Anyone voting Green or Labour

Watch this thread
Nice.Guy
Badges: 11
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
Explain how the economy could survive in the long run? How can socialism work in a capitalist world?

The left wing stance seems to be to tax all the rich people as much as possible Yes, morally I completely 100% get that, but let's face it, that's not the best solution for anyone.
Prime example: HSBC. Wants to move because taxes are too high here. So we made a few extra pennies but now they're won't even be paying at all. Which means less money to public services, and 'working people', and those most vulnerable would be worse off.

Same issue with increasing the minimum wage. I'm all for it - I think it's only fair that people get a decent wage at the end of the week - but businesses will be strapped for cash, they'll start hiring fewer people, and that'll mean more people out of work. No?

Again, we're a world of capitalism. And if people/businesses don't think they're getting a good deal here, there's plenty of other countries in the world happy to welcome them in with open arms, Why aren't we doing everything we can to support business in this country?!

Since the majority of the country seems to be pretty left wing, tell me why the Labour/Greens have got it right? I'm all for having a Government with morals, but surely competence is worth more than compassion?
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
(Original post by Nice.Guy)
Explain how the economy could survive in the long run? How can socialism work in a capitalist world?

The left wing stance seems to be to tax all the rich people as much as possible Yes, morally I completely 100% get that, but let's face it, that's not the best solution for anyone.
Prime example: HSBC. Wants to move because taxes are too high here. So we made a few extra pennies but now they're won't even be paying at all. Which means less money to public services, and 'working people', and those most vulnerable would be worse off.

Same issue with increasing the minimum wage. I'm all for it - I think it's only fair that people get a decent wage at the end of the week - but businesses will be strapped for cash, they'll start hiring fewer people, and that'll mean more people out of work. No?

Again, we're a world of capitalism. And if people/businesses don't think they're getting a good deal here, there's plenty of other countries in the world happy to welcome them in with open arms, Why aren't we doing everything we can to support business in this country?!

Since the majority of the country seems to be pretty left wing, tell me why the Labour/Greens have got it right? I'm all for having a Government with morals, but surely competence is worth more than compassion?
The Conservative model does not increase the productivity of available labor; it simply forces more people into a survival mode where they end up is a repetitive cycle of reliance on the state and are close to poverty with very little security.

The Tory answer is to abolish all welfare. This was done with the poor law. Welfare for the poor was taken away and the poor where forced into slums. This problem didnt really get better till Post WW2 when returning soliders demanded Some form of Socialism to make life better for working class people. This lead to the NHS and welfare state.

A good example is the Precariat. This is a worker who has little financial security due to a change in job contracts. Typically contracts are part time so the Employer pays no national insurance contributions to the state. This means the worker has no state pension. This type of worker will also take 2-4 jobs to make up a working week of 30 hours + to be able to get Tax Credits known as corporate welfare.

The Conservative model is about looking after the interests of business but in turn businesses are doing very little to look after their employees living costs.

Rival parties have called Businesses out on not trading by the rules and instead they have spat their dummy out like HSBC.

And finally when it comes to productivity workers with 2-4 jobs are more focused on meeting dozens of different mangers target rather than learning new skills and moving to better jobs with higher rates of productivity.

..............................................................

So this is the Tories Corporate Dystopia what about the Socialist approach?

..............................................................

Socialism is nothing new. In fact in the UK we have had a whole bunch of Socialist programs for many years. The NHS is the best example. The amount of wealth distribution that goes on in the NHS is huge.

For example in the USA with their medical insurance system if you need heart surgery you would have to sell your home worth $100,000 dollars + because some policies do not cover life saving surgery. In the UK you get it at the point of need and the only thing you have to pay is prescription charges for medication which are subsidized and fixed.

Our NHS produces workers who are willing to take huge risks for the benefit of our nation as a whole. The best example is our Armed Forces. They volunteer to be a recruit and in some instances they could lose a limb. However our NHS makes sure they are given the best healthcare when they come back to citizen life.

The same can be said about our welfare state. No solider in their right mind is going to volunteer for a hostile war situation when they could come home as a disabled man or women and are called a benefit scrounger. The welfare state encourages our brave men and women to take extra ordinary risks because they know they are going to be looked after if they become injured in the line of duty.

And the same can be said about our young students. They are willing to debt themselves up and take challenging degree courses that test their mental and vocational aptitude to be viable for high skilled jobs. This in its self is a huge risk and they do this because they know that if they fail they will not be subject to a life of debt which a lot of students with private loans are going though in other parts of the world.

...........................................................

Socialism takes people out of survival mode thinking and allows them to take on serious risks which may end up breaking them or allowing them to become more productive than their parents where in previous generations.

