Budget

[Jonnyboy]

No, they are not required. A complete bypass of human nature is however a pre-requisite.

 

If impossible, refer back to plan B.... Money tree.

 

I know, everyone is a cvnt.

[badgerx16]

You don't need them to make socialism work. You only need them to make tired and vacuous fallacies about socialism work.

 

Or to bail out bankers when they c()ck up their casino capitalism gambling with everybody else's money.

[Hockey_saint]

No, they are not required. A complete bypass of human nature is however a pre-requisite.

 

If impossible, refer back to plan B.... Money tree.

 

That sounds like a very cynical view of what human nature is!

[Colinjb]

That sounds like a very cynical view of what human nature is!

 

Is it wrong?

 

I admire idealism, but it's naive to try and deny something's nature.

 

Socialism to me has always seemed like the girl trying to change the bloke who is almost right for her, she's still sure it's the right thing to do...... but he is still a c**t.

Edited 16 July, 2015 by Colinjb

[Hockey_saint]

I just saw this and thought "what a great speech" but either way, perhaps she's right, perhaps the SNP are only the Labours supporters up north disgusted with their veer to the right. I suppose if you consider there were Tory leaders lefter than labour are now, perhaps she's correct.

 

Either way, I'd prefer to think that most people are inherently good and not heartless b$stards who'd sell their own mothers down the river if she cost them some tax pennies. In any case, if you want my honest opinion , I think that if you are not well-off or a sociopath and voted for these heartless buffoons you may be lacking a few things.

 

https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/y4/r/-PAXP-deijE.gif

[Colinjb]

I just saw this and thought "what a great speech" but either way, perhaps she's right, perhaps the SNP are only the Labours supporters up north disgusted with their veer to the right. I suppose if you consider there were Tory leaders lefter than labour are now, perhaps she's correct.

 

Either way, I'd prefer to think that most people are inherently good and not heartless b$stards who'd sell their own mothers down the river if she cost them some tax pennies. In any case, if you want my honest opinion , I think that if you are not well-off or a sociopath and voted for these heartless buffoons you may be lacking a few things.

 

https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/y4/r/-PAXP-deijE.gif

 

Nice dodge.

 

It's not a question of being heartless, it's a question of core human nature. In a position of live or die, people will subconsciously choose to live. There is no real choice, people of sound mind will automatically and instinctively act to survive and save themselves.

 

This is a subtext to all aspects of life. Humanity is a fundamentally selfish thing. There will always be those that prioritise themselves over others. So, what to do? Work with it or look to change genetic pre-sets?

 

We are animals, albeit animals with a sense of sentience. Socialism is diametrically opposed to our own nature.... It asks all people to think of the greater good. Selfishness is a preset, it's incompatible. Regardless of emotion, of morality; It's there. A core facet of human history is man's inhumanity to man, just because it is undesirable it doesn't mean it's untrue. Humanity is just awful.

Edited 16 July, 2015 by Colinjb

[aintforever]

Is it wrong?

 

I admire idealism, but it's naive to try and deny something's nature.

 

Socialism to me has always seemed like the girl trying to change the bloke who is almost right for her, she's still sure it's the right thing to do...... but he is still a c**t.

 

I do agree with you though, socialism would work if there wasn't so many c@nts around.

 

I think it does go in cycles though, today's capitalism will end up failing eventually, it's just a matter of time. The monetary system is ****ed and I expect after the next crash we will see some sort of return to socialism. Capitalism works but it needs some sort of control, you can't get that with globalisation.

[solentstars]

I just saw this and thought "what a great speech" but either way, perhaps she's right, perhaps the SNP are only the Labours supporters up north disgusted with their veer to the right. I suppose if you consider there were Tory leaders lefter than labour are now, perhaps she's correct.

 

Either way, I'd prefer to think that most people are inherently good and not heartless b$stards who'd sell their own mothers down the river if she cost them some tax pennies. In any case, if you want my honest opinion , I think that if you are not well-off or a sociopath and voted for these heartless buffoons you may be lacking a few things.

