Looney left analysis

Is mise le key

I found this to be a very inspiring read posted elsewhere on the net,

Flintwinch wrote:

Why ‘Looney Left’?
An Apology for Socialists
Why do establishment parties, media commentators and journalists so often refer to the hard Left as The Looney left?
Obviously the juvenile sing song cadence lent by the alliteration is a happy happenstance too irresistable to not bandy it about to the delight of the uninformed and ignorant. But it is a trite way to fob off what you really have no inclination to investigate or understand.
But on a deeper level I think that it is an accurate indicator of what the right truly believe. The world view held by the left is beyond their understanding; simply not part of their lexicon. When an idea is so alien to you that you simply cannot conceive of anyone holding such views, you simply file it away under ‘insane’ in what could be described a self defence mechanism; a form of denial whereby you don’ have to ask yourself any uncomfortable questions that could possibly shine light on your own world view, motivation and belief system. To do so could prove a very uncomfortable exercise and human nature being what it is, who wants to voluntarily make themselves uncomfortable?
The right wing establishment simply cannot conceive of anyone not being motivated, as so many have clearly been by unashamed naked avarice. This avarice manifests itself in jobs for the boys, nepotism and croyneism; the protection of the few at the cost of the many; capitalism for the workers with socialism for the elite.
I am bored by how the term is bandied about so freely by the talking heads rolled out night after night on our radio and TV screens. It is time for them to give it a rest and for us to call them on it.
The left are not loonies but rational people who care for the future of Ireland and Irish Citizens. Nor are they mad communists that want to land us all in the dark ages. They are mostly democratic socialists who are pro business with the caveat that said business is in the interest of the people and whose sole objective is not profit. Their world view is not one in which a n obsequious deference is shown to money, power and fatuous, inane celebrity. They are not the ones who know the price of everything but the worth of nothing. They wade through the cacophonous noise of the self interested mob to get to the heart of what is wrong in Ireland.
The left seem to be the only ones taking on board the analysis of people like Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prize Winner in Economic Sciences 2001; Paul Krugman, economist and winner of the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics; Nouriel Roubini cited by Foreign Policy magazine as being fourth on their list of the “top 100 global thinkers”; George Soros; and our own Dave Mc Williams, Brian Lucy, Constantin Gurdgiev, Morgan Kelly, Paul Somerville and Peter Mathews. With the exception of Soros you can’t describe these men as socialists. You wouldn’t describe our home grown boys as socialists. What unites them is a genuine social conscience; a strong moral compass directing them to do what is right; an innate intelligence and adherence to logic. They are simply stating the truth but the establishment seems to be studiously ignoring them. Why? These economists are not pushing some self serving agenda, they base their opinion on cold hard facts. Why is it that only the left seems to be taking note?
Many on the right believe that the level of renumeration offered to an employee is directly correlated to the quality and commitment they give to their profession. Look at the wage levels our government see fit to set for medical consultants, senior civil servants , bankers , TV and radio personalities, TD’ s and the like. The prevailing premise is that if you reward something you get more of the behaviour you desire while if you punish something you get less of it. Daniel Pink the American writer describes a study done at Massachusetts Institute of Technology whereby a group were given a set of challenges which were incentivised at different levels; do pretty well for a small monetary reward, medium well gets a medium reward , top achievers got a large cash prize. They found that as long as the task required only mechanical skill, bonuses worked as expected, but once a tast required even rudimentary cognitive skill a larger reward led to poorer performance. Why? It seemed to go against all accepted economic thought. It showed that once you get above rudimentary cognitive skill rewards don’t work. This research was funded by the Federal Reserve Bank , that notoriously looney leftist group!
The experiment was repeated in Madurai, India where the monetary motivation was relatively more significant . Here those offered two months salary did no better than those offered one months. The most significant finding was that those offered the highest reward performed worst of all. The ongoing trouble with the HSE comes to mind! Look at FAS and the government itself. These findings of are not anomalous ; it has been replicated over and over by economists, psychologists and sociologists. When a task requires conceptual creative thinking the old carrot and stick model is not effective. At work money is a motivator but if people are not paid enough they will not be motivated. Paying enough to remove the money worry frees people to concentrate on the work. Science shows that there are three factors that lead to better performance and satisfaction: autonomy , mastery and purpose. Humans need to be able to be masters of their own destiny, a self directed employee is an engaged employee.
