Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arabcnesbit)
    Who would decide what is proportional and how would they be appointed?

    Is murder proportional to rape?
    What is proportional to my mind is essential anything that would have equated to self-defence at the time of assault (the woman might have [legitimately] tried to shoot the rapist). Murder implies a wrongful killing, so it would not be murder for a woman to shoot her rapist.

    Essentially, individuals decide what is proportional since they can re-establish a case when they believe retribution enacted upon a relative was non-proportional; for example if I stole money from my neighbour who sought 'retribution' by torturing me, my family may wish to resolve the issue through a dispute resolution organisation (DRO) and punish this man.

    People choose private arbiters with high market reputation to handel disputes and if an arbiter is seen to be handling disputes in an unprofessional manner, he will lose business to his competitors and his rulings can potentially be overturned by higher court orders. He can even be held directly accountable for poor business (it follows that if he allowed for the unlawful death of a defendant, he himself should be liable for such actions, including outlawry).
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WelshBluebird)
    Errr no. Such routes are not viable because they do not make money.
    It isn't about having a cheaper bus ride. Its about having a bus ride at all.
    The situation we have now is that some people in rural areas may have to give up their jobs, or hope their employer can give them flexible hours.
    There are advantages and disadvantages to living in remote areas. It's cheaper,quieter, there's less crime. Worse transport links is a trade off but I don't see that those who have to live with urban disamenities should have to pay more so that those living rurally can avoid any of the downsides of that.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    There are advantages and disadvantages to living in remote areas. It's cheaper,quieter, there's less crime. Worse transport links is a trade off but I don't see that those who have to live with urban disamenities should have to pay more so that those living rurally can avoid any of the downsides of that.
    But it isn't just remote areas.
    Its fairly large towns and small cities (Wells) that are being cut off.
    Some of these had brilliant transport links until the 1960's, and some of the people who live there now rely on the bus services.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    So TSR what is your opinoin on state ownership? Do you think it is not needed and all business/services should be privatized? Health/education ect.

    Or should the government have control of certain services as they are so important to the public interest?

    Personally I have been thinking Education and health should be owned by the state. And I have been thinking about whether transport should be government controlled.

    Your thoughts?
    I want spondership. It is so simple to do.

    Mancherster hosptial sponsered by Windows.

    Easy money!

    School and police stations aswell.

    Put adverts on fire trucks.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jesusandtequila)
    There are advantages and disadvantages to living in remote areas. It's cheaper,quieter, there's less crime. Worse transport links is a trade off but I don't see that those who have to live with urban disamenities should have to pay more so that those living rurally can avoid any of the downsides of that.
    People living in rural or semi-rural areas with poor transport links actually pay higher council tax, which is where much of the funding for transport subsidies comes from, because it's based on the value of their property. I would be pissed if I lived in a village or a hamlet and was expected to have a car despite paying considerably higher (on average) council tax.

    Think it through.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by arabcnesbit)
    The courts, police and army should be run by the state. Everything else should be privatised. Charities will provide for people who can't afford to pay for themselves or their family.
    Why didn't charities provide for people who couldn't afford to pay for themselves before the welfare state? Or rather what has changed that means they would do now?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    I think that trains should either be renationalised or completely liberalised, but anything is better than the system of state-funded monopolies that we have now. There's no real competition because only one company can operate each franchise at a time.
    There is still competition but the competition lies in substitution (since it is not possible to have a competing rail service in the same given geographical location). For example if a train service transporting people from London City Centre to, lets say, Gatwick Airport was too expensive, people might catch a taxi or bus or drive their car their instead and the railway loses market share as a result.

    The market also trends towards homogeneity for consumer convenience; for instance the London Oyster card which permits the consumer to travel on a broad variety of public transport services over London.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AnarchistNutter)
    Nope, when North Ireland's water pipes (the water companies are nationalised) froze over, the Government/managers were very slow to respond and bottled water had to be delivered to the people. There really is no case for nationalising the water company over here.



    That would be a disaster.
    we are currently going through a disaster......
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    we are currently going through a disaster......
    How?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    How?
    highest rate of youth unemployment EVER RECORDED (20.5%)

    highest unemployment for 17 years

    people not being able to afford mortgages for a house

    5m on the council house waiting list

    public services being axed

    inflation rising (4.4CPI or 5.4RPI%) and wages stagnating. beleive we have to go back to the 1920s to see it that bad according to governor of the bank of england mervyn king (also the decade of the general strike)

    lots more.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    highest rate of youth unemployment EVER RECORDED (20.5%)

    highest unemployment for 17 years

    people not being able to afford mortgages for a house

    5m on the council house waiting list

    public services being axed

    inflation rising (4.4CPI or 5.4RPI%) and wages stagnating. beleive we have to go back to the 1920s to see it that bad according to governor of the bank of england mervyn king (also the decade of the general strike)

    lots more.
    Yeah you're right, sounds worse than the issues in Japan, we have a real disaster.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Yeah you're right, sounds worse than the issues in Japan, we have a real disaster.
    so because we havnt had an earthquake and a tsunami its not a disaster?? come on.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    so because we havnt had an earthquake and a tsunami its not a disaster?? come on.
    Well no,

    But saying high house prices mean helps show we have a disaster on our hands is a bit odd when compared to those in Japan.