 

https://fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net/rsrc.php/v2/y4/r/-PAXP-deijE.gif

If labour had leaders and mps like the SNP types with passion and working class people could relate to, they would have walked the election unfortunately they were more right wing than camerons Torys .hence why lots of real working class supporter's have deserted them for over a decade.

[Sour Mash]

I do agree with you though, socialism would work if there wasn't so many c@nts around.

 

I think it does go in cycles though, today's capitalism will end up failing eventually, it's just a matter of time. The monetary system is ****ed and I expect after the next crash we will see some sort of return to socialism. Capitalism works but it needs some sort of control, you can't get that with globalisation.

Looking back what are considered succesful socialist governments?

[Hockey_saint]

Nice dodge.

 

It's not a question of being heartless, it's a question of core human nature. In a position of live or die, people will subconsciously choose to live. There is no real choice, people of sound mind will automatically and instinctively act to survive and save themselves.

 

This is a subtext to all aspects of life. Humanity is a fundamentally selfish thing. There will always be those that prioritise themselves over others. So, what to do? Work with it or look to change genetic pre-sets?

 

We are animals, albeit animals with a sense of sentience. Socialism is diametrically opposed to our own nature.... It asks all people to think of the greater good. Selfishness is a preset, it's incompatible. Regardless of emotion, of morality; It's there. A core facet of human history is man's inhumanity to man, just because it is undesirable it doesn't mean it's untrue. Humanity is just awful.

 

You should also remember the many examples where those that have, have lorded it over those that have not and the resultant effects. Let them eat cake eh?

 

If people really are so bad, why bother living in a world like this after all? People act like socialism or being of the left is a bad word, well after another decade of these lovely fellas and their mates, privatising everything, removing the assistance from the poor and the needy and people still being taxed to the hilt and prices sky rocketing as well as the conservatives doing their usual and fighting amongst themselves....then trust me, people will return to the left.

[Hockey_saint]

Looking back what are considered succesful socialist governments?

 

The ones who created the NHS were pretty darn good.

[Jonnyboy]

Nice dodge.

 

It's not a question of being heartless, it's a question of core human nature. In a position of live or die, people will subconsciously choose to live. There is no real choice, people of sound mind will automatically and instinctively act to survive and save themselves.

 

This is a subtext to all aspects of life. Humanity is a fundamentally selfish thing. There will always be those that prioritise themselves over others. So, what to do? Work with it or look to change genetic pre-sets?

 

We are animals, albeit animals with a sense of sentience. Socialism is diametrically opposed to our own nature.... It asks all people to think of the greater good. Selfishness is a preset, it's incompatible. Regardless of emotion, of morality; It's there. A core facet of human history is man's inhumanity to man, just because it is undesirable it doesn't mean it's untrue. Humanity is just awful.

 

If you're brought up in a selfish society where selfish values are extolled as desirable than that's the sort of people you get. If you feed your bad sides they get bigger. And vice-versa.

[Colinjb]

You should also remember the many examples where those that have, have lorded it over those that have not and the resultant effects. Let them eat cake eh?

 

If people really are so bad, why bother living in a world like this after all? People act like socialism or being of the left is a bad word, well after another decade of these lovely fellas and their mates, privatising everything, removing the assistance from the poor and the needy and people still being taxed to the hilt and prices sky rocketing as well as the conservatives doing their usual and fighting amongst themselves....then trust me, people will return to the left.

 

People also act like conservatism is a bad word. All our conversations have shown is that there is no right answer.... just a preferred way.

[Colinjb]

If you're brought up in a selfish society where selfish values are extolled as desirable than that's the sort of people you get. If you feed your bad sides they get bigger. And vice-versa.

 

After fifteen years of labour we ended up with a subculture of society reliant on benefits. It works all ways chap. Provide a safety net and there are those that will abuse it too.

 

I do not want people to be selfish, I want them to be responsible, for their own actions and behavior in the context of a greater whole. Be conservative.

Edited 16 July, 2015 by Colinjb

[Sour Mash]

The ones who created the NHS were pretty darn good.

Were they socialist though?

[Batman]

After fifteen years of labour we ended up with a subculture of society reliant on benefits. It works all ways chap.