We love mastery, we have an inate drive to get better at things like sports, music , crafts etc. We derive a great sense of achievement and enjoyment from mastering things. We put in the time and effort because it is fun. Our payment is the sheer fun and enjoyment we experience. Such passion has resulted in the development, by highly skilled people all around the world working together for free ,of products like Linux (powering one out of four corporate servers in fortune five hundred companies), Apache (powering the majority of webservers) and Wikipedia which they then give away rather than sell.What motivates these people to do all this? They are doing it because they crave challenge and mastery and they have a real purpose; the desire to make a contribution to society. What employers are finding is that when the profit motive is unhinged from the purpose motive undesired things happen like shoddy products, bad service , unmotivated workers and dreary uninspiring workplaces. When the profit motive is dominant or when it is unhitched from the purpose motive entirely, things gets infinitely worse. Organisations and companies that are flourishing are also the ones that are animated by this purpose motive. Purpose is essential to our humanity and our productivity.
For too long Ireland and the Irish has been pimped by the government to Global Finance and Corporations. The only difference between FF and FG is that FF is prepared to jump through the hoops set by our European masters set at any heigh while FG refuse to do so unless the hoops is lowered, just a little. When the ECB , IMF and the EU ask what way the Irish Government want to take it, FF says “Any way, anywhere your lordship pleases”, while FG and Labour would timidly prefer a method and place of their own choosing.
Charles Dickens described what is happening in Ireland in his novel Little Dorrit 1855-1857. In this insightful, entertaining satire he describes the shortcomings of the Governments Treasury Office represented by the Circumlocution Office and the society of the period. Debtors are imprisoned in the Marshelsea Debtors Prison where nobody discern who’s fault it is; who is to blame. Prisoners can’t work while incarcerated and can’t be released until the debts are paid! Sounds familiar doesn’t it? A catch 22 situation. We are going round in circles and it won’t stop till someone calls a halt. We can do so by refusing to pay for the losses of speculators and rogue banks. Separate our soverign debt from that of the rapacious banks. Everone of us is happy to do all we can to get our soverign debt obligations fulfilled. It is our duty to honour those debts.
In Little Dorrit The Circumlocution Office is expert in the art of How Not To Do It and is populated by members of the Barnicle and Stiltstalking family.
“The Barnacle family had for some time helped to administer the
Circumlocution Office. The Tite Barnacle Branch, indeed,
considered themselves in a general way as having vested rights in
that direction, and took it ill if any other family had much to say
to it. The Barnacles were a very high family, and a very large
family. They were dispersed all over the public offices, and held
all sorts of public places. Either the nation was under a load of
obligation to the Barnacles, or the Barnacles were under a load of
obligation to the nation. It was not quite unanimously settled
which; the Barnacles having their opinion, the nation theirs. “
“what the Barnacles had to do, was to stick on to
the national ship as long as they could. That to trim the ship,
lighten the ship, clean the ship, would be to knock them off; that
they could but be knocked off once; and that if the ship went down
with them yet sticking to it, that was the ship’s look out, and not
theirs. “ Dickens
It certainly took an enormous effort to pry our own Mr Tite Barnacle off our ship.
Mr Merdle, an unscrupulous banker and fraudster who comes to a sorry end is redolent of Anglo Irish Bank et al. Coincidentally in Dicken’s introduction to the novel he connects this character with an Irish Bank.
“If I might make so bold as to defend that extravagant conception, Mr Merdle, I would hint that it originated after the Railroad-share epoch , in the times of a certain Irish Bank, and of one or two other equally laudable enterprises.” Dickens
Investing in Merdle’s enterprises leads to the ruin of many in the novel.
You could do worse than spend an hour reading chapter ten of Little Dorrit which will make you laugh and think in equal measure;it is a gem. Indeed you could do worse than read any of that great author’s books since most of the abuses and ills of society he so brilliantly illuminated are very much still with us today.
Back to the objectional term The Looney Left. Can someone on the right please tell me what term they would employ to describe what our government did on the night of 29 th September 2008? The……now, let me see….. what can I call it….looney idea of inextricably combining our soverign debt with that of the banks is an act of madness beyond comprehension. With a stroke of the pen they sold out the Irish people and their future. I don’t know what terms the right might employ but looney would seem to be the least strong; traitorous, ignorant , inordinately myopic, criminally negligent or perhaps simply insane are terms that immediately jump to my mind. What a miraculous windfall to all the bond holders who had written off their losses in their own heads anyway! Our governments lunacy certainly came as a nice surprise gift to them. In the circumstances I think economically traitorous is a euphemism. There are no words to describe the astounding incompetence of that action.
A very real worry is that perhaps there was method in their seeming madness, Afterall we are not allowed to access information on what actually went on at that fateful secret meeting. Perhaps we will find out in 2038! In the meantime we have to live with the consequences. But not all of us; the political and financial elite jog on as before with no fear of accountability. Who benefitted from that fateful decision?
