This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Jeremy Corbyn
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
 johnfirewall  14 Aug 15 2.05pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 1.48pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 14 Aug 2015 1.46pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 11.19am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Aug 2015 11.10am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.53am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Aug 2015 10.13am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.03am
If you include people acting within a market economy then you could include most of the socialist countries. I'm not sure its true on a global scale either that people in sweatshops etc are empowered by stitching trainers or Disney toys, esp when they are children who instead of being schooled are producing goods. Nor those empowered by an inability to afford HIV medication, or those dying of preventable disease, unclean drinking water or suffering from malnutirion. When you step outside the first world, capitalism isn't empowering people so much as enslaving them. The generation of wealth for its own sake, is a problem. Captialism needs regulation and control so that it serves the interests of everyone involved, otherwise it creates unrest, dissatisfaction, insurrection and tyranny. Oh please. We're all against war, poverty and injustice. That is not an anti-capitalist position. Monopoly, oligopoly, corruption, price-fixing, cartels, graft, kleptocracy, these are a bigger cause of the stuff you mention than capitalism. That and, say, trade barriers erected by the likes of, er, the European Union which likes to protect its comfortable left-wing middle class from genuine competition. What does "capitalism needs regulation and control" mean? You need the state for all kinds of stuff but it shouldn't be running the economy. And where it does so - and this was matt_himself's point - it tends to impoverish rather than empower people.
1. Oh Corbyn will be a disaster, Well go back to the 70's. - is there any evidence for this or is it lazy conjecture. 2. Oh you're a lefty? You must want to live in North Korea as you agree with totalitarianism. Have you got any evidence that socialist economies work. Can you point to any non-capitalist socialist country that has not been an authoritarian dictatorship? Has Corbyn said he wants a socialist state? No. What he has said is that he wants those that caused the financial crash to pay for it, not people living on the breadline. He's on the deluded side who say that overspending wasn't the problem, as opposed to the more reasonable Labour supporters who are willing to balance the books. He's talking about renationalising everything. Maybe he could start with the Royal Mail, paying 50% more at the current price than it was sold for. Blame whoever you want for our debt but that sort of idealism will make things a lot worse.
|
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 14 Aug 15 2.11pm |
|
|---|---|
|
What did labour over spend on?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| leggedstruggle Croydon 14 Aug 15 2.14pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 1.59pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 14 Aug 2015 1.57pm
Quote Sedlescombe at 14 Aug 2015 1.51pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 14 Aug 2015 1.46pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 11.19am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Aug 2015 11.10am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.53am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Aug 2015 10.13am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.03am
If you include people acting within a market economy then you could include most of the socialist countries. I'm not sure its true on a global scale either that people in sweatshops etc are empowered by stitching trainers or Disney toys, esp when they are children who instead of being schooled are producing goods. Nor those empowered by an inability to afford HIV medication, or those dying of preventable disease, unclean drinking water or suffering from malnutirion. When you step outside the first world, capitalism isn't empowering people so much as enslaving them. The generation of wealth for its own sake, is a problem. Captialism needs regulation and control so that it serves the interests of everyone involved, otherwise it creates unrest, dissatisfaction, insurrection and tyranny. Oh please. We're all against war, poverty and injustice. That is not an anti-capitalist position. Monopoly, oligopoly, corruption, price-fixing, cartels, graft, kleptocracy, these are a bigger cause of the stuff you mention than capitalism. That and, say, trade barriers erected by the likes of, er, the European Union which likes to protect its comfortable left-wing middle class from genuine competition. What does "capitalism needs regulation and control" mean? You need the state for all kinds of stuff but it shouldn't be running the economy. And where it does so - and this was matt_himself's point - it tends to impoverish rather than empower people.
1. Oh Corbyn will be a disaster, Well go back to the 70's. - is there any evidence for this or is it lazy conjecture. 2. Oh you're a lefty? You must want to live in North Korea as you agree with totalitarianism. Have you got any evidence that socialist economies work. Can you point to any non-capitalist socialist country that has not been an authoritarian dictatorship?
I agree with you. Having a better benefits system within a capitalist economy is not socialism - the country is still essentially capitalist. What I am trying to put to bed is full-blown socialism as a viable system. Even China is now a capitalist economy. Unfortunately it still has the trappings of authoritarian socialism but hopeful as the people get prosper they will form unions etc and push for personal and political freedom.