 

I believe that Tony Blair's government will be roundly slated in years to come.

we are still dealing with much of the fall-out from it.

 

none of them are perfect but fecking hell, Blair left a massive mark/dent/**** stain on the world

[Hockey_saint]

Yes, you are right Colinjb. Please forgive me, I do get a bit OTT on this.

Edited 16 July, 2015 by Hockey_saint

[Jonnyboy]

After fifteen years of labour we ended up with a subculture of society reliant on benefits. It works all ways chap. Provide a safety net and there are those that will abuse it too.

 

That doesn't mean everyone is inherently sociopathically selfish

[Hockey_saint]

Were they socialist though?

 

Since the Labour party until the 70's called each other "comrade" in party meetings, then I'd say yes, they were pretty darn socialist. The NHS itself is a pretty socialistic ideal.

[Colinjb]

Yes, you are right Colinjb. Please forgive me, I do get a bit OTT on this.

 

Say the f**k what!? haha

[Colinjb]

That doesn't mean everyone is inherently sociopathically selfish

 

No, but human nature does suck. There is also a significant difference between sociopathy and self preservation. They are not mutually exclusive.

[bridge too far]

I believe that Tony Blair's government will be roundly slated in years to come.

we are still dealing with much of the fall-out from it.

 

none of them are perfect but fecking hell, Blair left a massive mark/dent/**** stain on the world

 

The people who will be most roundly slated in years to come will be bankers and financiers currently overseeing the demise of Greece and the impoverishment of many working people around the world , to their own advantage.

[Batman]

The people who will be most roundly slated in years to come will be bankers and financiers currently overseeing the demise of Greece and the impoverishment of many working people around the world , to their own advantage.

 

of course they will and I agree. The EU is a sham

that has almost nothing to do with people looking back at previous UK governments/PMs though

[Hockey_saint]

Say the f**k what!? haha

 

Shocking I know, but in this spirit of "we're not all a bunch of cvnts" I thought I'd contribute ;p

[Sour Mash]

Since the Labour party until the 70's called each other "comrade" in party meetings, then I'd say yes, they were pretty darn socialist. The NHS itself is a pretty socialistic ideal.

But the current Tory government spend a higher percentage of gdp on healthcare, does that make them more socialist?

[Colinjb]

The people who will be most roundly slated in years to come will be bankers and financiers currently overseeing the demise of Greece and the impoverishment of many working people around the world , to their own advantage.

 

Naturally. That was a crime.

 

As a discussion went today, had Gordon Brown been a company director he would have been imprisoned for fraud for selling off the nation's gold reserves at his own best interest rather then the nation's when they were at their lowest value.

 

Just throwing it out there.

[Batman]

But the current Tory government spend a higher percentage of gdp on healthcare, does that make them more socialist?

 

it makes them Nasty, Horrible Tories.

 

also, labour will make themselves just as unelectable in the next election at this rate, with that old fella predicted to win the leadership contest.

He is just not PM material in these times. like it or not, that matters. Throw in the current govt doing a decent (not perfect) job

Edited 16 July, 2015 by Batman

[Colinjb]

Shocking I know, but in this spirit of "we're not all a bunch of cvnts" I thought I'd contribute ;p

 

Touché my friend, higher ground and all that. Miné's an elevated Becks Vier while you are up there.

[Hockey_saint]

it makes them Nasty, Horrible Tories.

 

If you consider the gdp percentage spent on healthcare BEFORE that Labour government got in to what it spent creating the system as opposed to essentially keeping the status quo (which is essentially what this government have done....aside from a costly and unneeded reorganisation...which has cost far far too much or the dispute with doctors they also currently have concerning 7-day week contracts) then nope, I wouldn't consider them socialists.

[Colinjb]

If you consider the gdp percentage spent on healthcare BEFORE that Labour government got in to what it spent creating the system as opposed to essentially keeping the status quo (which is essentially what this government have done....aside from a costly and unneeded reorganisation...which has cost far far too much or the dispute with doctors they also currently have concerning 7-day week contracts) then nope, I wouldn't consider them socialists.

 

Who would you vote for now Hockey_saint? Out of interest, and why?