.............................................................

Conservatism has been around for more than a 1000 years. Socialism is relatively new and while it has been over done in some nations careful allocation of wealth distribution has made the western world more richer than it has ever been before.

So here is to human potential. Here is to using Socialism to benefit human kind!
1
reply
IAMADAM27
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
You'd have to be bat sh** insane to vote Labour or Green!
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
(Original post by Nice.Guy)
Explain how the economy could survive in the long run? How can socialism work in a capitalist world?
"In politics, the Third Way (New Labour) is a position that tries to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of right-wing economic and left-wing social policies" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way

Labour haven't been traditional "socialist" for a long time now. So don't worry, labour are not socialist in any meaningful way anymore. Wanting to tax non-doms does not make you socialist. Even supporting naitonlisaing the railways (which labour do not support) doesn't make you a scoialsit, those are things old Tory Parties have done. Tories supported the mixed economy.

This is what exasperates me when people talk about labour vs Tory as if there is a big difference between the two, they are both parties that support a mixture of right wing neoliberal economic ideas and protectionist private capitalism. Most people who worship the Tories and are convinced labour are a far left party would be perfectly represented by labour. Basically the foundations of your question are wrong as there is no longer a battle between "socialism" and "capitalism".


The most socialist of labour governments kicked started the "golden age of capitalism", so that is how socialism and capitalism can work together. It's called a mixed econmoy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E2...omic_expansion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

Stuff like nationalization is a variant of capitalism, just that the state owns it. It can help the economy due to stuff like fiscal multipliers. SPending money on a hospital can bring more money into the econmoy than the government spend if done smartly.
2
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
This government has seen the longest fall in wages since Queen Victoria was on the throne.
0
reply
Amy. J S
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
"In politics, the Third Way (New Labour) is a position that tries to reconcile right-wing and left-wing politics by advocating a varying synthesis of right-wing economic and left-wing social policies" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Way

Labour haven't been traditional "socialist" for a long time now. So don't worry, labour are not socialist in any meaningful way anymore. Wanting to tax non-doms does not make you socialist. Even supporting naitonlisaing the railways (which labour do not support) doesn't make you a scoialsit, those are things old Tory Parties have done. Tories supported the mixed economy.

This is what exasperates me when people talk about labour vs Tory as if there is a big difference between the two, they are both parties that support a mixture of right wing neoliberal economic ideas and protectionist private capitalism. Most people who worship the Tories and are convinced labour are a far left party would be perfectly represented by labour. Basically the foundations of your question are wrong as there is no longer a battle between "socialism" and "capitalism".


The most socialist of labour governments kicked started the "golden age of capitalism", so that is how socialism and capitalism can work together. It's called a mixed econmoy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post%E2...omic_expansion
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixed_economy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Deal

Stuff like nationalization is a variant of capitalism, just that the state owns it. It can help the economy due to stuff like fiscal multipliers.



Good , informative post. :congrats:
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
(Original post by Amy. J S)
Good , informative post. :congrats:
Thanks

Just read this from a former Tory Party spokesman.

"‘More spending means higher taxes for hardworking people’ – not if it causes the economy to grow more than the spending." (this is what fiscal multipliers are, if you spend £1 and generate £1.50 then that will help the econmoy, if you cut that £1 spending you are actually making it worse. That's the premise behind fiscal multiplication anyway. If you are goign to cut spending it should be stuff that has a multiplier of less than one. doing blind ideological austerity, which is what the conservatives are doing is soooo stupid)

"The Conservative narrative has become the Overton Window of our day, outside of which policies are unthinkable. But sooner or later reality will break in, and what is now unthinkable will become sensible again. But not in this election."

http://www.skidelskyr.com/site/artic...manifesto/P10/

It's depressing :sigh:
0
reply
Amy. J S
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
Thanks

Just read this from a former Tory Party spokesman.

"‘More spending means higher taxes for hardworking people’ – not if it causes the economy to grow more than the spending." (this is what fiscal multipliers are, if you spend £1 and generate £1.50 then that will help the econmoy, if you cut that £1 spending you are actually making it worse. That's the premise behind fiscal multiplication anyway. If you are goign to cut spending it should be stuff that has a multiplier of less than one. doing blind ideological austerity, which is what the conservatives are doing is soooo stupid)

"The Conservative narrative has become the Overton Window of our day, outside of which policies are unthinkable. But sooner or later reality will break in, and what is now unthinkable will become sensible again. But not in this election."

http://www.skidelskyr.com/site/artic...manifesto/P10/

It's depressing :sigh:

