Socialism

[MyQul]

This thread isnt going to end well is it (I can see chippy waving his big padlock)?

 

[Ajhutch]

This thread isnt going to end well is it (I can see chippy waving his big padlock)?

Mature and sensible so far. So no, probably won't end well!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MyQul]

Mature and sensible so far. So no, probably won't end well!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The calm before the ($hit) storm

 

[Nicks90]

The only socialism I'd accept is the version portrayed by gene Roddenberry in Star Trek.
The rest is just another mechanism for social control, just the same as any other type of government, monarchy or religion.
Think about it, there is always a dude at the top. Always a bunch of privileged who run the show and the rest that prop it up through hard work.

 

[Godsdog]

my two penneth,yup socialism is an ideal world where everyone gives a leg up to everyone else but the reality is there will always be someone at the top of the monetary socialism pyramid grabbing well more than his rightful share,so in essence its all pie in the sky

 

[Dutto]

Hmmm interesting Posts that show what a diverse bunch of brewers we are. :thumb:

I'll join in the discussion by pointing out that in the UK "capitalism" isn't working for the general good; even though it may well suit those who are already well off.

My first example is the UK railway system.

Taken into state ownership as an "essential service" in 1948 by the then Labour Government.

Thirty-six years later, in 1984 a Conservative government started the privatisation process by selling off the more profitable arms of the industry (Sealink Ferries, British Transport Hotels, Travellers Fare and British Rail Engineering) and finished the process in 1993.

The whole privatisation process was carried out on the basis that the Tax-Payer would save money.

It started to go tits-up immediately when the assets were sold to a smaller number of companies than promised. This was followed by the collapse of Railtrack (responsible for the tracks themselves) in 2001 which saw its assets passed to the state-owned Network Rail and track maintenance was also brought in-house under Network Rail in 2004.

In other words it was a miserable failure.

However, let's consider what happened back in 2004 as "ancient history" and just consider East Midland Trains; the company that serves Skegness.

Back in 2012 the company was operating at a loss and having to defend a FORTY-SIX MILLION POUND handout from the Government. Also "ancient history"?

Well, how about less than a week ago? This was when the government announced that they were granting East Midland Trains a TWO BILLION POUNDS bailout of Tax-Payers money!

So after 36 years of public ownership under Socialism the privatisation has been a disaster that set off poorly and is getting worse.

Please feel free to check out the references and respond with any arguments that may show how the privatisation of this essential service provides a better deal for the UK's general public.

References:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_of_British_Rail

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-18893265

https://skwawkbox.org/2017/12/02/video-mcdonald-on-the-scandal-of-the-2bn-east-coast-rail-bail-out/

 

[pms67]

Funny how people with a few quid in the bank suddenly soil their expensive smalls when words like this are mentioned, don’t worry, we’re not coming to take your ISA account away, or your massive pension , or your 30 flats you rent out.

 

[simon12]

Hi!
It's working in the present: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...via-thrives-heres-why/?utm_term=.bcab5f68983e

58% of there population live in slums, I agree a greet example of how socialism works.

 

[simon12]

Hmmm interesting Posts that show what a diverse bunch of brewers we are. :thumb:

I'll join in the discussion by pointing out that in the UK "capitalism" isn't working for the general good; even though it may well suit those who are already well off.

My first example is the UK railway system.

Taken into state ownership as an "essential service" in 1948 by the then Labour Government.

Thirty-six years later, in 1984 a Conservative government started the privatisation process by selling off the more profitable arms of the industry (Sealink Ferries, British Transport Hotels, Travellers Fare and British Rail Engineering) and finished the process in 1993.

The whole privatisation process was carried out on the basis that the Tax-Payer would save money.

It started to go tits-up immediately when the assets were sold to a smaller number of companies than promised. This was followed by the collapse of Railtrack (responsible for the tracks themselves) in 2001 which saw its assets passed to the state-owned Network Rail and track maintenance was also brought in-house under Network Rail in 2004.

In other words it was a miserable failure.

However, let's consider what happened back in 2004 as "ancient history" and just consider East Midland Trains; the company that serves Skegness.

Back in 2012 the company was operating at a loss and having to defend a FORTY-SIX MILLION POUND handout from the Government. Also "ancient history"?

Well, how about less than a week ago? This was when the government announced that they were granting East Midland Trains a TWO BILLION POUNDS bailout of Tax-Payers money!

So after 36 years of public ownership under Socialism the privatisation has been a disaster that set off poorly and is getting worse.

Please feel free to check out the references and respond with any arguments that may show how the privatisation of this essential service provides a better deal for the UK's general public.

References:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privatisation_of_British_Rail

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-18893265

https://skwawkbox.org/2017/12/02/video-mcdonald-on-the-scandal-of-the-2bn-east-coast-rail-bail-out/

Perfect example of capitalism not working as the government sells a monopoly to a company, its a great example of a limited industry which needs the government to control but in no way makes socialism a good idea.