[aintforever]

Looking back what are considered succesful socialist governments?

 

Don't know or care, it's not a such black or white issue. There are parts of today's society that are socialist concepts - like the NHS and welfare state which even the conservatives want in place. You can want a fairer more compassionate society with wanting a communist style government.

[bridge too far]

Naturally. That was a crime.

 

As a discussion went today, had Gordon Brown been a company director he would have been imprisoned for fraud for selling off the nation's gold reserves at his own best interest rather then the nation's when they were at their lowest value.

 

Just throwing it out there.

 

Whereas the current government is intent on selling off OUR NHS, that we all paid and still pay for, by stealth to its own funders.

[Batman]

If you consider the gdp percentage spent on healthcare BEFORE that Labour government got in to what it spent creating the system as opposed to essentially keeping the status quo (which is essentially what this government have done....aside from a costly and unneeded reorganisation...which has cost far far too much or the dispute with doctors they also currently have concerning 7-day week contracts) then nope, I wouldn't consider them socialists.

 

the NHS should have been 7 day-a-week yonks ago.

it is insane that banks etc are shut (or very much used to be) over the weekend.

 

Sunday trading laws in this country are just plain bizarre.

all well and good doctors etc moaning about it, but the govt have to drag the health service into the 20th (let alone the 21st) century

[Colinjb]

Whereas the current government is intent on selling off OUR NHS that we all paid and still pay for by stealth to its own funders.

 

What is your job out of interest? NHS wasn't it?

 

And if you truly believe that selling off the reserves that underpinned our economy for decades are is less important then the institution they helped pay for then you are truly a complete fool. Backing up the Government you voted for that f**ked our self sustainability forever. Idiocy.

[buctootim]

But the current Tory government spend a higher percentage of gdp on healthcare, does that make them more socialist?

 

No much worse than that, dishonest hypocrites - favouring their own (mostly older voters) at the expense of the young whilst espousing one nation politics.

[Sour Mash]

Don't know or care, it's not a such black or white issue. There are parts of today's society that are socialist concepts - like the NHS and welfare state which even the conservatives want in place. You can want a fairer more compassionate society with wanting a communist style government.

Ok, I might have misread your original post, I thought you were suggesting the return to a different, previous system of government, that might work better than the current one.

[Sour Mash]

If you consider the gdp percentage spent on healthcare BEFORE that Labour government got in to what it spent creating the system as opposed to essentially keeping the status quo (which is essentially what this government have done....aside from a costly and unneeded reorganisation...which has cost far far too much or the dispute with doctors they also currently have concerning 7-day week contracts) then nope, I wouldn't consider them socialists.

But they're spending a higher percentage of gdp on the nhs than those that you do consider socialists.

 

What socialist policies (if any) would you like to see implemented in the UK today?

[Sour Mash]

No much worse than that, dishonest hypocrites - favouring their own (mostly older voters) at the expense of the young whilst espousing one nation politics.

Same as all governments then.

[Hockey_saint]

Who would you vote for now Hockey_saint? Out of interest, and why?

 

I would still vote Labour as opposed to abstaining. I feel, as Buctooth Tim says, it's not right to target groups of people who really can't fight back considering it was (amongst other things....but not because of the people being targeted for sure) banking corporations and one mentalist and vindictive Scotsman who got us into this. But I do agree with the Scottish girl, Harriet Harman should hang her head in shame.

[Colinjb]

I would still vote Labour as opposed to abstaining. I feel, as Buctooth Tim says, it's not right to target groups of people who really can't fight back considering it was (amongst other things....but not because of the people being targeted for sure) banking corporations and one mentalist and vindictive Scotsman who got us into this. But I do agree with the Scottish girl, Harriet Harman should hang her head in shame.

 

Fair play to you. I respect those that stand by their beliefs even if they do not tie in with my own. The best conversations happen over a few beers when things get controversial! haha.

[Hockey_saint]

But they're spending a higher percentage of gdp on the nhs than those that you do consider socialists.

 

What socialist policies (if any) would you like to see implemented in the UK today?

 

I'd like to see the trains re-nationalised and a re-examination into how big business can work for the British people, not just a few fat cats.

