Are we reverting to Socialism again?

[Kevin Doyle]

So what do you recommend, nationalise or subsidise book publishers, employ state-authors (good for propoganda mind you ) ? what about the costs of pens and notebooks for students and teachers, no we can't have that! So we should have state-run pen manufacturers and copybook creators? Oh no hang on, the paper for the copybook - hmm we need to nationalise tree-fellers....

What is it with RWers that they can’t discuss a topic without putting words in other people’s mouths?

It’s getting pretty Childish.

- NOTHING IS FREE !!! Get that out of your head..

It’s not me who has a problem with the realty of that statement, indeed it would be one of your fellow travelers who is making rather odd assertions that education and health care are free in this country.

- Nope, bad central bank monetary policies and government laws are why we've had booms and busts, not capitalism...

Are you one of these newly emerging anarcho-capitalists?

These horse before the cart arguments mean very little as rebuttals.

You either want regulation or you don’t.

[bormotello]

Most of that is too funny to respond to.

Typical response when you not able to answer

But I think you will find capitalism is slavery. It leaves the economy in the hands of an unelected elite capitalist class who then force the rest of us to be their wage slaves.

Main idea of capitalism is competition. Everybody free to chose their employers. If you don’t want to work with employer - you are free to leave. There are no chains.
If you buying goods from capitalists, it means that you are voting for him. Customers are electing capitalists. Of coarse, there is risk of monopoly, but there are a lot of laws to protect society from it.
Now only trade unions are supporting monopolies, because it giving them more power to control capitalists.
If there is no capitalism, it means that that there is no competition. There is only factory to make beds, one factory to produce pens. Another problem that everybody will want to have a better job. Nobody will want to do dirty jobs. To force people to work where it is needed for society you will have to create mechanisms to control them.
For example, everybody will want to be a top managers or ambassadors. Or everybody will want to live in Dublin 4. How you will refuse peoples demand?
Of coarse, propaganda will work for some of them, but some people will have resistance to propaganda. So, you will have to isolate them from society (into Gulag).
Before you will understand that there are a lot people different from you, you will be not able to understand all mistakes in Marx theory.

Communism is where the people democratically control every aspect of society.

No, any minor mistake and communism will be replaced by capitalism. Communist elites cannot afford any democracy.
If Marx theory is so good, why it is always failing?

[MortgageBroker]

any thread extolling the virtues of socialism is basically a troll thread, socialism has failed.

obvious troll is obvious.

socialism = fail

[turdsl]

Well, capitalism has just failed, and there will be more than one Joe Higgins in the next
Dail, There was plenty in this country who never saw the Celtic tiger, all on account of greed by the rich.

[MortgageBroker]

@turdsl [suspected troll comment - seeking relight the flames of the capitalism v socialism rant] 'capitalism has failed' read the rest of the thread, capitalism hasn't 'failed' in fact, the downturn in the market is merely showing us that we misread market signals and it is as natural as night following day. Government lead tinkering with interest rates and fiscal policy got us here, in fact, the only thing that might save us is capitalism.

[bormotello]

Well, capitalism has just failed, and there will be more than one Joe Higgins in the next
Dail, There was plenty in this country who never saw the Celtic tiger, all on account of greed by the rich.

Yes, it did it again.
Burns and Mitchell had described business cycles in 1946. Nothing changed since this time. This fall perfectly fitting into 20 years pattern.
Problem is only that there is no real alternative. Communism is even worse, because it is only way down. State capitalism through serious regulation is not free from disadvantages, because it will create more corruption.
Just need to find a balance between levels of regulation and try it again, until it will not fail again in 20 years time.

[Hazlitt]

What is it with RWers that they can’t discuss a topic without putting words in other people’s mouths?

Hi Kevin,

Just making the point that nobody (sane) is in favour of free education.

So this is just a question of who wants fees paid for by the government or by individuals. Well, are you in favour of government paying or individuals?

Are you one of these newly emerging anarcho-capitalists?

No.

These horse before the cart arguments mean very little as rebuttals.

What are you talking about? What horse before the cart arguments?

You either want regulation or you don’t.

I don't.

I see no reason why the government should enjoy a legal monopoly over any commodity.
[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR]

[MortgageBroker]

Hi Kevin,

Just making the point that nobody (sane) is in favour of free education.

So this is just a question of who wants fees paid for by the government or by individuals. Well, are you in favour of government paying or individuals?



No.



What are you talking about? What horse before the cart arguments?



I don't.

I see no reason why the government should enjoy a legal monopoly over any commodity.
[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR]

I take it that you are libertarian in your political views, but even friedman himself would admit that you do need a 'state' and that they have a roll to play, albeit a limited one, for instance - you do need to have judiciary who are not swayed by private bosses, you do need police etc.

@kevin doyle: regulation is required, to the point that it stops illegal practice but of itself i don't see that it will solve anything, having 'legal system' doesn't stop people from committing crime, nor will regulation stop abuses, it should however have a framework with teeth, for all of the issues we have seen thus far - even going back a few years to forex scandals etc. - how many banks were seriously fined? answer: none.

[Hazlitt]

I take it that you are libertarian in your political views, but even friedman himself would admit that you do need a 'state' and that they have a roll to play, albeit a limited one, for instance - you do need to have judiciary who are not swayed by private bosses, you do need police etc.

I would actually align myself more to Ludwig von Mises political/economic views. He advocates a minimalist state to enforce contracts and protect people and their property from violence.

I will say however that I am an admirer of Murray Rothbard and his books and I do think he was the best economist of the latter-half of the 20th century (Mises of the first half).
[COLOR="White"].[/COLOR]

[Fr. Dougal McGuire]

The title of the article says "you have been warned, the future is socialism"

Why the fuck do we have to be warned. Socialism is a good thing, putting the betterment of society before profit margins. If the future is socialism, bloody fantastic.

I suppose it is the Indo, the lexicon of the far right neo-fascists.

Yes share the misery equally - far superior to unequal levels of contentment and wealth.

Why would anyone want to make their own decisions when a civil servant can do it for them.