Quantcast
Can Capitalism be positive for the public? - Page 6 - GF - General Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
Gym Beglin

Can Capitalism be positive for the public?

Recommended Posts

Agreed it's an interesting idea, but isn't part of it the removal of any state support i.e. no healthcare and education, so that the consumer then buys education provision for the children and purchases health insurance. The latter of those has not worked particularly well in the United States as can be seen by the Commonwealth Funds ranking table below.

 

 

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2014/jun/mirror-mirror

 

If healthcare and education aren't provided the disparity between services that people can afford will grow considerably. Of course there will be those who say it allows people greater choice, but people often make short term economic decisions (i.e. buying a cheaper healthcare plan) that can have significant negative repercussions later (for example they are diagnosed with a disease not covered by their plan).

True, this is why I see it as a libertarian concept. On the other hand, you are seemingly under no economic pressure to buy cheap inadequate education and healthcare on 2500 francs a month as they had it in Swiss proposal, and if you make a stupid decision, it becomes your problem. Still, healthcare in the US had the worst of both worlds, choice didn't create competition so prices remained arbitrary and inflated, whilst leaving a good proportion of the society with no or with poor quality  healthcare.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So why not just use the accepted term laissez-faire instead of commandeering a pre-existing term that originally meant something else?

 

I think you overstate the extent to which we are controlled by corporations like zombie ants.

 

Well, why the term originated is rather irrelevant to the claim that nobody can explain what it means. That being said it came into being to describe a particular line of thought that is not the same as laissez-faire and was also not Liberalism, but a reaction to it (hence the change of the term). Either way it's a term that anyone with half an eye on the economics of the last few decades understands, and could tell you the main pillars of it, and is far from an unknowable abomination. 

 

Not sure why you feel the need to start with the silliness of controlled zombie ants. You may think that I overstate the extent to which people's behaviour and choices are manipulated but it does rather leave you in the awkward position of explaining why more people, given free choice and all the available information, are voting for UKIP than Lib Dem. You agree that people act in their own self-interest, what's the next step then to so many of them voting against their own self-interest if not that they've been engineered into making poor choices? My worldview is okay at explaining that, it makes sense; I don't see how yours can. 

 

I doubt we'd have any disagreement that religion controlling the culture someone is raised in will often define their behaviour, and other forces controlling the inputs people receive are no different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reformulate the problem of getting google to pay tax in terms of their "ownership of democracy, law and culture" to make sure I understand what you're proposing.

Stu isn't proposing anything in that post so perhaps you need to reformulate your request for clarification?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember when Hades was a Marxist? How time flies 

 

 

anyway, have a bit of this - vital teacher and mentor, Richard Wolff 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/06/2016 at 20:40, Gym Beglin said:

I'm trying to understand how money-obsessed companies, or people, can run public services in a fair way and for the majority of the population to agree with that as a principle, can you help me?

 

It's pretty obvious that there needs to be a sea-change in the way in which we talk about politics, and political parties, and elections.  

 

When you go to the ballot, you're not choosing which 'party' you want to be in control, you're choosing between capitalism and socialism.

 

The sooner that poor people are better educated about this very stark, very obvious, choice, then the sooner we can see the back of the Conservatives forever.

 

<_<

Capitalism is only distorted, because the means of exchange has become distorted.
Solve that, and you solve everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Red Shift said:

Capitalism is only distorted, because the means of exchange has become distorted.
Solve that, and you solve everything.

We should use leaves and then everyone can be millionaires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/11/2019 at 12:24, Jose Jones said:

We should use leaves and then everyone can be millionaires.

Funny you should say that, but there is a society of Polynesians (from memory) that literally get to create their own money to spend in the local economy. The more they make, the more they can spend. However, there are guidelines for the makeup of that money, and it is time consuming making the notes. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really interesting report on Channel 4 News earlier on how even some business leaders acknowledge that capitalism isn’t working as it should.

 

I was particularly interested in Ann Pettifor’s input, as a license to trade is something I’ve thought Labour should look at to force big international businesses to pay their fair share of tax.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Vincent Vega said:

Really interesting report on Channel 4 News earlier on how even some business leaders acknowledge that capitalism isn’t working as it should.

 

I was particularly interested in Ann Pettifor’s input, as a license to trade is something I’ve thought Labour should look at to force big international businesses to pay their fair share of tax.

 

 

Very interesting that mate, thanks for sharing.

 

As coincidence would have it, I happened to watch that shortly after reading chapter 1, part 2 of the Lion and the Unicorn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Red Shift said:

Funny you should say that, but there is a society of Polynesians (from memory) that literally get to create their own money to spend in the local economy. The more they make, the more they can spend. However, there are guidelines for the makeup of that money, and it is time consuming making the notes. 

I was basically just making a Douglas Adams reference (could be from The Restaurant at the End of the Universe).  Maybe that's where he got it from.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Book Review: 

Money and Government: The Past and Future of Economicsir?t=thneyoreofbo-20&l=as2&o=1&a=0300248

by Robert Skidelsky



"“There is no magic money tree,” as Theresa May put it during the snap election of 2017—virtually the only memorable line from one of the most lackluster campaigns in British history."