Socializing the private losses of speculators and placing the crucifying burden of covering those private losses on the shoulders of the already pauperized people of Ireland and in so doing mortally wounding our economy is a crime against humanity. Signing up to the EU, IMF/ECB ‘bailout’ is just twisting the knife in the wound. Anyone with a brain knows that we cannot attract any investment with such a millstone around our neck. Any desperately needed oxygen to the Irish economy has been mercilessly sucked up by this immoral arrangement. We are on our knees and the only hope is to do what the left say they will do; reject the deal. That way we can begin to fan the flames of our economy once again but this time in a real way; in such a way that builds our country, not as Ireland Inc., or Brand Ireland (shudder!) but as an open society where education, health care, basic human dignity, the environment, housing and employment are what is important, not making a profit to pay some faceless investors. We are not a business; we are a society; the community of Irish People.
As Charles Dickens wrote in A Christmas Carol:
“But you were always a good man of business, Jacob,” faultered Scrooge, who now began to apply this to himself.
“Business!” cried the Ghost, wringing its hands again. “Mankind was my business. The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!”
Fear is a malignant motivator, look how successfully Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair played their respective citizens like a virtuoso does a violin using that ever so effective subduer of free will.
The government paint a picture of a devastated wasteland with no money to pay public servants , empty ATM’s etc if we default. Well we are facing an economic wasteland now, the markets will not lend to us precisely because the bailout deal has ensured we cannot achieve any meaningful economic growth. We are not a good bet; we are literally shackelled. Investment money is like water, it is not sentient, emotional or animated but it will alway find its level; the markets are the same. If we discard the millstone and reject the begging dependant mentality we have had since joining the EEC and become self reliant, the markets will sniff out an opportunity and go for it. We have a morbid fear of offending the financial elites. They don’t give a curse. To the rest of the world we look like prime idiots meekly accepting our millstone and morbidly afraid of “what the neighbours will think if we default” never mind that they are emphatically not our debts. Appearance are everything to us and we want to be seen to be the good little beggars so beholden to the ECB that we will accept any ignominy they care to offer us. We should have rejected the overtures of the EU/ECB/IMF and asserted our independance earlier. The markets would have taken it in their stride, investors would have come back as soon as we started to show some growth. That action would have been lauded as the only rational and logical thing to do. We are heading for default anyway and all this misery will have been for nothing. We are like a terminally ill patient who goes through all the fear, pain , hope and indignity of treatment only to die after all. International investors expect Ireland to default in the not too distant future. Why wait and prolong the misery, bite the bullet and do it now? January 2011 came with a jolt as people awoke with the bald evidence printed on their pay cheques; the cold hard reality of what our government have signed us up to , all hope has been extinguished as in the cold light of day we face the heart stopping realization that it is only the start.
Too much fear causes indecision. We are like deer caught in the headlights of fear, preoccupied trying to hold on to a job if you are lucky enough to possess one, and to hold body and soul together if not. Young couples with children are imprisoned in their homes by mortgages they cannot meet and the soul destroying knowledge that they are no longer free. When you live in such fear there is the danger that you will clutch at straws for deliverance and make a decision to trust that some politician has done all the research and thinking and has hopefully come up with the right solutions. We have to shake ourselves out of this fatalism and think for ourselves and most of all not resign ourselves meekly to a prisonlike existance on somebody elses terms.
While fear is a malignant motivater hope is a benificent one. The last budget left us with little hope and January brought more desolation with the dawning realization that we are only embarking on this voyage of misery which is estimated to go on to affect our children and their children. But out of this despondency came a bright glimmer of hope when Joe Higgins Socialist MEP challenged Jose Manuel Barroso on the EU/IMF bailout. At last here was one of our representatives who actually had the gonads to confront our masters on the morality of this so called bailout; here was someone with the backbone to say what most thinking Irish men and women feel and were bursting to say. It was cathartic to hear him tell Mr Barroso that the emergency support fund of the bailout was “nothing more than another tool to cushion major European banks from the consequences of their reckless speculation on the financial markets”.
Mr Higgins is perhaps the most respected representative we have and his action in the European Paliament was lauded by commentators of every political hue. He is known for his integrity and honesty as well as his quick wit and ready riposte. The reason for this universal respect is simple, he is unassailable because he cannot be bought and confines himself to the realms of truth. He is an independent thinker and consequently the bane of the establishment. It was telling to see the reaction of Mr Barroso as his mask slipped to reveal just what he really thinks of the Irish. Of course his anger was also roused because what Mr Higgins confronted him with was the truth of the patent immorality of Irish tax payers paying the bad debts of the speculator banks. It is often said that the truth hurts and on this occasion it certainly hurt Mr Barroso.