I fully support unions. It is just a shame that many of their leaders these days play at politics rather than trying to improve the wages and conditions of working people. They should try harder to protect the interests of working people - should speak out about uncontrolled immigration lowering wages and taking jobs from their members for example.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| johnfirewall 14 Aug 15 2.17pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 2.11pm
What did labour over spend on? That's not my argument but ask Liam Byrne. The significant part is doing something about it, which he's not interested in, separating him from the other 3 candidates who have sided with the electorate in accepting the problem rather than concentrating on who's to blame. Edited by johnfirewall (14 Aug 2015 2.22pm)
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 14 Aug 15 2.20pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote johnfirewall at 14 Aug 2015 2.17pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 2.11pm
What did labour over spend on? Ask Liam Byrne.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| leggedstruggle Croydon 14 Aug 15 2.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote Sedlescombe at 14 Aug 2015 1.58pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 1.53pm
Quote Sedlescombe at 14 Aug 2015 1.51pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 14 Aug 2015 1.46pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 11.19am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Aug 2015 11.10am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.53am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Aug 2015 10.13am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.03am
If you include people acting within a market economy then you could include most of the socialist countries. I'm not sure its true on a global scale either that people in sweatshops etc are empowered by stitching trainers or Disney toys, esp when they are children who instead of being schooled are producing goods. Nor those empowered by an inability to afford HIV medication, or those dying of preventable disease, unclean drinking water or suffering from malnutirion. When you step outside the first world, capitalism isn't empowering people so much as enslaving them. The generation of wealth for its own sake, is a problem. Captialism needs regulation and control so that it serves the interests of everyone involved, otherwise it creates unrest, dissatisfaction, insurrection and tyranny. Oh please. We're all against war, poverty and injustice. That is not an anti-capitalist position. Monopoly, oligopoly, corruption, price-fixing, cartels, graft, kleptocracy, these are a bigger cause of the stuff you mention than capitalism. That and, say, trade barriers erected by the likes of, er, the European Union which likes to protect its comfortable left-wing middle class from genuine competition. What does "capitalism needs regulation and control" mean? You need the state for all kinds of stuff but it shouldn't be running the economy. And where it does so - and this was matt_himself's point - it tends to impoverish rather than empower people.
1. Oh Corbyn will be a disaster, Well go back to the 70's. - is there any evidence for this or is it lazy conjecture. 2. Oh you're a lefty? You must want to live in North Korea as you agree with totalitarianism. Have you got any evidence that socialist economies work. Can you point to any non-capitalist socialist country that has not been an authoritarian dictatorship?
Well put. I know this will irritate the f*** out of everyone but Sweden Germany and France also take in more asylum seekers than we do How many asylum seekers do socialist countries take? Or for that matter, muslim countries? Are the Scandinavian, French and German countries socialist by the way.
mother-in-law is an anagram of woman hitler |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| jamiemartin721 Reading 14 Aug 15 2.23pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote johnfirewall at 14 Aug 2015 2.05pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 1.48pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 14 Aug 2015 1.46pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 11.19am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Aug 2015 11.10am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.53am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Aug 2015 10.13am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.03am
If you include people acting within a market economy then you could include most of the socialist countries. I'm not sure its true on a global scale either that people in sweatshops etc are empowered by stitching trainers or Disney toys, esp when they are children who instead of being schooled are producing goods. Nor those empowered by an inability to afford HIV medication, or those dying of preventable disease, unclean drinking water or suffering from malnutirion. When you step outside the first world, capitalism isn't empowering people so much as enslaving them. The generation of wealth for its own sake, is a problem. Captialism needs regulation and control so that it serves the interests of everyone involved, otherwise it creates unrest, dissatisfaction, insurrection and tyranny. Oh please. We're all against war, poverty and injustice. That is not an anti-capitalist position. Monopoly, oligopoly, corruption, price-fixing, cartels, graft, kleptocracy, these are a bigger cause of the stuff you mention than capitalism. That and, say, trade barriers erected by the likes of, er, the European Union which likes to protect its comfortable left-wing middle class from genuine competition. What does "capitalism needs regulation and control" mean? You need the state for all kinds of stuff but it shouldn't be running the economy. And where it does so - and this was matt_himself's point - it tends to impoverish rather than empower people.
1. Oh Corbyn will be a disaster, Well go back to the 70's. - is there any evidence for this or is it lazy conjecture. 2. Oh you're a lefty? You must want to live in North Korea as you agree with totalitarianism. Have you got any evidence that socialist economies work. Can you point to any non-capitalist socialist country that has not been an authoritarian dictatorship? Has Corbyn said he wants a socialist state? No. What he has said is that he wants those that caused the financial crash to pay for it, not people living on the breadline. He's on the deluded side who say that overspending wasn't the problem, as opposed to the more reasonable Labour supporters who are willing to balance the books. He's talking about renationalising everything. Maybe he could start with the Royal Mail, paying 50% more at the current price than it was sold for. Blame whoever you want for our debt but that sort of idealism will make things a lot worse. Overspending was definitely an issue after they bailed out a number of national banks. Prior to the credit crunch and crisis the debt wasn't an issue. I largely think that blaming different groups, misses the point, that we're here now due to a combination of reasons, and the question really is about resolution of the problem, and how to best affect the balance between between fiscal necessity and state responsibility.