[buctootim]

Same as all governments then.

 

Not to this extent. I really cant think of another government, Tory or Labour, who have been this blatant about it. The fact they lie and pretend they arent just compounds thr situation.

[Sour Mash]

I'd like to see the trains re-nationalised and a re-examination into how big business can work for the British people, not just a few fat cats.

What do you mean by re-examination? Nationalisation of firms?

[Hockey_saint]

What do you mean by re-examination? Nationalisation of firms?

 

No, I mean a great many things; an investigation into the rates of tax they pay, a feasibility study into what would and would not be better off and more profitable in public hands and what it could fund. I mean, for example, there must be several options for industries that could work as "sovereign wealth funds" which would be ploughed back into the the economy.

 

I don't automatically mean nationalisation but investment in companies like the French do might be a good idea.

[JackFrost]

Whereas the current government is intent on selling off OUR NHS, that we all paid and still pay for, by stealth to its own funders.

 

Like the Thatcher/Major governments did?

[aintforever]

Ok, I might have misread your original post, I thought you were suggesting the return to a different, previous system of government, that might work better than the current one.

 

No, I just think after the next financial crash there will probably be a return to a more socialist style government. The current system is not sustainable.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Can we acknowledge that there is a middle ground between socialists wanting to nationalise everything and conservatives who look to help the rich /old at the expense of the poor /young at every turn? It's called social democracy- accepting markets as useful tools but recognising that there need to be strong protections to help the weakest in society?

[Ex Lion Tamer]

Nice dodge.

 

It's not a question of being heartless, it's a question of core human nature. In a position of live or die, people will subconsciously choose to live. There is no real choice, people of sound mind will automatically and instinctively act to survive and save themselves.

 

This is a subtext to all aspects of life. Humanity is a fundamentally selfish thing. There will always be those that prioritise themselves over others. So, what to do? Work with it or look to change genetic pre-sets?

 

We are animals, albeit animals with a sense of sentience. Socialism is diametrically opposed to our own nature.... It asks all people to think of the greater good. Selfishness is a preset, it's incompatible. Regardless of emotion, of morality; It's there. A core facet of human history is man's inhumanity to man, just because it is undesirable it doesn't mean it's untrue. Humanity is just awful.

 

Wouldn't like to be with you on the Titanic. 'Women and children first? Out of my way!'

 

Although humans have obviously done some terrible things to other humans, it is generally to 'others'. Countries against countries, races against races, social classes against social classes.

 

But within those groups there's a ton of cooperation and sacrifice. We just need to widen people's horizons.

 

The rule of law developed in the UK because of a recognition of the collective benefits of all living by rules that benefit everyone. Part of the taxes you pay have gone to help violence victims to prosecute their assailants, and that's a good thing.

 

The big thing to remember is the progress we've made. 200 years ago most English people thought black people were inferior beings. Women were the property of their husbands and could be raped at will.

 

But as a nation we used our brains and realised that our attitudes were wrong. In the same way, we can progress as to bring an altruistic society (we have actualy made a lot of progress already). But it doesn't help having people like you going around saying we should all be selfish because that's the natural way.

Edited 16 July, 2015 by Ex Lion Tamer

[Jonnyboy]

Spot on.

[Colinjb]

 

But as a nation we used our brains and realised that our attitudes were wrong. In the same way, we can progress as to bring an altruistic society (we have actualy made a lot of progress already). But it doesn't help having people like you going around saying we should all be selfish because that's the natural way.

 

You are missing my point.

 

I'm not advocating selfishness, I'm saying that when push comes to shove that's how people behave. Beyond logic, beyond morals that simply 'is.' It's similar to the 'flight or fight' response, when it comes to it, people will react in a certain way.

 

I'm not saying it's right, i'm not saying it's best. It just is. And to work as though that isn't the case because it is undesirable is the worst thing of all. The focus should be on developing a system that circumvents selfishness and rewards effort. (Not that i'm saying that's what we have now, but better to work with what is available then impose an over reaching yet sadly impractical moral view upon people who are in an already pressured environment.)

Edited 16 July, 2015 by Colinjb