I find this really interesting, so thanks for mentioning. Economics is such a weakness for me in my understanding of politics. But I know that finance and public spending is an important aspect of politics. I want to be able to break the barriers so I can expand my knowledge even further. :bigsmile:

Thanks for the link(s)!
0
reply
SeaPony
Badges: 2
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
No socialism can never work in a truly capitalist society that worked. No wonder these champagne socialist always screw over the economy is because their economic ideology cannot work with capitalism.
0
reply
ChaoticButterfly
Badges: 20
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
(Original post by seapony)
no socialism can never work in a truly capitalist society that worked. No wonder these champagne socialist always screw over the economy is because their economic ideology cannot work with capitalism.

golden age of capitalism

go look it up
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#11
Report 7 years ago
#11
(Original post by ChaoticButterfly)
golden age of capitalism go look it up
£10 a hour isn't possible for small business who hire workers for menial mundane tasks. Its possible for big business like Tesco, MCDonalds etc but your local services will only have 1 choice.

INCREASE SERVICE PRICES!

I'd rather tackle the root causes of high energy, housing and education costs. The problem with most of this is its all ran for profit. If I was PM I would say to local business okay you can pay your workers min-wage instead of a living wage but to combat your workers living standards you must pay a 50p fine for every hour your worker works.

This money will be put in a social housing creation fund to tackle the high rent prices.

The difference would be is instead of letting the free market dictate the cost of housing the fund would immediately bring down housing costs by introducing new supply which ................ doesn't allow right to buy.

Then you have a better system.

This will only work when we kick Labour out of the position of the main worker party.

I also don't think the Greens are inclusive either. If you don't believe in climate change they openly discriminate against you.

As for the Greens version of Socialism ............... will be diaster for the UK. Hitler was a early Green.
0
reply
illegaltobepoor
Badges: 19
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#12
Report 7 years ago
#12
(Original post by SeaPony)
No socialism can never work in a truly capitalist society that worked. No wonder these champagne socialist always screw over the economy is because their economic ideology cannot work with capitalism.
NHS, Welfare State, Free education.

Some people get operations which cost more than others.
Some people get benefits which are more in value than others.
Some people get access to courses which cost more to teach.

In all 3 of these programs there is a massive transfer of wealth from the rich to the poor while we all pay tax for them.

These institutions are ruled by our elected representatives and are as close to people ran organisations as you can get in a capitalist system.

Saying Socialism has never worked is hypocritical. The ignorance is off the scale.
0
reply
viddy9
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#13
Report 7 years ago
#13
(Original post by Nice.Guy)
Explain how the economy could survive in the long run? How can socialism work in a capitalist world?
Your premise is flawed. We do not live in a capitalist world; we live in a world full of, for the most part, mixed-market economies. That is, they incorporate elements of capitalism and elements of socialism.

(Original post by Nice.Guy)
The left wing stance seems to be to tax all the rich people as much as possible
Not really - Labour are offering increases in taxation for the rich, but only modest increases, and even the Greens aren't offering a top rate of tax higher than that,, say, in Denmark, which is one of the most equal, and happiest, societies in the world.

So, it is the best solution, and the evidence demonstrates this. HSBC can move if they want, but my understanding is that they are moving because they don't like regulations which stop people like them from crashing economies.

Well, tough. The neoliberal, free-market experiment over the past 35 years culminated in a global financial crisis that nearly caused a second Great Depression - the first, incidentally, was caused by free-market policies too.

(Original post by Nice.Guy)
Same issue with increasing the minimum wage. I'm all for it - I think it's only fair that people get a decent wage at the end of the week - but businesses will be strapped for cash, they'll start hiring fewer people, and that'll mean more people out of work. No?
No. There's a lot of noise in the data, but it centres around the null hypothesis; namely, that increasing, or introducing, minimum wages has no effect on unemployment.

Moreover, there's likely publication bias in studies discussing this effect as well: studies are more likely to be published if they find a negative effect on employment when it comes to the minimum wage.

Bottom line: when Labour introduced the minimum wage in 1997, the Tories claimed that there would be a massive increase in unemployment. Yet, unemployment continued to fall.

(Original post by Nice.Guy)
Again, we're a world of capitalism.
Again, we're not.

(Original post by Nice.Guy)
And if people/businesses don't think they're getting a good deal here, there's plenty of other countries in the world happy to welcome them in with open arms, Why aren't we doing everything we can to support business in this country?!
Labour don't want to increase corporation tax. And, the vast majority of businesses are going to stay in the country regardless of who gets into power. Furthermore, Labour's policy to close the non-dom loophole which allows people to avoid paying taxes won't have an effect, seeing as basically no other country in the world has such a ludicrous loophole.

