Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why do the right want to return us to the 1800s? Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    because it was run for the enrichment of the elite, it was more state capitalism than the people power of socialism.
    It's supporters would beg to differ.

    So we've seen that socialism/communism has failed in every country but China. However, give then 10 years and I'm sure we'll see that change.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by alex5455)
    clear and total misunderstanding of socialism. wealth does not exist in socialism so there is no tax. educate yourself.
    that is inconsistent with your previous argument as this represents ideal socialism in its purest form - commonly known as ideal communism which due to the human condition is unlikely to ever work
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by natninja)
    that is inconsistent with your previous argument as this represents ideal socialism in its purest form - commonly known as ideal communism which due to the human condition is unlikely to ever work
    no my previous points have all be how to mitigate this travesty of a system we have.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    ukip do, most of the eu regulation they hate is related to workers rights. and the tories also want to abolish workers rights in fact they have started to with this stupid shares for rights thing
    Tony Benn opposes the EU too
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adam543)
    The shares for rights scheme was one man's idea, and it was put down by the rest of the party at the Conservative conference. One man doesn't represent the whole right wing, or even the whole of his party. And I'm pretty sure that UKIP are mostly against the EU because they don't like immigrants, not because of workers rights.
    More financial - why are we sending 53 million a day to Brussels and a 0.3% levy on our VAT

    i.e 20% VAT paid, 0.3% goes directly to Brussels and 19.7% goes to London
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amholcroft)
    We are the Socialists, you will be provided for, resistance is futile.
    Thatcher defeated you guys!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MatureStudent36)
    It's supporters would beg to differ.

    So we've seen that socialism/communism has failed in every country but China. However, give then 10 years and I'm sure we'll see that change.

    IT DID FAIL IN CHINA. Read up on the 'great leap' forward, the 'socialist re-education movement' and the ' cultural revolution', people were hardly moving from capatilist hong kong to socialist china, they couldn't keep the waves of refugees out there were so many. China's economy boomend under Deng Xiaoping NOT CHAIRMAN MAO. Deng was much more capatilist. Chinese politics ( economically) took a MASSIVE shift to the right allowing the economic boom.

    Socialism caused the death of millions in China and held down what should of been a booming economy for three decades.

    Arguably china wasn't truly socialist, but we can say say that attempting socialism caused these massive failures.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Ironically most of the people that health and safety is supposed to protect would be most in favor of doing away with it.

    Its been taken to a stupid extreme. A friend of mine was working in a hospital and the rules say that a hard hat must be worn at all times while on site. As the hospital counted as the site he had to wear a hard hat even in parts of the hospital where no work was going on. So he'd be in the hospital shop surrounded by the public getting a *******ing for not wearing a hard hat. It defies common sense and makes peoples jobs more difficult.

    It may not be the fault of the legislation but the jobsworths on the ground that enforce it in an inflexible way.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    a till operator at tesco or a food maker at mcdonalds, how much do you think they would suffer without NMW, a hell of a lot is the answer.
    Do you know what classical economics are? If supermarkets dropped the wage so low, no one would work for them, i fear you lack the basic knowledge of supply and demand for wages.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jordan-James)
    Do you know what classical economics are? If supermarkets dropped the wage so low, no one would work for them, i fear you lack the basic knowledge of supply and demand for wages.
    Owned.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    a wage that allows a person to live for a start, which if the right get their way the majority of wages wont, extra money for the suits at the top.
    Suits at the top, that either got there by there own power or by their generation aboves. In short, they earned it. You give someone a tip at a restuarant and they'll start expecting one; it is no longer a compliment to give them a tip. You give workers higher wages for being uninnovative, not aiming high, not believing in themselves or trying to attain higher economic status and less of those will try and become businessmen... businessmen, which funnily enough, don't have job security (should state cover that in the name of fairness?), which pay everyones wages and without which, the economy could not exist.

    By hiring you or any other person the business(wo)man is providing you a service. Why should they be inclined or contracted to keep that service by regulations which undermine their spirit?

    If you are a worker, you are suspectible to firing, your are suspectible to low wages, because you chose not to try and get to the top. Don't blame anyone else, don't expect something for nothing, as doing either will get you no where. If you really wish to attain a higher standard of living, then of your own accord, go get it. If you want a girlfriend, are you entitled to them? No, you must go, have the courage, and get that girl.

