"We are the only OECD state where some get back more than they pay in income tax"

[Firefly]

Yes, plenty of different brands available.

I agree. And in your opinion do you think there would be a better or worse selection available in a socialist state where nobody has the incentive to make bread?

Why? NK is a country technically still at war with SK and with US imposed economic sanctions. It is ruled by a dictator and there are no democratic elections.

NK has its origins deeply rooted in socialism. From Wikipedia:

".... in 1948, separate governments were formed: the socialist Democratic People's Republic of Korea in the north, and the capitalist Republic of Korea in the south."
" North Korea officially describes itself as a self-reliant socialist state "
"Juche, an ideology of national self-reliance, was introduced into the constitution as a "creative application of Marxism–Leninism"[29] in 1972."
"The means of production are owned by the state through state-run enterprises and collectivized farms. Most services such as healthcare, education, housing and food production are subsidized or state-funded"

NK is about as much socialist as the US is.

You should be charging for posts like these..haven't laughed as much all day!

But at least they both have one thing in common, they use their vast resources to build WMD.

According to the World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS), the US spent 3.3% of its GDP on its military in 2015. Predictably there is no entry for NK, but judging its recent show of strength and the fact that any pictures I've seen show people practically emaciated from malnutrition, I would guess it's a lot higher

Although in fairness to Chavez, he was the democratically elected leader

Thanks to the lowest turnout in Venezuelan history!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Venezuela_(1999–present)

and did try to do a lot for the poor.

He started off well, but then soon descended into the natural progression to a dictator himself:

"In mid August 1999, the Constitutional Assembly moved to restructure the nations judiciary, giving itself the power to fire judges, seeking to expedite the investigations of corruption outstanding against what the New York Times estimated were nearly half of the nation's 4700 judges, clerks, and bailiffs"
" Over 190 judges were eventually suspended on charges of corruption. Eventually the Supreme Court was also dissolved and new judges were appointed that were supporters of Chávez"

However the people on the streets soon got wise of his plans:

"Chávez's opposition originated from the response to the "cubanization" of Venezuela when mothers realized that the new textbooks in Venezuela were really Cuban books filled with revolutionary propaganda and with different covers causing them to protest"

"By the summer months of 2001, the opposition groups grew quickly from concerned mothers to labor unions, business interests, church groups, and right and leftwing political parties"

Ha - even the lefties went up against him!!!

"the Confederación de Trabajadores de Venezuela (CTV) – a labour union federation with strong links to the AD party[55] – then called for a general business strike (paro cívico) for 10 December 2001[56] to protest the 49 laws"

Plenty more here:


http://theconversation.com/how-toda...ated-by-hugo-chavezs-revolutionary-plan-61474

Oh no! We are back in the USSR again! Why?

Because it is the country that most resembles a socialist state. Think Stalin. And we all know how that ended up!


We could go on all day at this lark, but again we don't have to. We have clear examples where those countries going the socialist / communist route have time and again failed leading to the misery of those who are most vulnerable.

 

[Firefly]

Dictators. It's fine to label yourself socialist, as a means to achieving power,but if you rule by dictatorship then you are no socialist.

Can you name any leader who has turned his state into a socialist state and stayed in power without becomming a dictator?

This of course would never happen in our free and open market system. We have democratic values and our capitalist leaders would never engage with brutally dictators in Lybia, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, would they?

Sadly they have but they face the electorate. Look how it fared for Tony Blair

I've already explained my core belief system to you. I believe we should capitalise on the resources of the earth in an ethically and environmentally sustainable way.
Would you take issue with that core belief?

Sounds great and leads me to ask you for a 3rd time, how would you calculate what a farmer should be paid for his produce?

And when you say ethically, how do you define this?

I'm not sure. It's the delivery of the service that I think is the issue. Once you are in the system it is generally excellent from my experience.

Really? Even seen all the people in trolleys in A&E who are in the system?

 

[TheBigShort]

I agree. And in your opinion do you think there would be a better or worse selection available in a socialist state where nobody has the incentive to make bread?

Any state, where nobody has the incentive to make bread, is not desirable.

"The means of production are owned by the state through state-run enterprises and collectivized farms. Most services such as healthcare, education, housing and food production are subsidized or state-funded"

This is a central command economy. Why do you keep advocating such a system?

According to the World Bank (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS), the US spent 3.3% of its GDP on its military in 2015.

Or about $500billion! Make you vomit wouldn't it? I mean, realistically, any country that spends that on weaponry must be intending on using it, don't you think?

Predictably there is no entry for NK, but judging its recent show of strength and the fact that any pictures I've seen show people practically emaciated from malnutrition, I would guess it's a lot higher

Yes, absolutely disgraceful. Between the US and NK both should stop their gross militarism, shouldn't they?