(Original post by Nice.Guy)
Since the majority of the country seems to be pretty left wing, tell me why the Labour/Greens have got it right? I'm all for having a Government with morals, but surely competence is worth more than compassion?
Our economy is built by ordinary, working people, not by big businesses. The wealth, I'm afraid, doesn't trickle down, as decades of neoliberalism has shown, so becoming friendly with large corporations means only one thing: they'll take advantage of what this country has to offer and find every way possible to avoid paying their taxes.

The fact that we've seen the longest fall in living standards in British history under the Conservatives demonstrates that they are incompetent. The fact that they implemented a top-down reorganisation of the NHS, wasting billions, that was universally condemned by medical professions and organisations demonstrates that they are incompetent.

I prefer compassion and competence, which is why I'm endorsing Labour.
0
reply
Nice.Guy
Badges: 11
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#14
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#14
(Original post by viddy9)
x.
Hey, thanks for the reply. Yeah I knowingly used 'capitalism' and 'socialism' really loosely, just to make it easier to make my point, and I've essentially been playing Devil's advocate, so despite the tone of my post I am really interested to hear the other side of the argument, and you've put it across really well - I'm now slightly more convinced by Labour's stance, but not at all yet by the Greens' arguments, but definitely something I want to look into more. Nice to have rational replies when it comes to politics on TSR
0
reply
viddy9
Badges: 16
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#15
Report 7 years ago
#15
(Original post by Nice.Guy)
Hey, thanks for the reply. Yeah I knowingly used 'capitalism' and 'socialism' really loosely, just to make it easier to make my point, and I've essentially been playing Devil's advocate, so despite the tone of my post I am really interested to hear the other side of the argument, and you've put it across really well - I'm now slightly more convinced by Labour's stance, but not at all yet by the Greens' arguments, but definitely something I want to look into more. Nice to have rational replies when it comes to politics on TSR
Interesting, nice to see someone interested in hearing the other side of the argument as well. All I can say is, vote Labour!

Apart from that, I'll just give you these sources on the minimum wage issue which I didn't have time to insert yesterday.

Firstly, the reasons why we should be endorsing a minimum wage: when it comes to pay and income inequality, a 2007 Centre for Economic Performance report, examining the effects of the minimum wage in the UK, found that the minimum wage “has raised the real and relative pay of low paid workers, tempered wage inequality and contributed to the narrowing of the gender wage gap.” Similar findings have been reported by the Low Pay Commission in 2014, finding that since the minimum wage was introduced to the UK, the “lowest paid had received higher than average wage increases...[without] significant adverse effects...on employment”.

On unemployment, both the Centre for Economic Performance report and the Low Pay Commission report above found no effect on unemployment.

By contrast, a 2006 National Bureau of Economic Research review of more than 100 studies found that 85% found a negative effect on employment.

Nevertheless, a 2009 meta-analysis of 64 studies found that any negative effects found have been due to publication bias and, once it corrected for the problem, found no evidence that the minimum wage has a negative effect on employment.

Moreover, some data suggest a positive link between job growth and the minimum wage. For instance, after 13 states in the United States raised the minimum wage at the start of 2014, the number of jobs in these states grew by 0.85% in the subsequent six months, compared to job growth in the other 37 states which was at 0.61%. While there is no evidence that the rise in the minimum wage caused this job growth – claiming that it did would be an example of post hoc ergo propter hoc – it still, as John Schmitt, economist at the Center for Economic and Policy Research says, “raises serious questions about the claims that a raise in the minimum wage is a jobs disaster”. Not only that, but it casts some doubt on the claim that having a minimum wage at all is a jobs disaster. Moreover, supporters of the minimum wage state that the minimum wage is an incentive to go into employment rather than stay on welfare.

The funnel-graph, overall, summarises the data. As you can see, it's centred around zero, and is assymetrical: publication bias is pretty likely. So, higher minimum wages probably do not have an effect on unemployment.

Name:  Funnel_Graph_of_Estimated_Minimum_Wage_Effects.jpg
Views: 139
Size:  42.8 KB
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

Y13's - If you haven't confirmed your firm and insurance choices yet, why is that?

I am waiting until the deadline in case anything in my life changes (24)
18.6%
I am waiting until the deadline in case something else changes (e.g. exams/pandemic related concerns) (14)
10.85%
I am waiting until I can see the unis in person (10)
7.75%
I still have more questions before I make my decision (22)
17.05%
No reason, just haven't entered it yet (33)
25.58%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (26)
20.16%

Watched Threads

View All