (and pay) of a profession is the availability of substitutes.

And no, I wouldn't trust any medical staff to do the job of a GP, nor have I caught my GP Googling during his job. If you don't trust your GP and find him/her incompetent, you can should just go to another one. I am sure I am not the only one who is reasonably happy with my GP.

---

im not worried about my gp googling, or using netdoctor, or any other useful tool. im saying that i could do the job for myself, with the tools of the internet. i pritty much only need the GP for a second opinion, a prescription or referral to a specialist.

i dont think being a GP takes anything more than dedication and slightly above average intelligence. The thought that the people who become GPs are somehow better than those who become binmen, is a step to national socialism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheAnimus

Whilst in some ways its distastful to say some people are more useful to society than others, its a simple fact that THEY ARE!

---

As theAnimus said in his post that these people are worth less, they are not. the jobs that they chose to do may well take a higher level of dedication, and i agree they should be paid more, but my opinion is that the gap is too large. This huge difference coupled with lending to people who dont really earn enough to own their own homes is why we have the Sub-prime mortgage credit crunch from the US.

and my whole binmen / GP example was to try and point out that every person plays a part in the system, and if you take one element away it will cause problems.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

u sound a bit like noel coward. (no offense)

Its not hatred of the super rich, as you will see from my last post and what i would do with em. I clothed them, fed them and gave them some entertainment. id just like to see them have a tougher life or everyone else to have it as easy as them.

the super rich aren't likely to be going cold this winter because they cant afford their gas bill, or spending a night in a cell because they cant afford the council tax, they wont have to get a bus that stinks of piss, or live in a rented shared house, go food shopping every other day after work because thats all you can carry in one go on public transport. they wont have to think twice about getting married due to financial worries, or even raise a family. they wont have to buy dairy milks for xmas presents again. They wont have to bypass social events due to funds and lack of time. they wont have to cut the mouldy parts off food or wear clothes that have holes in. They wont even have to count their penies because they can afford the 10&#37; tax that is charged by the coin sorting machines in supermarkets. they generally wont have to worry about that much in all honesty. The only major financial worry they have is how to keep hold of their money.

im not complaining, i just think we need a fairer tax system, or capped earnings.

Because a &#163;1200 council tax bill is just under 10% of my wages.

20% income tax (after the personal allowance). 1% tv license, &#163;840 on a bus pass 7%. room in a shared house 25% bills 15%. i still manage to save money (desperately awaiting the house price crash) . so im not pleading poverty by any means (even though im well below the official poverty line) i would just like a fairer world, where the poor are less poor and the rich are less rich.

am i only saying this because of my situation? probably.


edit: ohh and i am aware that im a lot better off than the majority of the world population, before theAnimus throws that at me.

---

My goodness, this is a lively debate isn't it?

I haven't contributed for 24 hours or more so thought I'd chime in.

j1979, if nothing else, you're honest. From your posts we can see your soul laid bare.

This is not necessarily a good thing because this world is full of people with less than honourable intentions. Our Animus doesn't seem to be a bad soul either despite his declaration that he's a seething cauldron of hatred, lol

j1979, looking at what you've written, all your hopes, fears, ideas, suggestions, just about everything, seem to be based on hate. This is not a good thing.

Your argument/point of view and general rantings are eternal and age old. They come from a point of view of somebody working class and not happy with their lot.

To disguise their frustration at not being part of some privileged inner circle or super rich club your type choose to slag off the better-off sections of society then try and disguise your hatred and envy by preaching equality and fairness. It doesn't wash.

And by way of mentioning, I am very much working class, Birkenhead born son of a docker.

The bottom line is you're poxed off because you don't earn as much as those Hooray Henrys on the Stock Exchange, for example. You may want to try changing your mindset. Ever thought of working for yourself rather than being a wage-slave? Then you're controlled by nobody but yourself.

And if you can't face that challenge you have no right to moan.

You have to realise that's the way it is, that's the way it's always been and that's probably the way it will stay. Those who try and change the very human nature of the workforce are doomed to failure (see Wikipedia entries under 'Communism')

Your ideals are fine, though unworkable, but your approach is full of hatred, anger, bile and disgust - all negative aspects. I suspect naivety rather than a true revolutionary spirit.

Accept us for what we are - human, full of faults, greed, inequality but deep down really rather wonderful.

Forget the purely financial aspect and explore the spiritual.If you knew me, you'd say I was being hypocritical but it's true. Look at the bigger picture.

Are you HIV? Homeless? Suffer Cancer? Disabled? No? Then be grateful, earn your money, respect and love your fellow human beings and STFU whingeing and realise you're well off.