    RPI at 5.4% is nothing compared to the 70s, 80s and early 90s.

    Wage stagnation after a period of 20 years strong growth isn't a disaster.

    People being on a waiting list for a cheap service doesn't say anything really.

    The public asked for services to be axed - how is following democratic will a disaster?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Healthcare, education and law enforcement should be in the hands of the state. Healthcare and education should also be opened up to private organizations and contributions to the running of the public versions for these should be separate from taxation and voluntary for those who do not use them, thus making these truly options. Transport should be completely privatized, the more profitable routes will generally have more competition while the remote ones will have some local service running in the area, much like where there are no supermarkets there are still small grocery shops.
    As far as finance goes, the state's job should be to regulate competition within banks by reducing entry barriers, and that should be the extent of its powers. It should not interfere with lending targets, public guarantees against failure or separation of banking activities through firewalls. I would also allow for the privatization of higher education to increase competition in research and teaching standards and bring in unsubsidized tuition fees with a scholarship, grant, bursary and loan system like the American one to allow poorer students to still get into universities while increasing the money available to universities which they can then invest within.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ish90an)
    Healthcare, education and law enforcement should be in the hands of the state. Healthcare and education should also be opened up to private organizations and contributions to the running of the public versions for these should be separate from taxation and voluntary for those who do not use them, thus making these truly options. Transport should be completely privatized, the more profitable routes will generally have more competition while the remote ones will have some local service running in the area, much like where there are no supermarkets there are still small grocery shops.
    As far as finance goes, the state's job should be to regulate competition within banks by reducing entry barriers, and that should be the extent of its powers. It should not interfere with lending targets, public guarantees against failure or separation of banking activities through firewalls. I would also allow for the privatization of higher education to increase competition in research and teaching standards and bring in unsubsidized tuition fees with a scholarship, grant, bursary and loan system like the American one to allow poorer students to still get into universities while increasing the money available to universities which they can then invest within.
    So they should do nothing when banks fail?

    Wont you be sad when you can't get cash from the machine?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    So they should do nothing when banks fail?

    Wont you be sad when you can't get cash from the machine?
    I would rather 70% of the banking sector crash because of its own mistakes(RBS, Northern Rock) crash today than all of it crashing down tomorrow along with the rest of the economy because of governments printing off money and pushing the cost of inflation to taxpayers(and only making the bubble larger) to avoid short term loss. Governments never think about the economy in the long term, all they care about is surviving 5 years so they can push the **** they have helped create onto the next administration and then blame them for when the problems they created finally come to bite, and that is why they should be kept away from the market as much as possible.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ish90an)
    I would rather 70% of the banking sector crash because of its own mistakes(RBS, Northern Rock) crash today than all of it crashing down tomorrow along with the rest of the economy because of governments printing off money and pushing the cost of inflation to taxpayers(and only making the bubble larger) to avoid short term loss. Governments never think about the economy in the long term, all they care about is surviving 5 years so they can push the **** they have helped create onto the next administration and then blame them for when the problems they created finally come to bite, and that is why they should be kept away from the market as much as possible.
    But you would be personally happy to lose all your savings for that right? Not necessarily now but in the future too.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quady)
    Why didn't charities provide for people who couldn't afford to pay for themselves before the welfare state? Or rather what has changed that means they would do now?
    I think you'll find they did. You should have a read of this http://www.amazon.co.uk/Welfare-Stat.../dp/1842750631

    If you read it with an open mind I think you'll find it interesting.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by badtothebone)
    we are currently going through a disaster......
    ...Well lets see why....

    (Original post by badtothebone)
    highest rate of youth unemployment EVER RECORDED (20.5%)

    highest unemployment for 17 years
    Due to artificial spending bubbles by a Keynesian (ish) government to promote high levels of employment; when these projects were found to be unsustainable and the bubble burst all of these people lost there jobs.

    people not being able to afford mortgages for a house
    Artificial low interest rates and loans given out by the CBE to non-creditworthy parties (also triggering a housing bubble).

    5m on the council house waiting list
    A lot of this is quite possibly a result of Thatcher's 'right to buy' to be fair; still, I maintain that liberalised trade and gold standard would trigger long term sustainable growth and more cheaper/affordable housing for most people so we wouldn't be so dependant on council housing anymore.

    public services being axed
    The market is relatively quick at reabsorbing the labour force although I have no doubt that harsh measures taken by the Tories now will be quite hard for a lot of people in the short term (but rewarding in the long term, assuming that idiot, Miliband doesn't make it as the next PM).

    inflation rising (4.4CPI or 5.4RPI%)
    Yep, this is a symptom of central banking.

    and wages stagnating.
    Damned unions protecting their members from competition.

    beleive we have to go back to the 1920s to see it that bad according to governor of the bank of england mervyn king (also the decade of the general strike)
    Damned Keynesian bankers.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Keynesian when they want to be.

    A true Keynesian would have seen economic contraction and responded immediately by lowering taxes. Labours first response was to consider a NI increase.
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
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.