whiskeyman

Please summarise in 10 words or less

Wossack

whats looney, is that ye think anyone in AH is gonna read all that..

BizzyC

Not reading that whole thing!

Are you looney!?

Is mise le key

whiskeyman wrote: »

Please summarise in 10 words or less

IMF/ECB screwed us, default recognised internationally as inevitable.

Wossack wrote: »

whats looney, is that ye think anyone in AH is gonna read all that..

Your choice.

Turtyturd

I thought in college they asked you to double space stuff to be awkward...I was wrong...my eyes hurt.

Is mise le key

Turtyturd wrote: »

I thought in college they asked you to double space stuff to be awkward...I was wrong...my eyes hurt.

Long time since i was at an age when i would have been in college chief & i never had the opportunity anyway.

Wibbs

whiskeyman wrote: »

Please summarise in 10 words or less

Hippies who spend money, but dunno how to earn it.

thebigbiffo

i can safely say nobody would give a f'uck if they were a barnacle...

Ghost Estate

tl;dr

stovelid

The "Looney Left"?

I think the Sun circa 1985 wants its terminology back.

Turtyturd

Is mise le key wrote: »

Long time since i was at an age when i would have been in college chief & i never had the opportunity anyway.

Where's that 'slang/chav talk you hate' thread?

FatherLen

holy balls that is the longest thing i have ever seen.











she said romantically

biko

Interesting read.

Nah didn't read it

RichieC

Thanks, OP, where you find this article?

brianthebard

Wibbs wrote: »

Hippies who spend money, but dunno how to earn it.

I think you've mistaken the article for the retarded right.

Is mise le key

stovelid wrote: »

The "Looney Left"?

I think the Sun circa 1985 wants its terminology back.

Ahh if you read even the first few lines you would see that it is asking why that term even exists & offers a real logical answer as to why in his opinion.

Turtyturd wrote: »

Where's that 'slang/chav talk you hate' thread?

You will have to start one chief.

RichieC wrote: »

Thanks, OP, where you find this article?

http://www.sliabh.net/?p=1794

Turtyturd

That link actually has less tri-colours, murals and balaclavas than I was expecting.

Degsy

brianthebard wrote: »

I think you've mistaken the article for the retarded right.

No...the left are better described as Libtards.

hoorsmelt

The reason why the right uses this terminology is to demonise the left. Never mind that the proposals put forward by the ULA and SF are realistic and take into account realities which the other parties don't (ie we'll be forced into a default sooner or later, better to do so now and use what's left of the NPRF to fund employment schemes), these proposals strike at the heart of the establishment and if implemented would quickly see them losing much of their power and influence, economically and politically- on this basis it's better to pour vitriol on the left and attack them instead of dissecting their proposals, as to do so seriously would leave them exposed.

bonerm

too looney ; didn't read

Kasabian

Why? when profits are made it is capitalism working but when it goes pear shaped as it has in Ireland the right wingers had no hestitation on making it a problem for all in our society.

We are all equally in the sh!t now.

United we stand.

Left and right train wreck approaching. :rolleyes:

Is mise le key

Kasabian wrote: »

Why? when profits are made it is capitalism working but when it goes pear shaped as it has in Ireland the right wingers had no hestitation on making it a problem for all in our society.

We are all equally in the sh!t now.

United we stand.

Left and right train wreck approaching. :rolleyes:

In essence it is,

Fixing a capitalist problem with a socialist solution.

Socialism for the private companies, not for the people.

hoorsmelt

Kasabian wrote: »

Why? when profits are made it is capitalism working but when it goes pear shaped as it has in Ireland the right wingers had no hestitation on making it a problem for all in our society.

We are all equally in the sh!t now.

United we stand.

Left and right train wreck approaching. :rolleyes:

You need to remember that this is capitalism at its purest- bosses screwing enormous profits out of the country during the boom years, then using unemployment caused by the collapse of their property bubble as an excuse to cut wages and running to the capitalist state to bail out their system and take their losses for them.

K-9

In Soviet Russia.................

Wibbs

brianthebard wrote: »

I think you've mistaken the article for the retarded right.

