67% of young Britons want a socialist system

Watch
imlikeahermit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#41
Report 3 weeks ago
#41
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
God damn weeb

Japan has got it's fair share of problems and shouldn't be idolised. (No country should be idolised) that said Hungary would be s better example of s country to follow...
I love it. Heaven knows we need something like that in this country. The rapid degradation of just basic moral values in this country is what forms the bedrock of our issues.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#42
Report 3 weeks ago
#42
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
1. Presumably you have not yet reached your peak earning potential yet. For Instance My father who has always been a socialist (and still is) recently for the first time in his life got a job where he was on a higher tax bracket and although he hasn't changed his political views it did shake him when he realised how much tax he was paying. That's basically my point.

2. Again we have a mixed economy and will continue to have a mixed economy under the "socialism" advocated by the modern left. If by capitalist you mean support the massively corrupt status quo then no, but then by that logic I'm not a "capitalist" either. The problem isn't "capitalism", it's the status quo and by that I don't just mean the Tories I mean the entire rotten liberal system.

Sure. What's your point?

3. Surely if we are struggling to build houses for our existing population surely it is madness to bring in more? It's like a parent saying "I can't afford to feed my children - let's have another baby!"

Lastly do you agree with the concept of supply and demand at all?
1. No, but as I've gotten older earnt more and paid more tax, my views haven't changed. I am very happy to pay tax to fund our public services. Most people seem to want the benefits of high taxation (excellent public services) without having to pay tax.

2. That's just playing no true scotsman. It's a bit like those who go "ah but Russia wasn't real communism". Our current capitalist system is flawed and that's why young people are looking for an alternative. Over the past 18 months most people have faced an enormous struggle, especially the young, while the richest 1% have seen their wealth soar.

3. It's not that we're struggling. We're not even trying. We could easily build more houses if the political will was there - it isn't.

So I'll ask again, when it's so difficult for young people to accumulate capital under the current system, why would they be capitalist? The right don't even seem to make the case FOR capitalism anymore, they just go on about socialism being bad.

Do you argue a lot about politics with your dad?
Last edited by DSilva; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#43
Report 3 weeks ago
#43
(Original post by DSilva)
1. No, but as I've gotten older earnt more and paid more tax, my views haven't changed. I am very happy to pay tax to fund our public services. Most people seem to want the benefits of high taxation (excellent public services) without having to pay tax.

2. That's just playing no true scotsman. It's a bit like those who go "ah but Russia wasn't real communism". Our current capitalist system is flawed and that's why young people are looking for an alternative. Over the past 18 months most people have faced an enormous struggle, especially the young, while the richest 1% have seen their wealth soar.

3. It's not that we're struggling. We're not even trying. We could easily build more houses if the political will was there - it isn't.

So I'll ask again, when it's so difficult for young people to accumulate capital under the current system, why would they be capitalist? The right don't even seem to make the case FOR capitalism anymore, they just go on about socialism being bad.

Do you argue a lot about politics with your dad?
1- fair enough but I know many people who feel differently. The problem is I think the wealthy and the middle class and the super rich are allowed to get away Scott free

2- well to some extent we have never had real communism, although early ussr came pretty close and should be enough to scare people off.

As I said I agree that the status quo is bad - where I disagree is that I don't think "socialism" of the kind you're advocating at least is a meaningful/ better alternative.

3- I see you've completely ignored my points on immigration and Japan

As for "defending capitalism" I don't need to, are you proposing scrapping private property or doing anything remotely radical from the status quo? If you are good luck in our liberal democracy.

I used to talk politics with my dad but not anymore because he gets upset. He's admitted that he only really had his views because of his social circle and it's in fashion and that I'm probably right. Family is more important than politics though and we otherwise have a good relationship.
Last edited by Starship Trooper; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#44
Report 3 weeks ago
#44
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
I mean it's s cliche to say it but this is just common sense at the end of the day.DSilva

Housing
https://www.insider.com/japan-ghost-...a-banks-2021-6

Wealth inequality
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/...n-data-charts/

And Immigration...



Imagine my shock! :rolleyes:

(And no they don't have a socialist or left wing government...)
Japan is probably the worst example you could give. The burden placed on the youngest generation is absolutely insane and people are worked to death, it's hardly a society we should aspire to.
0
reply
DSilva
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#45
Report 3 weeks ago
#45
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
1- fair enough but I know many people who feel differently. The problem is I think the wealthy and the middle class and the super rich are allowed to get away Scott free

2- well to some extent we have never had real communism, although early ussr came pretty close and should be enough to scare people off.

As I said I agree that the status quo is bad - where I disagree is that I don't think "socialism" of the kind you're advocating at least is a meaningful/ better alternative.