    The only real reason for the extensive regulations available now are in the name of democracy - in other words, the system lets your vote (if you are a minimum wage or unemployed/unskilled worker, you are virtually a waste of space to our economy, and may have a negative impact), count as much as a highly innovative, enterprising businessman who has contributed potential millions to the countries economy, when it comes to voting for the party and people that make these decisions.

    Your kind of people have already won; you won when you overthrew King Charles and formed a goverment where voting was roughly speaking, equal to classes overtime. How is the goverment to do economically best for the country, if the people that vote for it, are so self-centered, so selfish, that they vote not for the economy, but for themselves, because they are so lazy, and have this concept of fairness. At the end of the day, you started of, and will be starting of, at any time if you choose to, on par with everyone else who gets to the top.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    without NMW all jobs would be poorly paid except for leeching executives.

    why do you tories want to make it easier for the workers to be exploited for the financial gain of the people at the top, i thought you were the "party of the hard working", doesnt a hard working cleaner deserve a fair wage?
    Nearly everyone on the NMW can get better on benefits, which is probably why so many are on benefits. Raising the NMW lead to less jobs lead to increased benefits, which meant the NMW needs raising to keep it above that level. Once this was found to be unsustainable, the goverment has slowed the raising of the NMW. Thus without the initial NMW, no problem would exist.

    Workers are not exploited - they chose to do that job - and the 'financial gain' heads towards the goverment too. A hard working cleaner didn't work hard to get their, didn't innovate or do something good for this economy, so no, they don't deserve a high wage.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    CONSERVATIVES. It's in the name.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    certainly, right wing, economic sense, ie tories, ukip, american republicans for reference, think ayn rand maybe a little less evil though

    and capitalism, the failure we have now for an economic system
    You know how we've had to redefine poverty because the old definitions didn't apply to the UK any more? Tell me more about how our economy is a failure, I'm really interested.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    So right wingers, who want to abolish the NMW, health and safety, working time regulations, working conditions regulations, safety standards for products, benefits.

    This is what britain was in the 1800s, and will turn britain back into what it was then, the rich, feasting and partying while the poor suffer and starve. do you want to go back to working 20 hour days, for starvation wages in unsafe conditions, when you can be sacked for getting ill or hurt and receive no sick pay, and no unemployment help or disability support?

    capitalism had its chance and has failed.

    update: so through the neg storm, the only reasons the right has come up with for destroying human rights and workers rights and indeed the nations health has been "to help the markets, corporations and business owners"

    so in summary, what i have said is totally correct and the right even admit it.
    So do you know what life was like in the 1800s or do you only know that "anti-liberal" faults that your liberal educators and mates have taught you to frame life at that time by? What was say the standing of the nation at the time, or the capability of people who came out of school? How happy were people.

    The liberal is flawed because his paradigm would assume that if a woman has happy in her traditional role in 1850, that she is worse off than being unhappy in a job today. The flaw of the liberal is to presume that he is dealing in absolutes.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amholcroft)
    Well done a jokey comment you have to be a prick *CLAP*...*CLAP*...*CLAP*
    The fact that Thatcher's neo-lib policies are mostly still in place 23 years after she left office
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alex5455)
    so in summary, what i have said is totally correct and the right even admit it.
    They're infuriated by what you say, because it's true.

    The negs are for nailing them bang on
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by a729)
    The fact that Thatcher's neo-lib policies are mostly still in place 23 years after she left office
    Lol I'll not be baited by you, get a life.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amholcroft)
    Lol I'll not be baited by you, get a life.
    Typical loony leftie resorting to insults when you've lost the argument

    i bet you're the type who'd be involved in this UKIP smear campaign
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CareFor)
    So do you know what life was like in the 1800s or do you only know that "anti-liberal" faults that your liberal educators and mates have taught you to frame life at that time by? What was say the standing of the nation at the time, or the capability of people who came out of school? How happy were people.

    The liberal is flawed because his paradigm would assume that if a woman has happy in her traditional role in 1850, that she is worse off than being unhappy in a job today. The flaw of the liberal is to presume that he is dealing in absolutes.




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The fact is in the cities of Britain at the time the working man was often on starvation wages while working in a hazardous grim place to make the factory owner stinking rich, this is well documented as reforms only happened after inspections of factories nationwide showed how bad it was.

    Your entire post was not a point but a question on how well informed all liberals are, either make a valid point in this discussion or take your rant to speakers corner.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.