Thanks to the lowest turnout in Venezuelan history!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Venezuela_(1999–present)

That's democracy for you.

He started off well, but then soon descended into the natural progression to a dictator himself:

That's awful.

Ha - even the lefties went up against him!!!

Says it all then, doesn't it? If the leftie socialists went against him, then it's hard to imagine that he was running a leftist socialist state

Because it is the country that most resembles a socialist state.

It was a centrally command economy led by unelected officials. I don't advocate such a system, do you?

 

[TheBigShort]

Can you name any leader who has turned his state into a socialist state and stayed in power without becomming a dictator?

No, can you?
Considering I don't advocate a socialist state, in the manner you imagine, then what is the point of this?

Sounds great and leads me to ask you for a 3rd time, how would you calculate what a farmer should be paid for his produce?

And when you say ethically, how do you define this?

I support in principle the system applied by the EU. I support the concept of having a perpetual abundance of food to feed the population, rather than a free market system where the prospect of inflationary pressures could lead to social unrest and worse.
It's not without its faults, as Purple has highlighted earlier, but those faults are not insurmountable I would think.

Really? Even seen all the people in trolleys in A&E who are in the system?

I consider being on a waiting list, or waiting on a trolley for medical attention, as outside the system.
Only when you are in receipt of medical attention are you in the system. That is what I meant.
Waiting in a doctor's surgery for instance, doesn't classify as in the system.

 

[Firefly]

Any state, where nobody has the incentive to make bread, is not desirable.

Tends to happen when states go down the socialist route.

This is a central command economy. Why do you keep advocating such a system?

Because it goes hand in hand with socialist states, or are you trying to distance yourself from the failed examples provided?

Or about $500billion! Make you vomit wouldn't it? I mean, realistically, any country that spends that on weaponry must be intending on using it, don't you think?

It's a shedload of money I agree and just shows how rich the US is when 3.3% of its GDP is $500billion. The country most associated with capitalism must be doing something right!!

Yes, absolutely disgraceful. Between the US and NK both should stop their gross militarism, shouldn't they?

I agree.

That's democracy for you.

Kinda handy though. And especially when you made the reference earlier in the thread to context!

That's awful.

Yip, tends to happen!

Says it all then, doesn't it? If the leftie socialists went against him, then it's hard to imagine that he was running a leftist socialist state

He tried to but like all good socialists he went down the inevitable road to dictatorshi/////p

It was a centrally command economy led by unelected officials. I don't advocate such a system, do you?

I obviously don't but again it goes hand in hand with socialist utopia

 

[Firefly]

No, can you?
Considering I don't advocate a socialist state, in the manner you imagine, then what is the point of this?

Genuinely, I would love to hear your socialist ideas in more detail, outlining how they could be implemented, how they would better our people and in all the time we've been on this planet where it has been successfully implemented in the past. I'm not saying capitalism or the free market is perfect but it's the best system we have tried.

No, can you?
I support in principle the system applied by the EU. I support the concept of having a perpetual abundance of food to feed the population, rather than a free market system where the prospect of inflationary pressures could lead to social unrest and worse.
It's not without its faults, as Purple has highlighted earlier, but those faults are not insurmountable I would think.

You have referenced the floor price for food produce...like the minimum wage. Is this the price that should be paid to farmers? Should they have the ability to earn more or should they all be paid the same? What's a fair price to pay them for their produce?

 

[TheBigShort]

Tends to happen when states go down the socialist route.

No, it doesn't. Nowhere, in the history of humanity, regardless of what economic system, were people not incentivised to make bread.
That is sheer folly.
For sure, economic systems have collapsed leading to food shortages. I referenced the Arab Spring earlier as an example. The USSR is another example and the US in 1929, 'The Great Depression', is another example of a collapsed economic system. Germany post WW1 is another, France 1789 is another too. All of the economic systems, from fuedalism to capitalism to socialism to communism all collapsed and resulted in food shortages and poverty to lesser or greater degrees for their populations.
The incentive to make bread couldn't have been greater.

Because it goes hand in hand with socialist states, or are you trying to distance yourself from the failed examples provided?

I was never associated with those states, why do you keep peddling this nonsense?

It's a shedload of money I agree and just shows how rich the US is when 3.3% of its GDP is $500billion. The country most associated with capitalism must be doing something right!!

The US is the finest example of an open progressive society through technological innovation and research and development and free will.
It's just a pity that it is also plagued with individuals and organizations that infest this ingenuity with scare-mongering, war-mongering, win-at-all cost policies.
There is so much to admire about the US and it's people.
There is also, unfortunately, much to despair.

He tried to but like all good socialists he went down the inevitable road to dictatorshi/////p

Like all bad socialists rather.

I obviously don't but again it goes hand in hand with socialist utopia

Depends on your definition of a socialist utopia. It doesn't fit mine.

