Socialism, Capitalism or what ?

[neil]

Ever get the feeling that you would like to retire to another country -where it doesn't rain so much and you can go out at night without the fear that some drunken yob will duff you up for fun?

 

[Atilla]

Ever get the feeling that you would like to retire to another country -where it doesn't rain so much and you can go out at night without the fear that some drunken yob will duff you up for fun?

Yes I do. I witnessed a tirade of abuse to a middle aged train conductor once by a herd of 10-14 year olds and I was shocked as to what kind of young men we are breeding and nurturing.

I think the term is now called happy slapping and if one is lucky one may get to see it on youtube...

I think this must be new form of socialism as output by capitalism... :whistling


Coming back to thread theme - I think socialist policies are getting us out of the mess capitalist have put us in. In the sense that response to this sub-prime crises has been effectively - Keynesian, to provide liquidity to the markets to continue and prevent busts. Some say Keynesian policies are no longer valid or extinct but effectively this is what is taking place by Governments spending.

Most people agree that this recession/depression could have been much worse if policies of the past were used again.

 

[Trader333]

I think this must be new form of socialism as output by capitalism...

As opposed to state sponsored thuggery evidenced by communist states oppression of their own people.

I think this must be new form of socialism as output by capitalism...
Coming back to thread theme - I think socialist policies are getting us out of the mess capitalist have put us in.

It was a labour government that put us in this mess to start with.

In the sense that response to this sub-prime crises has been effectively - Keynesian, to provide liquidity to the markets to continue and prevent busts.

I seem to remember something similar being said by Gordon Brown

Most people agree that this recession/depression could have been much worse if policies of the past were used again.

What most people think on this subject is irrelevant to whether it is true or otherwise in my view but I have no doubt you will offer an appropriate counter view to all the above


Paul

 

[Atilla]

As opposed to state sponsored thuggery evidenced by communist states oppression of their own people.

Agree - Communism is the same as fascism - tyrannical systems. Keep well at distance.

It was a labour government that put us in this mess to start with.

Disagree - It was Tory big bang that kicked this off with self regulation. Labour off-spring in response to 3 terms of Tories followed in steps as day does night. If you can't beat em - join em...

I seem to remember something similar being said by Gordon Brown

I thought Gordon Brown handled fiasco well. Tribute to our recovery and his ideas. Didn't think much of him as a leader but good in this crises. Tories would have cut too much too soon making everything 10 fold worse (legacy of Maggie Thatcher apparently 80s down turn was worse in terms of unemployment and decline than our current one. She too sold off the silver and wasted North Sea oil.

What most people think on this subject is irrelevant to whether it is true or otherwise in my view but I have no doubt you will offer an appropriate counter view to all the above

Indeed what most people think is irrelevant - but how would you describe state owned industries?

How would a politician or an economist phrase nationalised industry?

In fact the market system as prescribed by capitalists would have been perfectly adapt at resolving this problem. Corporations would go to the market place to raise new funding - have a scrip issue. In fact a large number did precisely this raising new funds.

Otherwise if no funding was forth coming then company would go to the wall or be picked up by other bigger better ones ie Barclays taking selective Lehman operations.

Paul

Gosh - look at all the people from the funny farm... :clap: Amazing stuff.

 

[FX Bandit]

.

 

[FX Bandit]

Gosh - look at all the people from the funny farm... :clap: Amazing stuff.

Blame the Tories . Labour had been in power for 10 years when NR pooped.

What "Silver" did Maggie sell? Those hopeless, inefficient, union-crippled, loss-making industries?

 

[arabianights]

WTF?

Someone removed my shariah law lulz.

That is bloody ridiculous, but it does go to show that certain dark forces have genuine power, due to the inability of certain types to stick up to them.

I regularly find I am the only person prepared to make jokes about the total nonsense that is islam. No other religion is protected like this. Whoever is deleting this lulz, stop it. It's completely inconsistent.

 

[dick_dastardly]

Under whatever political system it is always the elite group who take the cream and the only difference is whether the hoi-polloi have to make do with fully skimmed or semi-skimmed milk.

jon

Doesn't matter what system you have, or what you call it, or which God you pray to, chimps will kill for a banana and always will.


dd

 

[FX Bandit]

WTF?

Someone removed my shariah law lulz.

That is bloody ridiculous, but it does go to show that certain dark forces have genuine power, due to the inability of certain types to stick up to them.

I regularly find I am the only person prepared to make jokes about the total nonsense that is islam. No other religion is protected like this. Whoever is deleting this lulz, stop it. It's completely inconsistent.

I thought it might have been due to my Jezza Kyle C0ck in mouth picture? If so I'm sorry.

 

[Atilla]

Doesn't matter what system you have, or what you call it, or which God you pray to, chimps will kill for a banana and always will.


dd

This kind of statement may appeal but is not necessarily correct.

Chimps have evolved to work together and share a banana by splitting it in half.

Look at the UK Navy - joining working together with the French to cut operating costs. Once upon a time they would have been blowing each other out of the water and now they will be going into battle together arm in arm...

Evolution - Charles Darwin - Gripping read Dick Dastardly Dude. :cheesy:


Isn't it time you evolved too...