Bit early in the day to be drunk I would have thought? How do hippies overspending come within an asses roar* of the right wing? The retarded right might be more; "I did it myself, why can't the proles? Fcuk them"







*EU approved measurement.

thebigbiffo

as maggie said, the problem with socialism is that eventually you'll run out of other peoples money.

see the problem with all this left/right talk is that almost the entire globe is based on a capitalist system, and for that to work you have the face the problems we are facing now: screwing the majority for the good of the 'captains of industry' - why cant the left just accept that someone has to at least try and make the money, and there's plenty of people who try and fail, but it's the ones who fail and use their political, monied friends to try again who are demonised when in fact if it wasn't for them things would be a whole lot worse.

capitalism works for the majority and is the only system in the world so far proven to do so - i've no problem with the left trying to tweek the system to improve the lot of the poorer in society, but i do have a problem with the 'looney left' attacking capitalism and trying to drag us back to outright socialism while demonising of the heads of the system...the system that overall works. so, in short, the term 'looney left' has a place.

My name is URL

Wibbs wrote: »

Hippies who spend money, but dunno how to earn it.

As opposed to idiots who know how to create vast amounts of it in order to prop up already failed systems while at the same time crippling those with spending power.

hoorsmelt

thebigbiffo wrote: »

as maggie said, the problem with socialism is that eventually you'll run out of other peoples money.

see the problem with all this left/right talk is that almost the entire globe is based on a capitalist system, and for that to work you have the face the problems we are facing now: screwing the majority for the good of the 'captains of industry' - why cant the left just accept that someone has to at least try and make the money, and there's plenty of people who try and fail, but it's the ones who fail and use their political, monied friends to try again who are demonised when in fact if it wasn't for them things would be a whole lot worse.

capitalism works for the majority and is the only system in the world so far proven to do so - i've no problem with the left trying to tweek the system to improve the lot of the poorer in society, but i do have a problem with the 'looney left' attacking capitalism and trying to drag us back to outright socialism while demonising of the heads of the system...the system that overall works. so, in short, the term 'looney left' has a place.

Capitalism doesn't work. It doesn't work for the majority of the worlds population- over 1 billion people have no access to clean water, 925 million people are starving, and almost half the worlds population survives on less than $2.50 a day. In the privileged west where we enjoy higher standards of living thanks to the super-exploitation of the neo-colonial world, we still have extreme stratification of wealth and a real differential in living standards between those at the top and the poorest in society.

As for capitalism creating wealth, it hasn't been in a position to create new wealth for a long time now. During the 'boom', there was no increase in production, simply an extension of credit which allowed people to buy a greater share of the goods in circulation- the only increase in production was construction, and we all know the problems reliance on construction has caused. For this country to get back on its feet, socilaist policies and radical thinking are needed. One example of how this could work would be to set up state funded co-operatives on fallow land where formerly unemployed construction workers could produce food for a living. It's only on the basis of a thorough-going economic restructuring towards production and away from services that the economy will be able to provide a decent economically and environmentally sustainable lifestyle for everyone.

karma_

thebigbiffo wrote: »

as maggie said, the problem with socialism is that eventually you'll run out of other peoples money.

see the problem with all this left/right talk is that almost the entire globe is based on a capitalist system, and for that to work you have the face the problems we are facing now: screwing the majority for the good of the 'captains of industry' - why cant the left just accept that someone has to at least try and make the money, and there's plenty of people who try and fail, but it's the ones who fail and use their political, monied friends to try again who are demonised when in fact if it wasn't for them things would be a whole lot worse.

capitalism works for the majority minority and is the only system in the world so far proven to do so - i've no problem with the left trying to tweek the system to improve the lot of the poorer in society, but i do have a problem with the 'looney left' attacking capitalism and trying to drag us back to outright socialism while demonising of the heads of the system...the system that overall works. so, in short, the term 'looney left' has a place.

Tweaked your post there.

Wibbs

My name is URL wrote: »

As opposed to idiots who know how to create vast amounts of it in order to prop up already failed systems while at the same time crippling those with spending power.

Yea but that's over 10 words. Typical overspending lefty :P:D *runs*

Wibbs

hoorsmelt wrote: »

Capitalism doesn't work. It doesn't work for the majority of the worlds population- over 1 billion people have no access to clean water, 925 million people are starving, and almost half the worlds population survives on less than $2.50 a day. In the privileged west where we enjoy higher standards of living thanks to the super-exploitation of the neo-colonial world, we still have extreme stratification of wealth and a real differential in living standards between those at the top and the poorest in society.