 

[TheBigShort]

Genuinely, I would love to hear your socialist ideas in more detail, outlining how they could be implemented, how they would better our people and in all the time we've been on this planet where it has been successfully implemented in the past. I'm not saying capitalism or the free market is perfect but it's the best system we have tried.

It's not rocket science really. I support the concept of a democratic socialist republic, the sovereignty of the state residing in the will of the people.
I consider two objectives. What we need as a people, and what we want as a people.
I support free market enterprise for all that is wanted, subject to fair procedure, standards and quality set out through good governance.
I support government intervention for all that is needed, set out in public policy, as determined by the people through the ballot box.
Things that are needed - food, housing, education, health, etc
Things that are wanted - everything else over and above what is needed.

The discussion here is to determine, or define, how we deliver products and services to the population in the most efficient and cost effective way.
I have my views, I am open to persuasion.

 

[Deiseblue]

H

Firstly I would like to see this backed up. And secondly, am I reading this correct - are you saying that because the gap between earnings in the private and public sectors has narrowed you think it should be widened again? @BigShort, as you have liked Deise's post, can you confirm you would be happy to promote this policy of inequality?

I also note you use the term "pay restoration". That's funny, as when wages were reduced they were roundly referred to as "cuts" but now that there is a move to increase them they are called pay restorations. Of course the flipside of this could equally be argued, that when pay was reduced that was pay restoration back to pre Celtic Tiger madness and the moves to increase pay now are pay rises..

In terms of understanding the methodology behind the Government initiated independent report by the Public Services Pay Commission I can only refer you to their website which contains the report in full.

The report concludes that as at 2014 the pay differential between the sectors was relatively on a par , in the 3 years subsequently pay increases in the private sector have outpaced those in the public sector so yes I believe that further pay restoration is indeed appropriate in the EU's fastest growing economy .

Both the Government as employers & the Unions as employee representatives refer to the continuing process of salary negotiations under the gradual winding down of FEMPI as " pay restoration " & as such that's the term I use.

 

[jjm]

indeed appropriate in the EU's fastest growing economy .

Both the Government as employers & the Unions as employee representatives refer to the continuing process of salary negotiations under the gradual winding down of FEMPI as " pay restoration " & as such that's the term I use.[/QUOTE]

We need to understand as a nation one of the reasons high earners will always pay more is down to the fact we are over paying ourselves both public and private sectors.This is putting pressure on lower wage earners to afford/ access goods and services I don't see a better way than using the tax system to address the affects of over paying ourselves.We need to have a breakdown on the wage level of these new jobs in the so called fasted growing economy . I expect high tax payers will get hit if these new jobs are lower wage earners. I would say there has being pay restoration/Increases in the private sector in Companies that can afford to do so .I would also say high wage earners are doing better than lower wage earners but I have no way of knowing for sure.The strange thing is if we go with Purple and firefly high earners will end up paying more tax.

 

[Purple]

It's not rocket science really. I support the concept of a democratic socialist republic, the sovereignty of the state residing in the will of the people.
I consider two objectives. What we need as a people, and what we want as a people.
I support free market enterprise for all that is wanted, subject to fair procedure, standards and quality set out through good governance.
I support government intervention for all that is needed, set out in public policy, as determined by the people through the ballot box.
Things that are needed - food, housing, education, health, etc
Things that are wanted - everything else over and above what is needed.

The discussion here is to determine, or define, how we deliver products and services to the population in the most efficient and cost effective way.
I have my views, I am open to persuasion.

That's a really excellent post. I don't fully agree but it's very well put.

 

[Firefly]

It's not rocket science really. I support the concept of a democratic socialist republic, the sovereignty of the state residing in the will of the people.
I consider two objectives. What we need as a people, and what we want as a people.
I support free market enterprise for all that is wanted, subject to fair procedure, standards and quality set out through good governance.
I support government intervention for all that is needed, set out in public policy, as determined by the people through the ballot box.
Things that are needed - food, housing, education, health, etc
Things that are wanted - everything else over and above what is needed.

The discussion here is to determine, or define, how we deliver products and services to the population in the most efficient and cost effective way.
I have my views, I am open to persuasion.

I agree, a very well made reply. The "needs" you've mentioned are certainly needs (I think we'd all agree on that), however I believe that the private sector should be involved in these where it makes sense. If the private sector can provide the same service for less cost to the state it should be able to do so. The smaller the public sector, the higher the tax intake for the state which means that the service the state does provide will be much better funded.
In any case, at a high level I do agree with you however. Just like extreme left viewpoints of central planning I also have an issue with libertarian viewpoints. Slightly right of centre is my preferred option.

 

[jjm]

Firefly
Five or six years ago I would agree with you but not any longer What is happening in Ireland we finish up paying Private sector more than if the state provided the service in most cases we tax payers finish up paying twice when they private sector are involved along with the state.