 

[Pat494]

I think one of the good points of capitalist competition is the low cost goods like computers. But if you look behind the scenes the picture isn't so rosy. Where 1 company like Microsoft made billions there were a lot of "also rans" that went bust and don't even merit a mention. Tough yes. Fair no. Better products like Beta max sometimes went under to inferior products.
Can the top company people justify a daily wage 100s of times greater than the lowest paid - no way. Not morally and probably not economically either. Higher yes - to promote good work, initiative etc. but not that great a difference imho.

 

[Atilla]

I think one of the good points of capitalist competition is the low cost goods like computers. But if you look behind the scenes the picture isn't so rosy. Where 1 company like Microsoft made billions there were a lot of "also rans" that went bust and don't even merit a mention. Tough yes. Fair no. Better products like Beta max sometimes went under to inferior products.
Can the top company people justify a daily wage 100s of times greater than the lowest paid - no way. Not morally and probably not economically either. Higher yes - to promote good work, initiative etc. but not that great a difference imho.

Capitalism may make more sense if it was based on the theory of imperfect competition.

Then at least measures can be put in place to tackle its flaws.

 

[Pat494]

Capitalism may make more sense if it was based on the theory of imperfect competition.

Than at least measures can be put in place to tackle its flaws.

Forms of imperfect competition include:

Monopoly, in which there is only one seller of a good.
Oligopoly, in which there is a small number of sellers.
Monopolistic competition, in which there are many sellers producing highly differentiated goods.
Monopsony, in which there is only one buyer of a good.
Oligopsony, in which there is a small number of buyers.
Information asymmetry when one competitor has the advantage of more or better information.

 

[Atilla]

Forms of imperfect competition include:

Monopoly, in which there is only one seller of a good.
Oligopoly, in which there is a small number of sellers.
Monopolistic competition, in which there are many sellers producing highly differentiated goods.
Monopsony, in which there is only one buyer of a good.
Oligopsony, in which there is a small number of buyers.
Information asymmetry when one competitor has the advantage of more or better information.

I agree totally.

Management do not aim to maximise profits either. This is a wholly false assumption in our day.

Management aim is to maximise salary and wages. We can tell this by virtue of the fact that numeration goes up when share value - company valuataion goes down.

Shareholders have nominal rights. Rights are in the hands of pension funds who are managed by equally self serving money grabbing management who pursue self interest.


System needs serious over haul...

 

[Pat494]

Perhaps we could also agree:-
1. workers need jobs and companies need workers
2. companies need to be profitable to pay the workers
3. companies need to borrow and therefore have obligations to satisfy shareholders

For a company to be profitable
1. needs a product or service that people are willing to buy at a competitive price
2. as little internal friction and as much cooperation as possible by the employees

Seems straight forward enough to me

 

[Splitlink]

This kind of statement may appeal but is not necessarily correct.

Chimps have evolved to work together and share a banana by splitting it in half.

Look at the UK Navy - joining working together with the French to cut operating costs. Once upon a time they would have been blowing each other out of the water and now they will be going into battle together arm in arm...

Evolution - Charles Darwin - Gripping read Dick Dastardly Dude. :cheesy:


Isn't it time you evolved too...

Sorry, Atilla, I don't agree with that , at all. That kind of thinking is hoping that we will improve. We won't.

The British and French navies can co-operate, the same as everyone can. The problem is that it is only on a mutually beneficial basis.

The Americans did co-operate with Sadim Husein, once, and finished by hanging him.

The Americans did co-operate with Noruega, once, and now, after a prison term he has been deported.

In WWII we were friends with the Russians. After the war, it was a question of grab.

It goes on and on. We are, all, a naturally acquisitive species and it starts in the nursery.

 

[Atilla]

Sorry, Atilla, I don't agree with that , at all. That kind of thinking is hoping that we will improve. We won't.

The British and French navies can co-operate, the same as everyone can. The problem is that it is only on a mutually beneficial basis.

The Americans did co-operate with Sadim Husein, once, and finished by hanging him.

The Americans did co-operate with Noruega, once, and now, after a prison term he has been deported.

In WWII we were friends with the Russians. After the war, it was a question of grab.

It goes on and on. We are, all, a naturally acquisitive species and it starts in the nursery.

Do you not see any improvement in conduct of war and deaths and how we react to injustice and attrocities at all? Compare the last 2000 and 200 and last 100 years for example.

I do.

I can not visualise Europe at war with each other as in the past.

Can anybody visualise such a scenario?

Lessons have been learnt.

 

[Atilla]

Perhaps we could also agree:-
1. workers need jobs and companies need workers
2. companies need to be profitable to pay the workers
3. companies need to borrow and therefore have obligations to satisfy shareholders

For a company to be profitable
1. needs a product or service that people are willing to buy at a competitive price
2. as little internal friction and as much cooperation as possible by the employees

Seems straight forward enough to me

Yes I agree but this list is very rudimentary and broad. Need more specifics and details.

If you wish to get to the nitty gritty - one should look at benchmarking and numerating effort and productivity coupled with reward.

 

[Dommo]

Which of these 2 do you prefer and why or could there be another better system ?

If you believe the Nolan chart, the alternatives are along different axes to the usual left/right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_chart

 

[Pat494]

If you believe the Nolan chart, the alternatives are along different axes to the usual left/right.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_chart

Interesting

The Nolan chart seems to be saying - how much freedom does one give away for order