As for capitalism creating wealth, it hasn't been in a position to create new wealth for a long time now. During the 'boom', there was no increase in production, simply an extension of credit which allowed people to buy a greater share of the goods in circulation- the only increase in production was construction, and we all know the problems reliance on construction has caused. For this country to get back on its feet, socilaist policies and radical thinking are needed. One example of how this could work would be to set up state funded co-operatives on fallow land where formerly unemployed construction workers could produce food for a living. It's only on the basis of a thorough-going economic restructuring towards production and away from services that the economy will be able to provide a decent economically and environmentally sustainable lifestyle for everyone.

Sweet zombie Jesus. They are hippies. :eek: Collective farming hippies to boot. Yea great, a future where everything is knit your own muesli and bottle your own farts for natural gas and grey, very grey. Forget about owning anything either. That's theft you know.

Is mise le key

thebigbiffo wrote: »

as maggie said,
.

Who really gives a fu.ck what maggie said.

hoorsmelt

Wibbs wrote: »

Sweet zombie Jesus. They are hippies. :eek: Collective farming hippies to boot. Yea great, a future where everything is knit your own muesli and bottle your own farts for natural gas and grey, very grey. Forget about owning anything either. That's theft you know.

I mentioned farming for a reason: it may have escaped your notice but food prices are going through the roof and there are expected to be sugar shortages later on in the year. In this context we need to concentrate on providing for peoples basic needs in terms of food, energy and shelter, it doesn't imply a wish to return to the past. We can provide for such projects while investing in scinetific R&D.

Wibbs

Though the allotment notion like they have in other countries, inc our neighbour is a good idea.

RichieC

thebigbiffo wrote: »

capitalism works for the majority

Pure fantasy.

karma_

Wibbs wrote: »

Sweet zombie Jesus. They are hippies. :eek: Collective farming hippies to boot. Yea great, a future where everything is knit your own muesli and bottle your own farts for natural gas and grey, very grey. Forget about owning anything either. That's theft you know.

Wibbs, I know you are an excellent poster and I respect that but I fear you are way off teh mark here. Capitalism has a track record of failure for the majority for many years now. It's not a stable system at all. It creates a bubble which eventually bursts then moves on to the next bubble. Yes some get rich off this scheme, but it's certainly not a majority. The thing I detest about this system is it requires losers, someone must get stung for those dollars to roll in, whether they be an investor, or some citizen of a third world country who has their resources stripped away.

Spudmonkey

hoorsmelt wrote: »

You need to remember that this is capitalism at its purest- bosses screwing enormous profits out of the country during the boom years, then using unemployment caused by the collapse of their property bubble as an excuse to cut wages and running to the capitalist state to bail out their system and take their losses for them.

Tin foil hat anyone??

I never liked the term looney left, more lazy left.

Bit of a generalization I know but when so many left wing politicians are willing to dump those who couldn't be bothered their arse in with those who might have lost their job. I fail to see why I should differentiate either.

karma_

Spudmonkey wrote: »

Tin foil hat anyone??

I never liked the term looney left, more lazy left.

Bit of a generalization I know but when so many left wing politicians are willing to dump those who couldn't be bothered their arse in with those who might have lost their job. I fail to see why I should differentiate either.

Maybe we could set up extermination camps for the unemployed so? Tender it out to the highest bidder and make some cash.

Wibbs

hoorsmelt wrote: »

I mentioned farming for a reason: it may have escaped your notice but food prices are going through the roof and there are expected to be sugar shortages later on in the year. In this context we need to concentrate on providing for peoples basic needs in terms of food, energy and shelter, it doesn't imply a wish to return to the past. We can provide for such projects while investing in scinetific R&D.

OK How will you finance the R&D? Let's be practical here. I know it's rarely the more extreme left's strong suit. Let's change our farming policy. Then watch the EU get bolshie. If we started sugar beet production again which they effectively killed, watch them get even more bolshie. Much of the extreme left/shinners policies come from an anti EU angle. They would be happy to leave. Frankly they're... whats the technical term? Fcuking morons. Oh I am a major eurosceptic BTW. Well an EU sceptic. I liked the EEC, even the EC, but past Maastricht I get well dubious and have voted Nein ever since. If this notion had been floated back in the 70's then maybe, just maybe we could have forged ahead. Its a big bloody maybe though as the hippies would insist on "taxing the rich" and pumping up corporation tax and then it would be welcome to Cuba without the hot babes, blue seas and sun. Oh we may have been self sufficient but we would be making our own shoes.

The extreme left tends to be all well meaning adolescent pie in the sky stuff. Major throw baby out with the bathwater stuff. The extreme right while being equally dodgy, more so indeed, are generally more practical. Hence there have been way more of those societies in history than socialist ones.