 

[Firefly]

You have referenced the floor price for food produce...like the minimum wage. Is this the price that should be paid to farmers? Should they have the ability to earn more or should they all be paid the same? What's a fair price to pay them for their produce?

Just to follow up on this. What's a fair price to pay farmers for their produce?

 

[TheBigShort]

Just to follow up on this. What's a fair price to pay farmers for their produce?

On the face of it, the price will be determined by supply and demand. But as we are talking about food, which is essential for human life, then I would prefer not to leave the price of food to the free market.
That's all well and good in times of abundance, it results in cheap food for consumers. But if the price goes too low then some farmers won't bother and will leave the industry. This is bad, as during times of food shortages (history is littered with them), the absence of a sufficient pool of farmers will result in food shortages and all the consequences that goes with that.
So I'm happy to pay farmers the market price for their produce, subject to a basic income that will ensure their continued presence on the farm regardless of the price of food.
This in turn is not perfect, it has knock on consequences for non-EU markets and arguably it is a contributory factor in rising obesity levels. This is inefficiency.
The alternative could be food shortages and hunger. Obesity is a societal health problem. Starvation is inhumane.

 

[TheBigShort]

I agree, a very well made reply.

So, we can put to bed the allegations and insinuations of a soviet socialist style or North Korean style of governance?
Will you accept that you are not up against the Anti-Capitalist?

 

[Firefly]

On the face of it, the price will be determined by supply and demand. But as we are talking about food, which is essential for human life, then I would prefer not to leave the price of food to the free market.
That's all well and good in times of abundance, it results in cheap food for consumers. But if the price goes too low then some farmers won't bother and will leave the industry. This is bad, as during times of food shortages (history is littered with them), the absence of a sufficient pool of farmers will result in food shortages and all the consequences that goes with that.
So I'm happy to pay farmers the market price for their produce, subject to a basic income that will ensure their continued presence on the farm regardless of the price of food.
This in turn is not perfect, it has knock on consequences for non-EU markets and arguably it is a contributory factor in rising obesity levels. This is inefficiency.
The alternative could be food shortages and hunger. Obesity is a societal health problem. Starvation is inhumane.

We're getting somewhere! I'm ok with a minimum price for essentials, but we've all heard of farmers getting paid to keep their land in clover, about the wine lakes and butter mountains. I doubt that CAP payments cover Pomegranite seeds or Quinoa, so the market price determines what a farmer gets paid like everone and everything else... the fruit & veg shop shops around when buying potatoes to sell. The potato growers have to keep their price down so that their produce is picked by the fruit & veg shop and all the way down. I've read Tim Harfords book called Adapt where he refers to the fact that an average Wallmart in the US has approx. 1m products. How in God's name can we possibly determine the fair price for these products without the market!

So, we can put to bed the allegations and insinuations of a soviet socialist style or North Korean style of governance?
Will you accept that you are not up against the Anti-Capitalist?

You've made a sensible post, however if you wade through posts by Complainer and RainyDay you'll see examples of posts that are far more to the left. It's my opinion that anywhere socialism has been tried, the result is dictatorship. I've asked that you provide an example of your ideology and where it has worked.

 

[TheBigShort]

if you wade through posts by Complainer and RainyDay you'll see examples of posts that are far more to the left.

I don't know who they are or what their opinions are. I don't speak for them nor they for me. This is irrelevant.

I've asked that you provide an example of your ideology and where it has worked.

No you didn't. You asked me for examples of an ideology that I don't endorse (central command closed economies), but that you labeled me with regardless.
I'm asking you to retract those labels.

 

[Firefly]

I don't know who they are or what their opinions are. I don't speak for them nor they for me. This is irrelevant.

Riight

No you didn't. You asked me for examples of an ideology that I don't endorse (central command closed economies), but that you labeled me with regardless.
I'm asking you to retract those labels.

From my post #206
Genuinely, I would love to hear your socialist ideas in more detail, outlining how they could be implemented, how they would better our people and in all the time we've been on this planet where it has been successfully implemented in the past.

 

[TheBigShort]

but we've all heard of farmers getting paid to keep their land in clover, about the wine lakes and butter mountains.

This is the inefficiency I referred to earlier. But between food abundance or food shortages, I know which problem is more preferable to deal with.

I doubt that CAP payments cover Pomegranite seeds or Quinoa,

I don't know either.

I've read Tim Harfords book called Adapt where he refers to the fact that an average Wallmart in the US has approx. 1m products. How in God's name can we possibly determine the fair price for these products without the market!

Who said anything about getting rid of the market?
Any issues I raise about the market are to do with the notions that it is 'free' and that it always finds the fair price. This is delusional. There is widespread inefficiency, waste, duplication, rigging, interference, collusion, distortion in the markets that attempt to influence prices to maximize profits to the detriment of the consumer.