3- I see you've completely ignored my points on immigration and Japan

As for "defending capitalism" I don't need to, are you proposing scrapping private property or doing anything remotely radical from the status quo? If you are good luck in our liberal democracy.

I used to talk politics with my dad but not anymore because he gets upset. He's admitted that he only really had his views because of his social circle and it's in fashion and that I'm probably right. Family is more important than politics though and we otherwise have a good relationship.
When most young people say they support socialism, what they mostly mean (Imo) is the scanadanavian model, of higher taxes, higher wages, better public services etc.

The woke nonsense debates are a distraction. Young people are suffering because they can't afford to buy a house and are saddled with debt, not because a university took down a picture from its common room. But when young people raise concerns with the current economic system they are told to shut up, or to stop being naive.

If you look at some of the policies our Tory government are introducing, you'd be hard pressed to argue that Corbyn didn't at least partially shift the dial.

The right should be comforted by the fact that there's no party which represents young people and those to the left. I've voted Labour every election, I really don't know if I will next time. Starmer is every bit as vacuous and dishonest as Johnson, to the point where I'm not even sure I could see him as the lesser of two evils.
Last edited by DSilva; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
imlikeahermit
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#46
Report 3 weeks ago
#46
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Japan is probably the worst example you could give. The burden placed on the youngest generation is absolutely insane and people are worked to death, it's hardly a society we should aspire to.
Unsurprisingly I disagree. While it does have its issues, it’s by far a safer and more disciplined place to live in than this country.
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#47
Report 3 weeks ago
#47
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Japan is probably the worst example you could give. The burden placed on the youngest generation is absolutely insane and people are worked to death, it's hardly a society we should aspire to.
Out of interest, what would be the best example to give?

Japan has problems sure- but housing and wealth inequality- which were the examples DSilva gave are not one of them.
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#48
Report 3 weeks ago
#48
(Original post by DSilva)
When most young people say they support socialism, what they mostly mean (Imo) is the scanadanavian model, of higher taxes, higher wages, better public services etc.

The woke nonsense debates are a distraction.

Young people are suffering because they can't afford to buy a house and are saddled with debt, not because a university took down a picture from its common room. But when young people raise concerns with the current economic system they are told to shut up, or to stop being naive.

If you look at some of the policies our Tory government are introducing, you'd be hard pressed to argue that Corbyn didn't at least partially shift the dial.

The right should be comforted by the fact that there's no party which represents young people and those to the left. I've voted Labour every election, I really don't know if I will next time. Starmer is every bit as vacuous and dishonest as Johnson, to the point where I'm not even sure I could see him as the lesser of two evils.
Sweden used to be talked about all the time by lefties - and for good reason, they had created a social democratic semi utopia over there. But they don't talk about it now because of all the Rapes, crime and terrorism because of [censored ]

As I said to Burton bridge- you may think the some stuff is nonsense but a sizeable chunk of the membership including the bulk of the leadership don't - in fact they not only don't think it's nonsense bit it's the most important part of what they believe in.

Sure I agree to an extent.

Mmm possibly. Boris has always been a wet though.

Well the green party tends to be the collector of those votes and you have plaid and Snp too.
0
reply
PowerSlide
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#49
Report 3 weeks ago
#49
Socialist systems tend to: discourage the best from working as hard as they can.

Its honestly pathetic how the laziest generation are the ones to complain about society without ever working a full hard day of work in their lifes.

Do they not realise that if we move to a system that encourages laziness, the system will start to slowly degrade for the worse not the better?
0
reply
TCA2b
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#50
Report 3 weeks ago
#50
(Original post by imlikeahermit)
Unsurprisingly I disagree. While it does have its issues, it’s by far a safer and more disciplined place to live in than this country.
At least it's not stupidly treating immigration as a cure-all. They are banking on automation for that. It should probably be looking at that plus policies like countries such as Hungary and Poland are introducing. A big problem with Japan is its workaholic culture. It's not very conducive to family building.

The west is the very last place I'd look to for "leadership" on what to do on just about anything.
0
reply
Gaddafi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#51
Report 3 weeks ago
#51
(Original post by DSilva)
The right should be comforted by the fact that there's no party which represents young people and those to the left.
I disagree. The left should be comforted by the fact that the "right wing" party in this country is incredibly left wing and will keep a 45% tax rate for the top bracket. We have high taxation regardless of government here.

45p out of £1 in the top bracket goes to the government before we even look at NI. And we're supposed to pretend that there is an economically right wing party in this country?

The left own the country really. Our "right wingers" are mainly lefties anyway.
0
reply
Gaddafi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#52
Report 3 weeks ago
#52
(Original post by DSilva)
The right don't even seem to make the case FOR capitalism anymore, they just go on about socialism being bad.
The two are the same thing.