None of us are perfect but some of us try.

^-- What he said...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by floppybootstomp

Are you HIV? Homeless? Suffer Cancer? Disabled? No? Then be grateful, earn your money, respect and love your fellow human beings and STFU whingeing and realise you're well off.

None of us are perfect but some of us try.

---

did you not read the post you quoted? i said im currently able to save money and saving for my first home. im not in anyway unhappy with what i earn. i am unhappy with people who seem to think that some people are worth £1m per year. they are not!

Stirred up a can of worms here, eh?...

Basically the world is full of dying people , who dont want to die...
These people are split between rich people who may/may-not realise that they are rich and poor people..
Nobody on the whole planet asked to be born in their own situation (bar maybe a ferw) and what you get is a lot of very confused people wondering who they are, and why they are asked to think so much about something they know so little about.
Do what you can people ...you owe it to yourselves and to me and anyone else you care about...Be the best that you can be ... I , for one, will respect you.


Or kill you on sight

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

i dont think being a GP takes anything more than dedication and slightly above average intelligence. The thought that the people who become GPs are somehow better than those who become binmen, is a step to national socialism.

---

'Better'? It's so unnecessarily vague (better at what?) I don't think that's how that's relevant and didn't cross my mind.

Harder to become? Undoubtedly. You are downplaying what it takes using terms like 'anything more than' and 'slightly above', but even that rules out more than half the population without even quantifying the amount of dedication it takes.

How much education and/or training is required to become a bin man? No disrespect to any bin men out there, but I can't imagine any physically able individual with enough mental capacity to live/communicate on his/her own wouldn't be able do that job (training could even be done on the job).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

As theAnimus said in his post that these people are worth less, they are not.
[...] and my whole binmen / GP example was to try and point out that every person plays a part in the system, and if you take one element away it will cause problems.

---

This has likely been pointed out already, but you are conveniently ignoring the effect of substitutes on value. The most important things in the world has limited financial value if it can be found everywhere or a substitute can be found everywhere. This effect can be real of subjective.

If most people believe that the internet is a perfect/near perfect substitute for a GP, demand for GPs will decrease, and their wage and/or numbers would decrease. But while you may think that the Internet is an adequate substitute, it's clear that enough people do not share your views (for GP to be paid what they are paid).

Even IF the job of a bin man can be proven to be more valuable than that of a GP, their pay check will still suffer in comparison unless it is also found that a bin man actually requires years of education (with great results) and post-degree training to have a chance at being competent in that job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

i am unhappy with people who seem to think that some people are worth &#163;1m per year. they are not!

---

I don't know why you care. It's not like you are going to be better off if those those high earners decide to move out of the country. In your opinion, someone who starts with nothing, but successfully manage to build a private multi-million business (bearing all risks) do not 'deserve' 1M per year? Way to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship.

If there weren't any binmen, we'd need more GP's... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TooNice

'Better'? It's so unnecessarily vague (better at what?) I don't think that's how that's relevant and didn't cross my mind.

---

well that was my point!!! thats why i wrote "the thought that they are SOMEHOW better".

dont just take one word from a sentence. read the whole thing in order to understand what i was saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TooNice

This has likely been pointed out already, but you are conveniently ignoring the effect of substitutes on value. The most important things in the world has limited financial value if it can be found everywhere or a substitute can be found everywhere. This effect can be real of subjective.

---

ive not ignored the fact, yes job of binmen can be replaced by the army, as it has already been pointed out. But i was, as i have already pointed out, talking about the removal of the job from society. My point was just because its a menial job, it does not make its role any less important.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TooNice

If most people believe that the internet is a perfect/near perfect substitute for a GP, demand for GPs will decrease, and their wage and/or numbers would decrease. But while you may think that the Internet is an adequate substitute, it's clear that enough people do not share your views (for GP to be paid what they are paid).

Even IF the job of a bin man can be proven to be more valuable than that of a GP, their pay check will still suffer in comparison unless it is also found that a bin man actually requires years of education (with great results) and post-degree training to have a chance at being competent in that job.

---

as ive already pointed out several times now. i recognise that GPs deserve to be better paid than bin men. please read my posts again!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TooNice

I don't know why you care. It's not like you are going to be better off if those those high earners decide to move out of the country. In your opinion, someone who starts with nothing, but successfully manage to build a private multi-million business (bearing all risks) do not 'deserve' 1M per year? Way to encourage innovation and entrepreneurship.

