The Political and Social War

[unloadonme]

We have a socialist government in the UK already Mitchy, as evidenced by the NHS, universal benefits and taxation of the rich to subsidise the poor. What more do you want?

 

[unloadonme]

I'd like to see an end of the need for the rich to subsidise the poor. I want to see interest rates abolished. I want to see rent slashed to nothing. I want to see investment in the things that really matter, like agriculture and building and not small businesses that manufacture waistcoats for dogs. There, that is a few, still plenty to be achieved, the war is not won yet Ulom!

You want free accommodation and interest free loans, but you'd like the rich to no longer subsidise the poor. How exactly do you propose to square that particular circle? Everything has to be paid for Mitchy. If you don't pay, somebody else has to.

 

[Kabluey]

Tend to think that in a modern, developed society this would end up being a cyclical trend. Societies becoming more conservative and then more liberal, then back to the beginning.

 

[blackbeltninja]

We have a socialist government in the UK already Mitchy, as evidenced by the NHS, universal benefits and taxation of the rich to subsidise the poor. What more do you want?

Isn't socialism in part why the Euro is currently so... well, shit?

-d-

 

[Kabluey]

Isn't socialism in part why the Euro is currently so... well, shit?

-d-

^ Practically no one was paying tax in Greece. Tax evasion will make social spending fall apart. But look at northern Europe. Stable, secure, relatively insulated.
But there are many more billionaires in Greece than Denmark...

 

[mikey3000]

When the pendulum eventually comes to a stop, it will land right in the middle of the two extremes, socialism. And the eventual one world government will keep it there.

 

[timboy]

I just want to sleep with Mitchymo

 

[shainski]

honestly, it sounds like a nightmare to me.

If no one is paying for anything, then there is no incentive to make it better. Everyone would live in identical cookie-cutter housing. But even then, some locations would be preferable to others. How do you decide who gets the nicer units?

Unless you are saying that there should be a basic housing that would be available for free - "Public housing" - but anyone who could afford to could upgrade to something better.

Even at their heights in the 1970s, groups would join communes where everyone would work together for the benefit of the commune. But not many of them worked for very long.

It's really hard to contradict human nature.

 

[Kabluey]

Yeah, I'm not a fan of the idea of free housing either. Would prefer people had decent wages and unnecessary costs didn't inflate the cost of living in and maintaining good housing.

 

[pat grimshaw]

...I believe this because the driving forces of both the former two are motivated by a better ethos....

Mitchy, sometimes I think you might be a closet-christian.

But despite that, I reckon you should try to read Brave New World because it was written by an intelligent, protestant Englishmen who's pragmatic enough to believe that the drive for 'power, wealth and selfishness' is normal human nature.

 

[Kabluey]

^ Mitchy - Seems too narrow. You could just as easily argue that food is a basic human need.
Reducing measures that inflate the cost of housing (regulations, taxes, loose lending, tax advantages for investors and monopoly abuse) would reign in costs.
Reason housing costs so much where you are is because other people are prepared to spend it.

 

[Kabluey]

^ Not for as long as the most successfully greedy hold the purse strings

 

[pat grimshaw]

I thought you might be a closet-christian because your use of the word 'better' reminded me of the days when people strived to be good.

Nowdays American pop-culture says we should strive to be bad.

 

[Kabluey]

Yes you could, but that is what deters people from taking it seriously, by making it a series of issues that add up to too much hassle, rather than dealing with one thing at a time. If the free housing worked, maybe free bread and butter could be offered using a ration card to get a daily allowance, and then anybody who didn't want to work, they wouldn't get benefits, they'd just get the free basics to ensure they don't freeze on the streets or starve, but they won't be able to buy anything, it would save huge amounts in benefits. They could get free toiletries the same way. Anyone with kids could collect extra freebies, but only things that are for the kids.

Oh i don't know. I don't know whether government pays out too much in benefits or whether they just take too much from the workers, or both. I hate life lol

Prefer to see everyone paying their fair share, and no-one acting as an economic siphon. People complain about taxes more than they complain about monopolies and cartels that skim wealth out of an economy and hide it away, never to be seen again (or speculated with endlessly).