"The truly extraordinary thing about May’s phrase is that it isn’t true. There are plenty of magic money trees in Britain, as there are in any developed economy. They are called “banks.” Since modern money is simply credit, banks can and do create money literally out of nothing, simply by making loans."

Looks like a great book; hopefully I wont need a loan to buy it!


https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2019/12/05/against-economics/?utm_source=pocket&amp;utm_medium=email&amp;utm_campaign=pockethits&amp;fbclid=IwAR0P2qAXg7Cxq9lSfUIYBfanwnGfKz48ay7qUxsFYpq30mNMYzdJ7gJTuQk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Available Subscriptions

  • Last Match Report

  • Latest Posts

    • In terms of our Mike's excursion at Speke, seems a real possibility there was trouble with the RET (Rapid Exit Taxiway). Very near where the plane ended up, not only is there a massive change in the taxiway surfacing, but in dark/murky/rainy conditions, I wouldn't want to be using the white line on the right as a reference point; the surfacing suddenly changes from tarmac/concrete to grass. Here's a pic. Don't forget the plane would be exiting the runway and entering this taxiway from right to left...      Now you're talking my language. Don't miss out on the French lot BEA as well. Some decent stuff on there.    They did a great video of an Airbus windshear incident on takeoff from Bogota...   
    • Don Carlo: Everton! Fuck that.   *Advisor whispers something in his ear.   Don Carlo: 60 goals! Tell them I'll forfeit my signing bonus.
    • Their lists of firsts and reasons why a top class manager should jump at the chance to manage them is pathetic. Like me suggesting Scarlett Johansson would take me because of my Air Training Corp Wing Blue for throwing the discus back in the 80s, along with double jointed thumb and ability to do a perfect kermit the Frog impression. Hey if I thought it would work I'd try.    Ancelotti is probably knocking one out to the list of glorious firsts that Everton parade instead of silverware. Aren't they one of only two clubs to not win anything this century? Accrington were a founder member of the football league, along with Preston NE and Notts County (and others), it means fuck all. So you had underground heating first big fucking deal.    They have spent a small fortune in the last few years to end up even worse, most of that spending still owed to their owner. Some of that involved selling their best players and buying shite in return, that rarely if ever ends well. They go on about their new stadium and the debt that will bring like it will entice any prospective manager. BMD is all they can see as the answer to all of their problems when actually it's just a massive problem that could eventually sink them.   Most football managers do not live in a bubble, they know what's going on and often far more than the fans. Any manager they target won't have to do much homework to see what a poisoned chalice that place is. That doesn't mean someone won't take it, these days taking a premiership manager job often entails you getting sacked eventually and being financially sorted for life.    I can see the mancs smashing them this weekend, they had a little bounce against Chelsea but the rot has set in there. Fair play to Moshiri IF he manages to convince a top class manager and gives him funds, that could help them to catch up with the other teams in the mid table and might even at a stretch end their long wait for silverware. But will that appease the bitters? Probably not, as we set the bar ever higher their chance of getting close to it fades even further away. We all know that being above us is the only thing that makes them happy.         
    • Yes superb , the time he crossed to Salah who stuck it in and the camera caught him going yess was brilliant. The best.
    • Andy Robertson has confidently claimed that no team would want to play Liverpool in the knockout stages of the Champions League.

      No team has a better record in the competition over the last two years than the Reds as they finished runner/up to Real Madrid in 2017/8 and then going one better last season against Tottenham.

      It is that statistical fact that Robertson knows will play on the mind of their opponents when we reach the crunch games of the competition.

      Sky Sports reported the left-back as saying:

      “We respect every opponent we play but we know the way we have done things in the last two years and nobody wants to play against us and that is clear - but it is up to us to keep proving that.

      “We cannot rely on that and we need to keep proving why people don't want to play against us but, so far, we have done that.

      “ We will wait for the draw and see who we get in the last 16. 

      “We know it will be tough regardless but we look forward to the challenge as we want to go far in this tournament again."  

      Along with the overall quality of the Liverpool side, it is also the level of respect which Robertson says has been well earned across Europe.

      “That is the atmosphere we have created in the last two years, a team which has been to the final twice and has obviously lost one and won one and we are respected in this tournament.

      “ Maybe the first season when we went to the final, I don't think we were really respected until maybe after the quarter-final when we went to Porto and washed them away.

      “ We did not get the respect we deserved. 

      “Now, we know we are respected in Europe.   "No one will want us but everyone who gets into the last 16 will fancy themselves."

      But Robertson says that they are no longer the underdogs and have a big target on their back.

      “We know that now, we are the champions and everyone wants to beat us.

      “ That is what we have to deal with and hopefully we can deal with it well. 

      “But there are about 40 games between now and the last 16 (in February) - so we will worry about that when the time comes."

      Robertson also paid tribute to midfielder Naby Keita who has been a star performer of late.

      “Our squad is full of quality and unfortunately for Naby this season, he has picked up an injury which has kept him out a bit and he came back and the midfield has done so well.

      “But he has had an opportunity in the last two games and he has been excellent. He has added to our options and that is what we need to create.

      “Naby replicates what this team is about. He was the man of the match on Saturday and again (against Salzburg) he was excellent.   "Long may that continue."


       
      View full article
  • Latest Round Up

  • Popular Contributors

×