---

No i dont think any person on the planet should be 100 x more wealthy than another! i will never be budged on that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by floppybootstomp

If there weren't any binmen, we'd need more GP's... ;)

---

ohh the irony :surrender:

if there werern't any GPs we'd need more Binmen to clear the bodies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

ohh the irony :surrender:

if there werern't any GPs we'd need more Binmen to clear the bodies.

---

The binmen wouldn't touch the bodies. It wouldn't be in their contracts...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

The binmen wouldn't touch the bodies. It wouldn't be in their contracts...

---

:)

they would if they felt more loved and appreciated!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

:)

they would if they felt more loved and appreciated!!

---

Thats a bit niaeve! Perhaps if they got paid a hell of a lot more they would. You have such a funny view of the world!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menthel

Thats a bit niaeve! Perhaps if they got paid a hell of a lot more they would. You have such a funny view of the world!

---

sorry i thought you were joking about the contract. turns out you weren't

note to self .... no humour in this thread!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

ive not ignored the fact, yes job of binmen can be replaced by the army, as it has already been pointed out. But i was, as i have already pointed out, talking about the removal of the job from society. My point was just because its a menial job, it does not make its role any less important.

---

It doesn't require the removal of a job, merely the time to train/contract new bin men. If there was a shortage of bin men, it probably wouldn't take long to find someone who can do the job full time (I am not referring to the army here, I am talking full time replacements). If it does, then it is indeed the time to raise their pay. If there was a shortage of GP, it would take many years to get replacements, short of attracting foreign doctors into the country (by providing higher pay and/or benefits).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

No i dont think any person on the planet should be 100 x more wealthy than another! i will never be budged on that.

---

I am glad we do not live under your ideals. I rather live in a system where at least some people have the opportunity to move up the chains than a system where everyone leads a lazy yet mediocre existence with no way, hence incentive, to work their way out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TooNice

It doesn't require the removal of a job, merely the time to train/contract new bin men. If there was a shortage of bin men, it probably wouldn't take long to find someone who can do the job full time (I am not referring to the army here, I am talking full time replacements). If it does, then it is indeed the time to raise their pay. If there was a shortage of GP, it would take many years to get replacements, short of attracting foreign doctors into the country (by providing higher pay and/or benefits).

---

i understand the mechanism, and the reasoning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TooNice

I am glad we do not live under your ideals. I rather live in a system where at least some people have the opportunity to move up the chains than a system where everyone leads a lazy yet mediocre existence with no way, hence incentive, to work their way out.

---

the world would be pritty boring if we all agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

the world would be pritty boring if we all agreed.

---

http://i274.photobucket.com/albums/j...s/icon_mad.gif no it wouldnt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by j1979

sorry i thought you were joking about the contract. turns out you weren't

note to self .... no humour in this thread!

---

I was joking, slightly. Having worked in the public sector I know that that kind of attitude is exactly what you would come up against.

well in the 1st vote for bailout in the US has gone against the President, wall st is in turmoil.

over here B&B was the next to fall (i predicted barclays), and even the Shadow chancellor agrees with me, that the super rich are paid too much. The torys shift to the left says a lot about the current state of the UK!

so who still thinks major political changes in the world we live in won't or shouldn't happen?

Resource based economy ftw! Get rid of money and employ technology. Everyone benefits.


Oh and on the binmen - bit of a perfect situation but a point to ponder nonetheless - Two men both try to become doctors, one succeeding with great success, the other failing due to a lack of education/money etc, becoming a binman. Each works as hard as the other at trying to become a doctor. Who should get paid more?


Neither.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by funke_munke

Resource based economy ftw! Get rid of money and employ technology. Everyone benefits.


Oh and on the binmen - bit of a perfect situation but a point to ponder nonetheless - Two men both try to become doctors, one succeeding with great success, the other failing due to a lack of education/money etc, becoming a binman. Each works as hard as the other at trying to become a doctor. Who should get paid more?


Neither.

---

thats a different perspective!! outside the box i like it...


but the question ive really got on my mind is why is Gordon Brown so happy at the moment? is it because he now knows he will go down in history? or because he likes a challenge ? maybe hes happy because the torys look scared... or maybe its because the labour dream of nationalisation is coming true.

any ideas?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by funke_munke

Resource based economy ftw! Get rid of money and employ technology. Everyone benefits.


Oh and on the binmen - bit of a perfect situation but a point to ponder nonetheless - Two men both try to become doctors, one succeeding with great success, the other failing due to a lack of education/money etc, becoming a binman.

---

Why would the other fail due to lack of money/education? If the system is working then everyone should have the education they need to get to uni (they do as far as I can tell) and then money shouldn't be a barrier to becoming a doctor after that due to busaries/loans etc.