Karma_ wrote:

Capitalism has a track record of failure for the majority for many years now. It's not a stable system at all. It creates a bubble which eventually bursts then moves on to the next bubble. Yes some get rich off this scheme, but it's certainly not a majority. The thing I detest about this system is it requires losers, someone must get stung for those dollars to roll in, whether they be an investor, or some citizen of a third world country who has their resources stripped away.

Cool, well show me a viable and practical alternative for us as a small island nation with quite small natural resources sitting off a capitalist continent in a capitalist world.

I agree many aspects of capitalism are well dodgy, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater here and go the other bloody way.

Spudmonkey

karma_ wrote: »

Maybe we could set up extermination camps for the unemployed so? Tender it out to the highest bidder and make some cash.

Now there's an idea..... :rolleyes:

Maybe looney was apt after all.

karma_

Wibbs wrote: »

OK How will you finance the R&D? Let's be practical here. I know it's rarely the more extreme left's strong suit. Let's change our farming policy. Then watch the EU get bolshie. If we started sugar beet production again which they effectively killed, watch them get even more bolshie. Much of the extreme left/shinners policies come from an anti EU angle. They would be happy to leave. Frankly they're... whats the technical term? Fcuking morons. Oh I am a major eurosceptic BTW. Well an EU sceptic. I liked the EEC, even the EC, but past Maastricht I get well dubious and have voted Nein ever since. If this notion had been floated back in the 70's then maybe, just maybe we could have forged ahead. Its a big bloody maybe though as the hippies would insist on "taxing the rich" and pumping up corporation tax and then it would be welcome to Cuba without the hot babes, blue seas and sun. Oh we may have been self sufficient but we would be making our own shoes.

The extreme left tends to be all well meaning adolescent pie in the sky stuff. Major throw baby out with the bathwater stuff. The extreme right while being equally dodgy, more so indeed, are generally more practical. Hence there have been way more of those societies in history than socialist ones.

Cool, well show me a viable and practical alternative for us as a small island nation with quite small natural resources sitting off a capitalist continent in a capitalist world.

I agree many aspects of capitalism are well dodgy, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater here and go the other bloody way.

Why do you feel it necessary to jam a label on me? I'm not a hippy, ok I do like Canned heat but so what.

No one on the far left espouses a system of pure unadulterated socialism. The main aim is to create a system that is fair for everyone. It's not about having everyone paid the same, it's about being paid commensurately to the role you perform. No one could ever convince me that a banker at the top of the pile deserves an obscene amount of money, while a nurse or doctor gets considerably less.

Also, what is so wrong about making our own shoes?

brianthebard

Wibbs wrote: »

Bit early in the day to be drunk I would have thought? How do hippies overspending come within an asses roar* of the right wing? The retarded right might be more; "I did it myself, why can't the proles? Fcuk them"

Well then push the glass away or see your sponsor. What hippies overspent exactly? The Bert and the Biffo? Its easy to create wealth, its another thing to hold onto it, and the right in this country has proven itself incapable. Fyi I find your condescension pretty disgusting.

hoorsmelt

Wibbs wrote: »

OK How will you finance the R&D? Let's be practical here. I know it's rarely the more extreme left's strong suit. Let's change our farming policy. Then watch the EU get bolshie. If we started sugar beet production again which they effectively killed, watch them get even more bolshie. Much of the extreme left/shinners policies come from an anti EU angle. They would be happy to leave. Frankly they're... whats the technical term? Fcuking morons. Oh I am a major eurosceptic BTW. Well an EU sceptic. I liked the EEC, even the EC, but past Maastricht I get well dubious and have voted Nein ever since. If this notion had been floated back in the 70's then maybe, just maybe we could have forged ahead. Its a big bloody maybe though as the hippies would insist on "taxing the rich" and pumping up corporation tax and then it would be welcome to Cuba without the hot babes, blue seas and sun. Oh we may have been self sufficient but we would be making our own shoes.

There wouldn't be a problem with leaving the EU- at this stage, they'd be happy enough to get rid of us I think. And we'd be well capable of an alternative economic model to the current status quo- opening up to the multi-nationals and following EU directives hasn't exactly worked out too well now has it? Dell and others have upped sticks and left despite the risible corporation tax rate, EU directives have seen the ESB obliged to jack up prices to attract 'competition' into the market while we have lost rights to our fishing grounds. We could continue to trade with the EU if we left like Norway and Switzerland does, it wouldn't be an apocalyptic scenario. Indeed, if we were able to do some of the things I've proposed, it would be better off in the long run. Think outside the box mate.

