BNP support set to rise

[Mr Stabby]

Seems a very unworkable concept, being a doctor isn't due to a high IQ, it's determenation and hard work, and if they are rewarded with the same benfits as an unskilled worker, they would lose their drive

 

[Sulkdodds]

It never works like that in practise. It never could.

Everyone eating home-grown food would in all probability do more for the world than a socialist revolution ever would.

EDIT: Also yes people sometimes become doctors because they want to become society's elite or become rich. There are some very stupid doctors around.

 

[Solaris]

Seems a very unworkable concept, being a doctor isn't due to a high IQ, it's determenation and hard work, and if they are rewarded with the same benfits as an unskilled worker, they would lose their drive

Doctors would be middle ground, there's still alot of people who couldn't be a doctor. And they wouldn't lose their drive becuase they would be 'paid' to go to college. Learnings more fun than sweeping.

"It never works like that in practise. It never could."

I disagree, but lets not derail.

 

[Mr Stabby]

even when they qualify, being a Doctor is very hard work and very Stressful, if they get payed the same as a binman why would they bother.

 

[kirovman]

If the people want the socialists, they will vote for them. If the people want the BNP, they will vote for them.

 

[Solaris]

If the people want the socialists, they will vote for them. If the people want the BNP, they will vote for them.

Congratulations, you understand the basics of democracy.

even when they qualify, being a Doctor is very hard work and very Stressful, if they get payed the same as a binman why would they bother.

I don't imagine being a refuse collector is hours of fun either. Plus they would get paid the same, which would be more than they get now.If not enough people were wanting to become doctors we could reduce the hours, or let them retire early, or have longer holiday time to attract more people to the proffesion.

 

[kirovman]

So, is your proposed revolution democratic?

Also, thanks for the snide remark, but it didn't really address what I was getting at.

 

[Mr Stabby]

I don't imagine being a refuse collector is hours of fun either. Plus they would get paid the same, which would be more than they get now.If not enough people were wanting to become doctors we could reduce the hours, or let them retire early, or have longer holiday time to attract more people to the proffesion.

a more attractive propostion is more money, why not do that

 

[Solaris]

So, is your proposed revolution democratic?

Also, thanks for the snide remark, but it didn't really address what I was getting at.

Yes, their would be democracy at everstage. Workers would elect a supevisor, he would of course have to be qualified.

Their would be no partys, instead individuals are voted for. For instance 200 people might elect a representative who meets other representatives from all over the town, who elect a town representative who might have sway on some big local descions and maybe vote on some national issues.

That's just one idea, there are many proposed socialist ideas on how the state can be democratic, what they all have in common however is democracy at every stage in the state with the right people making the right descions.

Yes, it would be a 100 times more democratic than the current system.

 

[kirovman]

1) Does that work, other than you saying that it's so great? Yeah, sounds like a really cool idea, everyone's equal, BUT it leaves plenty of opportunity for some power hungry lunatic to bribe an army with promises of riches and lead a facist revolution or something. And the economy would be very fragile. Also the bureacracy involved in all these elections would be a logistical nightmare. Don't we already elect our local leaders in by-elections (coming soon)?

2) Does overthrowing a democratic institution in order to install a supposedly "more democratic" institution make sense?


There's a lot of idiots in this country, but I'm confident there's enough people with sense to stop the BNP ever being elected.

Remember to balance idealism with pragmatism, Solaris.

 

[Mr Stabby]

sounds like a bureacratic mess

 

[Solaris]

1) Does that work, other than you saying that it's so great? Yeah, sounds like a really cool idea, everyone's equal, BUT it leaves plenty of opportunity for some power hungry lunatic to bribe an army with promises of riches and lead a facist revolution or something. And the economy would be very fragile. Also the bureacracy involved in all these elections would be a logistical nightmare. Don't we already elect our local leaders in by-elections (coming soon)?

Money wouldn't exist. People would be issued vouchers, or some similar e-voucher thing. Which they could only use at state stores, the vouchers would have an expirey date to stop people hoarding wealth to exploit people with.

2) Does overthrowing a democratic institution in order to install a supposedly "more democratic" institution make sense?

One could argue that the current system isn't that democratic.

There's a lot of idiots in this country, but I'm confident there's enough people with sense to stop the BNP ever being elected.[/quote]

 

[Sulkdodds]

Money wouldn't exist. People would be issued vouchers

Surely a contradiction in terms?

 

[Mr Stabby]

Which they could only use at state stores, the vouchers would have an expirey date to stop people hoarding wealth to exploit people with.

sounds awful

 

[Solaris]

Surely a contradiction in terms?

The difference would be the expiry date, and that it wouldn't be money in the conventional sense, but I cba explaining the econmic differences it would be long and boring.

 

[kirovman]

So, have they trialed this voucher system anywhere?
How can you avoid the black markets which would open up, and further exploit people?

 

[Solaris]

There would be little need, people would have more than enough, but these people would be punished and rehabilitated. I don't know if they have trialed it properlly before.

 

[gick]

Remember to balance idealism with pragmatism, Solaris.

I think they have the right idea in Sweden and Norway. The best bits of Capitalism (minus the downsides) with the best bits of socialism (minus the downsides). Hurrah!

 

[Solaris]

I think they have the right idea in Sweden and Norway. The best bits of Capitalism (minus the downsides) with the best bits of socialism (minus the downsides). Hurrah!

What are the downsides in your opinion?

 

[Mr Stabby]

There would be little need, people would have more than enough, but these people would be punished and rehabilitated. I don't know if they have trialed it properlly before.

if it was only that easy

 

[Solaris]

What incentive would there be for crime? It really would be low with no poverty and such.