"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| nickgusset Shizzlehurst 14 Aug 15 2.26pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote johnfirewall at 14 Aug 2015 2.17pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 2.11pm
What did labour over spend on? That's not my argument but ask Liam Byrne. The significant part is doing something about it, which he's not interested in, separating him from the other 3 candidates who have sided with the electorate in accepting the problem rather than concentrating on who's to blame. Edited by johnfirewall (14 Aug 2015 2.22pm) Nicely dodged. But really, what did they over spend on?
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Sedlescombe Sedlescombe 14 Aug 15 2.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote leggedstruggle at 14 Aug 2015 2.21pm
Quote Sedlescombe at 14 Aug 2015 1.58pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 1.53pm
Quote Sedlescombe at 14 Aug 2015 1.51pm
Quote leggedstruggle at 14 Aug 2015 1.46pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 11.19am
Quote Hoof Hearted at 14 Aug 2015 11.10am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.53am
Quote jamiemartin721 at 14 Aug 2015 10.13am
Quote Johnny Eagles at 14 Aug 2015 10.03am
If you include people acting within a market economy then you could include most of the socialist countries. I'm not sure its true on a global scale either that people in sweatshops etc are empowered by stitching trainers or Disney toys, esp when they are children who instead of being schooled are producing goods. Nor those empowered by an inability to afford HIV medication, or those dying of preventable disease, unclean drinking water or suffering from malnutirion. When you step outside the first world, capitalism isn't empowering people so much as enslaving them. The generation of wealth for its own sake, is a problem. Captialism needs regulation and control so that it serves the interests of everyone involved, otherwise it creates unrest, dissatisfaction, insurrection and tyranny. Oh please. We're all against war, poverty and injustice. That is not an anti-capitalist position. Monopoly, oligopoly, corruption, price-fixing, cartels, graft, kleptocracy, these are a bigger cause of the stuff you mention than capitalism. That and, say, trade barriers erected by the likes of, er, the European Union which likes to protect its comfortable left-wing middle class from genuine competition. What does "capitalism needs regulation and control" mean? You need the state for all kinds of stuff but it shouldn't be running the economy. And where it does so - and this was matt_himself's point - it tends to impoverish rather than empower people.
1. Oh Corbyn will be a disaster, Well go back to the 70's. - is there any evidence for this or is it lazy conjecture. 2. Oh you're a lefty? You must want to live in North Korea as you agree with totalitarianism. Have you got any evidence that socialist economies work. Can you point to any non-capitalist socialist country that has not been an authoritarian dictatorship?
Well put. I know this will irritate the f*** out of everyone but Sweden Germany and France also take in more asylum seekers than we do How many asylum seekers do socialist countries take? Or for that matter, muslim countries? Are the Scandinavian, French and German countries socialist by the way.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| johnfirewall 14 Aug 15 2.36pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 2.26pm
Quote johnfirewall at 14 Aug 2015 2.17pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 2.11pm
What did labour over spend on? That's not my argument but ask Liam Byrne. The significant part is doing something about it, which he's not interested in, separating him from the other 3 candidates who have sided with the electorate in accepting the problem rather than concentrating on who's to blame. Edited by johnfirewall (14 Aug 2015 2.22pm) Nicely dodged. But really, what did they over spend on?
But again that's not my point. Blaming banks isn't going to reduce the deficit. Neither is any sort of Robin Hood tax which I'm waiting for him to propose. Neither is buying back prviously public assets, which is only possible in his socialist utopia where he plans to have the BoE create more money for this purpose.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| fed up eagle Between Horley, Surrey and Preston... 14 Aug 15 2.38pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 2.26pm
Quote johnfirewall at 14 Aug 2015 2.17pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 Aug 2015 2.11pm
What did labour over spend on? That's not my argument but ask Liam Byrne. The significant part is doing something about it, which he's not interested in, separating him from the other 3 candidates who have sided with the electorate in accepting the problem rather than concentrating on who's to blame. Edited by johnfirewall (14 Aug 2015 2.22pm) Nicely dodged. But really, what did they over spend on?
They certainly over spent on welfare, creating a something for nothing culture, where the terminally selfish, stupid and lazy get bucket loads of cash for churning out horrible little sprogs. They abandoned the borders so then there was more people to look after, they continually threw money at the NHS, they wasted money on stupid wind farms, they gave billions of pounds to the E.U, and of course this stupid fascination of foreign aid. Of course that's probably just the tip of the iceberg what I have said, but they certainly overspent on something because we were in a s**t state when they left office. Their legacy was a bloated state, welfare system etc.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hoof Hearted 14 Aug 15 2.49pm | |
|---|---|
|
Nick earlier on you asked why Corbyn is being criticised for promoting 1970's style policies. Surely even you can see that it's a throwback to recommend re-nationalising the railways and energy companies without outlining the financial details of how we could afford it? Similarly he has suggested re-opening the South wales coal mines to reduce unemployment whilst also promoting greener energy production? That smacks of 1970's style politics to me.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / RegisterNew users
Registration is now on our new message board
Existing users
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
Sponsors
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.