 

[simon12]

The only socialism I'd accept is the version portrayed by gene Roddenberry in Star Trek.
The rest is just another mechanism for social control, just the same as any other type of government, monarchy or religion.
Think about it, there is always a dude at the top. Always a bunch of privileged who run the show and the rest that prop it up through hard work.

I agree socialism should be confined to science fistion a place it can work outside of reality.

 

[druid]

One thing that is being overlooked in this current debate is the economic model that is utlilized to underpin the political model. Its one thing to debate capitalist vs socialist, but this is only one half of the debate. The thing that needs to be included is whether the economic model is either Keynesian or Austrian. This has a major impact on how things play out in whatever political sphere you wish to align yourself with. Keynesian economics depends on credit expansion and within this model debt equals wealth. Austrian economics works under a different premiss ( being that saving equals wealth ) under the current Keynesian model, savers ( those that had nothing to do with the economic downturn ) have been punished by receiving essentially zero return for their money ( in the form of interest ) and those that precipitated the collapse, have been handsomely rewarded by being able to borrow and stick in the markets for literally no money down. This recent credit expansion has been a bust from an effectiveness point of view, and for the most point, kicked the can down the road. These chickens will come home to roost, and all the money that governments printed to protect the greedy who made the mess will be given to the tax payer to pay back.....Capitalism privatizes profits while it socializes the risk...

 

[pms67]

I agree socialism should be confined to science fistion a place it can work outside of reality.

Science fistion does sound like a place outside of reality 🤔

 

[Bigcol49]

EDIT Enough of this bo****ks!
Back to home brewing.

 

[Dexter101]

More importantly, if Gene Roddenberry's world were to come true (I for one, love the idea) if replicators existed would people still homebrew... discuss

 

[pms67]

More importantly, if Gene Roddenberry's world were to come true (I for one, love the idea) if replicators existed would people still homebrew... discuss

This 3D machine at my work is a belter, I may stick a homebrew in and see what happens.
Probably just 45 more pints of mediocre watery lager 😄😄😄

 

[BeerCat]

Perhaps the system we are under now could be best described as ****ism.

 

[Dutto]

Hi!
It's working in the present: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...via-thrives-heres-why/?utm_term=.bcab5f68983e

Another situation where one must look at The Messenger after looking at The Message; so who owns The Washington Post?

"In 2013, its longtime controlling family, the Graham family, sold the newspaper to billionaire entrepreneur and Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos for $250 million in cash. The newspaper is owned by Nash Holdings LLC, a holding company Bezos created for the acquisition."

In other words, it's another Daily Wail that promotes those doctrines that further the interests of the rich.

Socialism in Venezuela was doomed to failure when their government used their oil wealth to help the poor of the USA. The Venezuelan generosity towards the victims of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 upset the USA government. Please check out this article ...

https://mic.com/articles/3357/hugo-...s-poor-following-obama-budget-cuts#.HIVKF9oN1

The failure of the Venezuelan economy has been engineered by the USA and is living proof of the saying "Anyone who chooses to sup with The Devil should use a long spoon."

PS

We visited New Orleans in December 2009 and the damage from Hurricane Katrina had still not been repaired in the poorer sections of the city. Here's a few photographs to illustrate my point. They are taken from a Slideshow I put together to cover our holiday it shows just how non-effective capitalism is when the chips are down. Enjoy. :thumb:

 

[Saisonator]

Capitalism is basically natural order, trading goods and services mostly for cash.
The forced alternative unfortunately has a history of purges, poverty and mass starvation of millions.

 

[Saisonator]

Funny how people with a few quid in the bank suddenly soil their expensive smalls when words like this are mentioned, don’t worry, we’re not coming to take your ISA account away, or your massive pension , or your 30 flats you rent out.

I am not rich and work front line in the public sector, but this has just cemented my belief that socialism does not work.

 

[Saisonator]

Another situation where one must look at The Messenger after looking at The Message; so who owns The Washington Post?

"In 2013, its longtime controlling family, the Graham family, sold the newspaper to billionaire entrepreneur and Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos for $250 million in cash. The newspaper is owned by Nash Holdings LLC, a holding company Bezos created for the acquisition."

In other words, it's another Daily Wail that promotes those doctrines that further the interests of the rich.

Socialism in Venezuela was doomed to failure when their government used their oil wealth to help the poor of the USA. The Venezuelan generosity towards the victims of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 upset the USA government. Please check out this article ...

https://mic.com/articles/3357/hugo-...s-poor-following-obama-budget-cuts#.HIVKF9oN1

The failure of the Venezuelan economy has been engineered by the USA and is living proof of the saying "Anyone who chooses to sup with The Devil should use a long spoon."

PS

We visited New Orleans in December 2009 and the damage from Hurricane Katrina had still not been repaired in the poorer sections of the city. Here's a few photographs to illustrate my point. They are taken from a Slideshow I put together to cover our holiday it shows just how non-effective capitalism is when the chips are down. Enjoy. :thumb:

Chavez should have spent a bit more effort taking care of his own people and kept his nose out of other countries.
All he was doing was being provocative. When there were more than enough people a damn sight poorer in Venezuala than in the U.S..