 

[gick]

What are the downsides in your opinion?

Briefly put, most of the problems revolve around they way that people in the western world actually think, not how they would think in an ideal world. For example, if everyone got paid the same amount there would be very little incentive to work hard, or even just try hard at school. Also, competition between businesses encourages innovation, efficiency and diversity in the products made - this would most likely be lacking in a 100% socialist state. Not to mention the fact that the system is inherently conservative, and doesnt really encourage progression of society.

And on a more practical level, good look convincing people to back you when one of the main ideas is to take away all their personal posessions.

What incentive would there be for crime? It really would be low with no poverty and such.

That's assuming it would be a post-scarcity society. Which would be virtually impossible to achieve given our current technologies.

 

[Kadayi]

You said a fourth of the population. What you put is people per square kilometer, A DIFFERENT THING.

What I said was:-

'we have a 4th of the population of america, yet a 50th of the landmass'.

Notice the bit about population levels Vs landmass? Whether the UK population is a 4th, 5th of 16th of the american population isn't important (I take it the crux of your argument is I wasn't exact enough...), what is important is that per KM² there are about 8 times more people living in the UK than the USA.

You called bullshit on the UK being overpopulated and I've backed it up with solid data that supports my argument. In terms of population density we are 33rd in the world, that might not sound that bad, but most of the 'countries' above us are either Islands (Malta), principalities (like monaco), or City-states (the vatican, Singapore), all of whom rely upon outside forces to support them. Presently the UK lacks an internal sustainability, and that is not good thing in the long term.

Also in my original post I didn't say that immigration was wholly responsible for the overpopulation problem, merely that as we are already overpopulated it makes sense to tighten proceedures. Nor did I say anything about 'taking away' state benefits from people who already had children, merely about the state not paying towards the upkeep of future children whilst on benefits.

Please if you are going to attempt to debate, make an effort to correctly read peoples posts in future.

 

[Solaris]

'we have a 4th of the population of america, yet a 50th of the landmass'.

No we don't. We have a 5th, as my figures show :l

 

[kirovman]

We are overpopulated and increasingly unsustainable, yes, however with our ageing population, we need immigration from a workforce point of view.

 

[Kadayi]

'we have a 4th of the population of america, yet a 50th of the landmass'.

No we don't. We have a 5th, as my figures show :l

Good job, you've proven once again to the readers of this thread that idiocy is everwhere and armed with a keyboard. Well done (slow claps) please feel free exit planet earth now your job is done.

kirovman

There are plenty of unemployed people in this country yet.

 

[kirovman]

kirovman

There are plenty of unemployed people in this country yet.

That is true Kadayi.

But the government doesn't want to push too close to no unemployment, because that would instill undesirable inflation.
And they'd still prefer to use immigrant labour in many cases.

 

[Mr Stabby]

I think immigration law now stops non-skilled workers from outside the EU.
Also for some people benefits pays more then jobs which need no qualifications, that needs sorted

 

[Kangy]

Solaris, I think you're having trouble distinguishing between the Happy Socalist Fantasy Land in your head and the reality everyone else is living in.

 

[Kadayi]

Solaris, I think you're having trouble distinguishing between the Happy Socalist Fantasy Land in your head and the reality everyone else is living in.

He's 16, so it's no surprise. Perhaps after a few years of working he'll realise that the majority of people are inherently lazy and that given the choice between working, or idling 90% will opt for the latter. It's only because people have to work (to buy food, pay the mortgage, tax the car, etc, etc) that they do.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

'we have a 4th of the population of america, yet a 50th of the landmass'.

No we don't. We have a 5th, as my figures show :l

That doesn't do anything to refute his arguement, though. That's still very cramped

 

[Solaris]

That doesn't do anything to refute his arguement, though. That's still very cramped

It doesn't and I didn't want to make it so. Just he picked up on it and said some crap about how he was right becuase he was talking in another context or whatever.

He's 16, so it's no surprise. Perhaps after a few years of working he'll realise that the majority of people are inherently lazy and that given the choice between working, or idling 90% will opt for the latter. It's only because people have to work (to buy food, pay the mortgage, tax the car, etc, etc) that they do.

**** off. Most people on this forum are under 18, and it's got **** all to do with the weight of there argument. I haven't worked much. I have a freind whoever who spent his entire summer holidays on a factory conveyor belt last year when he was 16, so your little steriotype of superioty there doesn't always work.

And

-or idling 90% will opt for the latter
Show me where any socialist/communist has remotely suggested that anyone would be aloud to do that and still get paid? Go on.

 

[Mr Stabby]

At 16 you can't expect to have worked out a feasible Socialist system, Lenin spent his life on it, and his was crap.

 

[kirovman]

Show me where any socialist/communist has remotely suggested that anyone would be aloud to do that and still get paid? Go on.

Every man, according to his need?

 

[Sulkdodds]

What if they need a good kick up the arse?

 

[Solaris]

Every man, according to his need?

As long as
From each according to ability.

 

[Mr Stabby]

As long as
From each according to ability.

so those more skilled get more?

 

[Solaris]

No, just as long as each person gives to the best of their ability, they shall get back depending on they're need.

 

[Mr Stabby]

and how would 'best of their ability' be determined

 

[Solaris]

Well you give them an IQ test, stand behind them, and every time they get a question wrong you beat them....... joke.

They'd be evaluated all the way through the educational system, and hopefully everyone would enjoy learning and thoose that could would be able to be given the chance to go to a factory or university, and they'd still go to further education, becuase they value learning. As everyone will, just some will be better at it than others.