How to tax plan like a hard left socialist hero

[andrew1903]

Well neoliberal policies are only creating a wider divide between the rich and the poor.

I'd like to see a form of capitalism that has a social conscience, where corporate greed is not at the heart of every political, social and economic decision in this country (and indeed much of the western world).

You suggested that we'd need to suffer to even out the stakes? That's absolute bollocks. There can be a gradual process whereby poorer nations are not raped of their wealth and resources. The gap between the richest and the poorest in society can be narrowed. And its socialism (as loose a term as that is) that will do it.

Countries that have adopted liberal economic policies are also the ones that have/are doing well (Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea) while the ones that have a high amount of government intervention are doing pretty badly(Venezuela, Brazil, Russia, Mongolia, Argentina). The only thing that will take people out of poverty is more liberal economic policy. If this also makes the rich richer then it isn't necessarily a bad thing especially when the return of assets is higher than the increase of wages there is little that can be done about the widening gap between the rich and poor apart from taxes that harm everyone.

Oh aye the 70s were fucking dreadful. The Thatcher crew like to repeat this mantra in order to make her seem like some sort of a messiah.

The Left have brought forward every progressive policy that this country has ever had - and you and your likes would've opposed EVERY SINGLE ONE.

- the abolition of slavery

- workers getting the vote

- an old age pension

- a progressive form of income tax

- women getting the vote

- the NHS

- equalities legislation

I'm sure I'll have missed out a few others but hey ho - its getting late. Now as pleasant as this is (debating politics with right wing trolls has never been so much fun) I have some work to do before bed.

You could argue that the two policies in bold has been the worst two ideas of the UK. Both will bankrupt the country and both are silly, anti-competitive and unnecessary. You shouldn't be forced to pay for services that can be fulfilled privately.

[milhouse]

Why is it that Reynard thinks he is better than everyone else?

[Reynard]

Why is it that Reynard thinks he is better than everyone else?

Why is a Weegie scheme goblin even asking such questions?

Countries that have adopted liberal economic policies are also the ones that have/are doing well (Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea) while the ones that have a high amount of government intervention are doing pretty badly(Venezuela, Brazil, Russia, Mongolia, Argentina). The only thing that will take people out of poverty is more liberal economic policy. If this also makes the rich richer then it isn't necessarily a bad thing especially when the return of assets is higher than the increase of wages there is little that can be done about the widening gap between the rich and poor apart from taxes that harm everyone.

You could argue that the two policies in bold has been the worst two ideas of the UK. Both will bankrupt the country and both are silly, anti-competitive and unnecessary. You shouldn't be forced to pay for services that can be fulfilled privately.

Left leaning statists simply never get this. Particularly the younger more naive ones we are awash with in here. State confiscation and redistribution has always ended in total failure. The politics of the left have always resulted in misery for all but the elite.

Perhaps some of the total muppets in here actually think they have a chance at becoming members of this elite or something? Oh dear.

[Elixir]

Why is a Weegie scheme goblin even asking such questions?

Bigot.

[Reynard]

Bigot.

What am I bigoted against?

[pandarilla]

Countries that have adopted liberal economic policies are also the ones that have/are doing well (Singapore, Hong Kong, South Korea) while the ones that have a high amount of government intervention are doing pretty badly(Venezuela, Brazil, Russia, Mongolia, Argentina). The only thing that will take people out of poverty is more liberal economic policy. If this also makes the rich richer then it isn't necessarily a bad thing especially when the return of assets is higher than the increase of wages there is little that can be done about the widening gap between the rich and poor apart from taxes that harm everyone.

You could argue that the two policies in bold has been the worst two ideas of the UK. Both will bankrupt the country and both are silly, anti-competitive and unnecessary. You shouldn't be forced to pay for services that can be fulfilled privately.

Russia? Not following neo-liberal policies?

I must've missed the selling off (or sheer fucking theft) of state assets that occurred in the 1990s - and at the same time the welcoming in of McDonalds to feed the masses.