The extreme left tends to be all well meaning adolescent pie in the sky stuff. Major throw baby out with the bathwater stuff. The extreme right while being equally dodgy, more so indeed, are generally more practical. Hence there have been way more of those societies in history than socialist ones.

Far-right societies are practical?? Maybe for factory owners and bankers but not for the ordinary workers who've been imprisoned, seen their wages decline and conditions worsen (as happened in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy) as a result. Socialist societies tend to come under immediate attack from capitalism as we saw with the Russian Civil War (invasions of Russia by 18 imperialist powers including France, the US and UK), this is something which obviously limits the potential to create such a society and maintain it.

Cool, well show me a viable and practical alternative for us as a small island nation with quite small natural resources sitting off a capitalist continent in a capitalist world.

I agree many aspects of capitalism are well dodgy, but lets not throw the baby out with the bathwater here and go the other bloody way.

These are practical alternatives. It's not practical to base the future of an economy on service industries or letting 'market forces' take care of the future. If we were to do so, we'd never be done waiting for it to work. We shouldn't be afraid to try something new.

thebigbiffo

hoorsmelt wrote: »

Capitalism doesn't work. It doesn't work for the majority of the worlds population- over 1 billion people have no access to clean water, 925 million people are starving, and almost half the worlds population survives on less than $2.50 a day. In the privileged west where we enjoy higher standards of living thanks to the super-exploitation of the neo-colonial world, we still have extreme stratification of wealth and a real differential in living standards between those at the top and the poorest in society.

As for capitalism creating wealth, it hasn't been in a position to create new wealth for a long time now. During the 'boom', there was no increase in production, simply an extension of credit which allowed people to buy a greater share of the goods in circulation- the only increase in production was construction, and we all know the problems reliance on construction has caused. For this country to get back on its feet, socilaist policies and radical thinking are needed. One example of how this could work would be to set up state funded co-operatives on fallow land where formerly unemployed construction workers could produce food for a living. It's only on the basis of a thorough-going economic restructuring towards production and away from services that the economy will be able to provide a decent economically and environmentally sustainable lifestyle for everyone.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_farming#Soviet_Union

a find the bit on the 3+ million dead ukrainian's quite entertaining.

hoorsmelt

thebigbiffo wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_farming#Soviet_Union

a find the bit on the 3+ million dead ukrainian's quite entertaining.

I didn't suggest that people should be herded into a farm at gunpoint or have everything taken from them. To try and claim the Stalinist USSR and its collectives had anything to do with socialism is just plain wrong.

karma_

thebigbiffo wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collective_farming#Soviet_Union

a find the bit on the 3+ million dead ukrainian's quite entertaining.

Get down off your ivory tower there and follow the conversation at least. No one wants a communist system, and a communist system is a million miles away from a co-operative enterprise.

Kasabian

hoorsmelt wrote: »

You need to remember that this is capitalism at its purest- bosses screwing enormous profits out of the country during the boom years, then using unemployment caused by the collapse of their property bubble as an excuse to cut wages and running to the capitalist state to bail out their system and take their losses for them.

I thought I got my sarcasm loaded post across.

Scanlas The 2nd

karma_ wrote: »

Why do you feel it necessary to jam a label on me? I'm not a hippy, ok I do like Canned heat but so what.

No one on the far left espouses a system of pure unadulterated socialism. The main aim is to create a system that is fair for everyone. It's not about having everyone paid the same, it's about being paid commensurately to the role you perform. No one could ever convince me that a banker at the top of the pile deserves an obscene amount of money, while a nurse or doctor gets considerably less.

Also, what is so wrong about making our own shoes?

Capitalism with some minimal government intervention to people to who really have no hope is the best of a bad bunch of options. Socialism is stupidity. No one forces people to be nurses.

You are basically saying people can't spend their money how they want. That's not a society I want to live in. If I want to spend 1 million euro for someone to wash my car then that's what I'll do, I don't care what someone else thinks the man washing my car deserves. That's the problem with these socialist thinking types. They don't think about the real practical consequences of their ideas. They are living in cuckoo land.

Pherekydes

Wibbs wrote: »

Bit early in the day to be drunk I would have thought?

Your avatar does you a disservice.

Wibbs wrote: »

OK How will you finance the R&D? Let's be practical here. I know it's rarely the more extreme left's strong suit. Let's change our farming policy. Then watch the EU get bolshie.

Don't you just love the way people use bolshie as a euphemism for communistic thinking. It actually means 'majority', something the right hates.

hoorsmelt

Kasabian wrote: »

I thought I got my sarcasm loaded post across.