You need to consider what money really is. Money is simply time quantified.

If you have let's say a 50% tax rate and I work 40 hours a week, you are essentially owning me for 20 hours a week. If my working career is 40 years, you have owned me for 20 years. I am being made to forcefully use a good chunk of my life in paying tribute to the government.

Getting rid of this system completely is unrealistic but taxation at it's core is a master-slave like situation.

Lower taxation is more freedom, whilst higher taxation is less freedom. Saying that more freedom is good is the same as saying less freedom is bad.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#53
Report 3 weeks ago
#53
(Original post by Starship Trooper)
Out of interest, what would be the best example to give?

Japan has problems sure- but housing and wealth inequality- which were the examples DSilva gave are not one of them.
Good question, I'm honestly not sure.

The evidence you gave that Japan doesn't have a housing issue is very poor. While there is certainly no shortage of homes, a great majority of these exist in rural "ghost towns" (as your source described it) where there is no work and, well, nothing to do. This clearly isn't viable for younger people. It would be like saying the UK doesn't have a housing crisis because you can buy homes for less than £50k in the far north of Scotland.

On wealth inequality, your source only compared Japan to the United States. If you compare Japan to the UK, they have very similar levels of wealth inequality for the top 1%. If you look at the top 10%, inequality is even worse in Japan.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#54
Report 3 weeks ago
#54
(Original post by Gaddafi)
Lower taxation is more freedom, whilst higher taxation is less freedom. Saying that more freedom is good is the same as saying less freedom is bad.
Disagree entirely. Taxation, at least in some form, can provide people with opportunities that they would otherwise not have (e.g. in education, health, public infrastructure, etc). You can effectively grant better societal freedoms through taxation. Removing taxation may give more money to the people who don't need these services, but you limit the freedom of those who do. I'd say that the effect of taxation on freedom is a net positive.
0
reply
Gaddafi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#55
Report 3 weeks ago
#55
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Disagree entirely. Taxation, at least in some form, can provide people with opportunities that they would otherwise not have (e.g. in education, health, public infrastructure, etc). You can effectively grant better societal freedoms through taxation. Removing taxation may give more money to the people who don't need these services, but you limit the freedom of those who do. I'd say that the effect of taxation on freedom is a net positive.
Lower taxation is more freedom for the individual. In that he is giving less of his life in forced tribute to the government and he is a master of more of his time.

The argument of benevolence just goes back to the point of the master and slave relationship. Sure the government might pay for my healthcare if I get poorly/poor and look after me in my old age if I can't afford it, but then again so did many slave owners in Arabia, Greece and Rome. I'd rather have the freedom over my time.

I would also disagree with what your implying as the definition of freedom. Another person not getting welfare isn't decreasing his freedom, freedom is the absence of interference and tyranny. He is free to do as he likes financially and with his time. Free money isn't a right but a privilege.
Last edited by Gaddafi; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
kolme
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#56
Report 3 weeks ago
#56
Im in the lower bottom of that age group and most people around me don't even know what socialism is, they just know what our english teacher told us - Priestley was a socialist and his book is good so socialism is good.
1
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#57
Report 3 weeks ago
#57
(Original post by Gaddafi)
Lower taxation is more freedom for the individual. In that he is giving less of his life in forced tribute to the government and he is a master of more of his time.

The argument of benevolence just goes back to the point of the master and slave relationship. Sure the government might pay for my healthcare if I get poorly/poor and look after me in my old age if I can't afford it, but then again so did many slave owners in Arabia, Greece and Rome. I'd rather have the freedom over my time.

I would also disagree with what your implying as the definition of freedom. Another person not getting welfare isn't decreasing his freedom, freedom is the absence of interference and tyranny. He is free to do as he likes financially and with his time. Free money isn't a right but a privilege.
Based on how you've defined "freedom", why is more freedom something we should aspire to? If granting more freedom reduces the amount of things people can actually do with their life then what benefit is freedom really giving people? Sure, you can reduce tax to 0% and no longer become a 'slave' to the government, but if this means you no longer have access to healthcare, education, public roads, infrastructure, etc, then what exactly is the point? For the vast majority of people, the amount of money they would save from a 0% tax rate would be nowhere near enough to provide for these things privately.

There is a reason why most (all?) developed countries have some level of taxation and fund public services in at least some form. Economically, and morally, it makes sense to have taxation.
0
reply
Gaddafi
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#58
Report 3 weeks ago
#58
(Original post by SHallowvale)
Based on how you've defined "freedom", why is more freedom something we should aspire to? If granting more freedom reduces the amount of things people can actually do with their life then what benefit is freedom really giving people? Sure, you can reduce tax to 0% and no longer become a 'slave' to the government, but if this means you no longer have access to healthcare, education, public roads, infrastructure, etc, then what exactly is the point? For the vast majority of people, the amount of money they would save from a 0% tax rate would be nowhere near enough to provide for these things privately.