You claim the NHS and the Old Age Pension are two of the UK's worst ideas? At that point you become a joke figure.

[pandarilla]

What am I bigoted against?

Truth.

[lichtgilphead]

But for all of those weans in here that cant remember the socialist 70s, we might get a chance to experience blackouts and stuff like that this winter. Should be a reminder of how shit governments making shit decisions can actually f**k things up for all of us.

I remember the blackouts as being during early 1972 & early 1974. At both times, Ted Heath was the Prime Minister in a Conservative government.

[pandarilla]

I remember the blackouts as being during early 1972 & early 1974. At both times, Ted Heath was the Prime Minister in a Conservative government.

Its a sad situation that Ted Heath's government was comfortably to the left of the current Labour Party.

[Reynard]

I remember the blackouts as being during early 1972 & early 1974. At both times, Ted Heath was the Prime Minister in a Conservative government.

Thats correct.

I remember them too. Heath was a shit PM.

[Reynard]

Its a sad situation that Ted Heath's government was comfortably to the left of the current Labour Party.

Heath was a shit PM.

He was a crappy old socialist queen

[andrew1903]

Russia? Not following neo-liberal policies?

I must've missed the selling off (or sheer fucking theft) of state assets that occurred in the 1990s - and at the same time the welcoming in of McDonalds to feed the masses.

You claim the NHS and the Old Age Pension are two of the UK's worst ideas? At that point you become a joke figure.

Gazprom is majority owned by the Russian government and the Russian government often intervenes in private matters relating to those close to Putin. You might not say this is representative of socialism but there are no examples of a state spending money wisely and not being corrupt, inept or a mixture of the two.

The way the NHS is talked about in the UK is ridiculous. It's terribly run and inefficient and it should be sold off and privatised and a insurance based system should be brought in similar to the Swiss or German health care markets.

[pandarilla]

You think putin is running a socialist country? And that privatisation would improve the nhs? How's it working out for the railways?

[andrew1903]

You think putin is running a socialist country? And that privatisation would improve the nhs? How's it working out for the railways?

Russia is 111/189 in the ease of doing business scale. The main oil and gas company is majority owned by the state. The government is propping up the Ruble by using foreign reserves. The government is a kleptocracy. It's is not exactly a hot bed of liberal thinking, economically or socially. Russia may not be an example of a socialist country but it shows what happens when governments meddle in the economic and social lives of it's citizens which is inevitable in a socialist country. I used to believe in socialism but then I became aware about government meddling in our private lives (the smoking ban, the ridiculous amount of taxes that are there to influence are behaviour, the "war" on drugs etc.) and how the higher the stake the state has in our economic lives the more likely they will want to influence and control our social lives. After reading up about personal liberty I started to understand how economic freedom is important as well.

The lack of competition in the railways is a problem. You could also mention the methods by which the government sells off leases short term deters investment plus subsidises mean that poorly run lines are not punished. I think the government intervention at the moment is the problem with the railways and if they just let things be you'd see improvements. Obviously regulation is needed in some industries. Looking at the the USA broadband market or Mexico's cable or telephone market this is clear but I think to have anti-monopoly rules is consistent with the idea of very light government regulation.

The NHS can't fail. Just look at that hospital(can't remember where) where a load of kids died, people were mistreated etc. If that had been a private hospital it would have failed as people would have stopped going there and it would have made less money. It is impossible for governments to fail as they will just keep putting money into failing ideas. This means that ideas will never change as they don't really know what is good and what is bad because of a lack of consumer choice. Capitalism breeds ideas because, like evolution, good ideas will be used in the future while failing ideas will be gone because businesses will no longer be able to afford to run themselves inefficiently. Private hospitals can still be mostly free at the point of entry with an insurance based system being forced on all residents like it is in Switzerland with a small fee paid with each appointment to lower the moral hazard present in today's NHS.