Turn on thread page Beta

Ed Miliband pledges to put Labour back on path to socialism watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    You're just as bad as the Tea Baggers in the US who opposed Obama's healthcare reforms, even they were the very people who reforms will benefit.
    You're just as bad as the Tea Baggers if you think Socialism is about just the nationalisation of education, health care, etc. It's like the people who claim Obama's a socialist. It's insane, pure ignorance to the ideology and the lack of understanding of it in our society is the reason it's been made into such a dirty word.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    “Yes, but it is not his form of socialism,” he replied. “It is my form of socialism which is a more fair, more just, more equal society. And that is the path that I will want to take our party on.”

    I think it's overwhelmingly obvious his 'type' of socialism barely meets the pre-requisites necessary to use that word.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Master Roshi)
    Obvioulsy that's not going to happen. Maybe you didn't read the article. Socialism is a pretty lose term, what Ed said was "“It is my form of socialism which is a more fair, more just, more equal society. And that is the path that I will want to take our party on". So basically just reduce inequality, which is a very important thing to do. Right-wing policies will only ever increase inequality, so a step towards socialism can only be a good thing. Ed said nothing about going on a nationalising rampage, that was just you having the standard low-level intelligence reaction to the word socialism.
    Reducing inequality so you think he will just magic this up how? Labour always bangs on about reducing inequality its a meaningless term used by Labour because it makes a good sound bite.

    So his idea of socialism is just another load of meaningless Labour sound bites typical
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Socialism halfway to communism?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    Most people in Britain are socialists. The problem is, many are just too non-intellectual to know it. See your average typical Sun reader (where Tories get so much of their support from), who will likely believe in socialist principles, but isn't able enough to understand it. I think as our society becomes better educated, more people will be willing to accept the word socialism. Just look at Norway.
    I doubt it!

    What people will equate with socialism is anyone who is middle class and above will be even more severely targetted for tax rape than they currently are. They will see the work shy, the reckless and the feckless being rewarded at the expense of those who truely need state intervention and help. They will realise that in a socialist environment, more and more of their taxes will be funding civil service pensions and salaries - whilst the public servents who ought to be rewarded are systematically failed (in comparison at least).

    What most socilaist fail to realise is that without a capitalist route being in place at the core, they would not have the money to finance anything!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Referee)
    I doubt it!

    What people will equate with socialism is anyone who is middle class and above will be even more severely targetted for tax rape than they currently are. They will see the work shy, the reckless and the feckless being rewarded at the expense of those who truely need state intervention and help. They will realise that in a socialist environment, more and more of their taxes will be funding civil service pensions and salaries - whilst the public servents who ought to be rewarded are systematically failed (in comparison at least).

    What most socilaist fail to realise is that without a capitalist route being in place at the core, they would not have the money to finance anything!
    Newsflash....there are more working class and lower-middle class people than there are upper-middle and upper class people.

    And as for your last point...that's just nonsense. State owned companies can create wealth just like privately owned companies can. If the state took over a factory, would that factory suddenly stop producing goods? Of course it wouldn't. It might even be able to produce even more goods, as the profits could be invested back into the company instead of going into the pockets of shareholders who do nothing other than exploit the workers.

    I accept that capitalism can create wealth at a faster rate than socialism, which is why I am in favour of a mixed economy. Socialism doesn't have to be about nationalising every industry.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    Ask people if they agree with state funded healthcare, education, libraries, train travel, energy etc and they will tell you yes. That is socialism.
    Ask them if they agree with very high taxation and they'll say no... voters are idots who can't stop contradicting themselves.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by gimp21)
    Ask them if they agree with very high taxation and they'll say no... voters are idots who can't stop contradicting themselves.
    Ask if they agree with higher taxation for those who earn above the mean income and most will tell you yes. Of course, the vast majority of people in the UK earn below the mean income.

    Work that one out.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    Newsflash....there are more working class and lower-middle class people than there are upper-middle and upper class people.

    And as for your last point...that's just nonsense. State owned companies can create wealth just like privately owned companies can. If the state took over a factory, would that factory suddenly stop producing goods? Of course it wouldn't. It might even be able to produce even more good, as the profits could be invested back into the company instead of going into the pockets of shareholders who do nothing other than exploit the workers.

    I accept that capitalism can create wealth at a faster rate than socialism, which is why I am in favour of a mixed economy. Socialism doesn't have to be about nationalising every industry.
    Newsflash - they may only make up ~10% of the population, but they pay ~50% of the income tax already. Why should they be paying more?

    Do you honestly think that state owned companies would be more efficient and better managed that privately owned? It's another layer of interference and more red tape!

    You seem to have this rose tinted view of socialism that I find completely inexplicable. For some reason I always get the feeling that you hate those who have money, status or both...maybe I'm doing you a disservice there but it's the impression you give.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    Ask if they agree with higher taxation for those who earn above the mean income and most will tell you yes. Of course, the vast majority of people in the UK earn below the mean income.

    Work that one out.
    Ask them if they agree with their jobs being outsourced to Inda/other low labour cost nations because it's not cost effective to operate here...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    Ask if they agree with higher taxation for those who earn above the mean income and most will tell you yes. Of course, the vast majority of people in the UK earn below the mean income.

    Work that one out.
    You do realise that high-income people are categorised as "voters"
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    note that it his his view of socialism, not the orthodox marx-engels view, nor the leninist or trotskyist view.

    remember tony blair's 'socialism' guys ?

    this isnt a view of maos china in britian. and the telegraph, seriously ? they spent the last week slaughtering him at every opportunity and praising david cameron. forgive me if i dont care about it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    Most people in Britain are socialists. The problem is, many are just too non-intellectual to know it.
    You don't mean non-intellectual. You mean they don't understand what socialism truly means, par example, the stereotypical Sun Reader has always been conditioned to read "socialist" as "DURTY COMMIE SPY!!!11!!!"

    Please tell me that's what you mean.

    Please don't mean that they reject any sort of intellectual thought, or are deliberately stupid/pursue ignorance over expanded knowledge/understanding.

    Please.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    Ask if they agree with higher taxation for those who earn above the mean income and most will tell you yes. Of course, the vast majority of people in the UK earn below the mean income.

    Work that one out.
    Yes, increasing tax on higher-earners will bring in more money and have absolutely no negative effects on the economy.

    What's that? Brain drain? No, never heard of it... get out of my way, i've got an aeroplane to catch.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teveth)
    And as for your last point...that's just nonsense. State owned companies can create wealth just like privately owned companies can. If the state took over a factory, would that factory suddenly stop producing goods? Of course it wouldn't. It might even be able to produce even more goods, as the profits could be invested back into the company instead of going into the pockets of shareholders who do nothing other than exploit the workers.
    1) where is the incentive for innovation or improvement without the profit motive?
    2) how can we know where/ what resources are truly wanted/needed without the price mechanism?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Good

    Raise the scarlet banner high
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Back to the glorious 70's under Ed Milliband. Or not.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Teaddict)
    Secondly, I doubt most people in Britain are socialists... If that was the case, Thatcher wouldn't have won three elections -_-
    More people voted against Thatcher than did. And many also didn't vote.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Crash)
    More people voted against Thatcher than did. And many also didn't vote.
    By voting "against Thatcher", do you mean voting for someone other than the Conservatives? If so, could you point out a single PM in recent political history that managed to achieve over 50% of all votes?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Unfortunately I fear any decent kind of socialism has been made impossible following Thatcher.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
Useful resources

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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

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