There is a reason why most (all?) developed countries have some level of taxation and fund public services in at least some form. Economically, and morally, it makes sense to have taxation.
I don't support in practical terms a 0% income tax rate, as I said earlier. Some level of a state apparatus is still needed. 0% tax only works in societies rich in natural resources.

More freedom is something we should aspire to as it increases the motivation for people to become wealthier as you know you will enjoy the fruits of your labour. Even for those who aren't upper middle class they can aspire to reach that point. Kind of like how most people in the UK oppose the estate tax despite it only effecting a minority.

(Original post by Gaddafi)
Getting rid of this system completely is unrealistic but taxation at it's core is a master-slave like situation.
We don't have to go full hog. Decreasing the defence budget, ending university subsidies, ending environmental spending, decreasing foreign aid, ending foreign military deployments, decreasing state pension contributions, limiting infrastructure spending and encouraging women to look after elderly parents (and thus reducing old age care) would all result in strong tax reductions. Whilst we're at it we can target major companies such as Amazon and Uber (corporations don't earn money in the same way as the individual.)

We could slash income tax by around 75% like this.

The UK throws unbelievable amounts of money about. We don't need to get rid of the NHS or starve children to achieve a lower tax economy for everybody.
0
reply
SHallowvale
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#59
Report 3 weeks ago
#59
(Original post by Gaddafi)
I don't support in practical terms a 0% income tax rate, as I said earlier. Some level of a state apparatus is still needed. 0% tax only works in societies rich in natural resources.

More freedom is something we should aspire to as it increases the motivation for people to become wealthier as you know you will enjoy the fruits of your labour. Even for those who aren't upper middle class they can aspire to reach that point. Kind of like how most people in the UK oppose the estate tax despite it only effecting a minority.


We don't have to go full hog. Decreasing the defence budget, ending university subsidies, ending environmental spending, decreasing foreign aid, ending foreign military deployments, decreasing state pension contributions, limiting infrastructure spending and encouraging women to look after elderly parents (and thus reducing old age care) would all result in strong tax reductions. Whilst we're at it we can target major companies such as Amazon and Uber (corporations don't earn money in the same way as the individual.)

We could slash income tax by around 75% like this.

The UK throws unbelievable amounts of money about. We don't need to get rid of the NHS or starve children to achieve a lower tax economy for everybody.
People already have the incentive to become wealthier, it's the reason why people spend years training to become doctors, accountants and engineers, the reason why people start their own businesses, the reason why people persue promotions within their company, etc. The incentive already exists. Cutting taxation and defunding the services that most people depend upon will only put them into debt as they will struggle to afford these services privately. Arguably, cutting some public services would actually make it harder for people to become wealthier. I can't see how any of this is worth potentially making some people feel more motivated?

We can debate where tax should be spent or what services are a waste of tax money, but that's separate to your original idea that 'less tax = more freedom'. This idea is simply incorrect, unless you wish to define "freedom" as you've done and don't consider what people can actually do with their lives.
Last edited by SHallowvale; 3 weeks ago
0
reply
Starship Trooper
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#60
Report 3 weeks ago
#60
For people interested in the differing accounts of human freedom (positive and negative liberty) then they might like to see here*

My take on "freedom" is that it's ultimately a means to an end and this can be for good or evil purposes. When evil reigns good people want to be free, and vice versa.

For instance we can see this when the radicals were truly in opposition against a conservative status quo they demanded freedom to think and say whatever you want. Fast forward fifty years and now these "radicals" are the status quo and we see them clamping down on "hate speech" etc.

So I would say if you have an evil government which I would describe Biden's America as, then it is moral and right to support negative freedom, as In the government should have as little power as possible and you should do everything legally in your power to do that inc tax avoidance and civil disobedience.

And to some extent, the reverse is also true. So I'm supportive if giving a good government more power/ money to stop immigration, go after corporations and help native families etc. Now I am more inclined to be more capitalist (less tax, less government) but we need to understand that unless the government is working for us it is never going to leave us alone and that that may not always be desirable.

DSilva
SHallowvale
Gaddafi

*https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/l...tive-negative/
1
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

Have you made your mind up on your five uni choices?

Yes, and I've sent off my application! (178)
55.97%
I've made my choices but havent sent my application yet (44)
13.84%
I've got a good idea about the choices I want to make (34)
10.69%
I'm researching but still not sure which universities I want to apply to (30)
9.43%
I haven't started researching yet (18)
5.66%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (14)
4.4%

Watched Threads

View All