Would the UK population accept communism?

[turbobloke]

AJS- said:

The point is people expect the state to provide for them in a way which it appears that people didn't in the 19th century.

Except - and I know you weren't implying otherwise - the State doesn't provide anything, it's profitable businesses and high earners (net contributors) that provide pretty much everything.

[AJS-]

Oh exactly right. But it's the state, not businesses and the wealthy who people expect to provide. This was possibly different in the 19th century when charities, friendly societies and big businesses did provide a lot. All now replaced by the state.

[crankedup]

turbobloke said:

AJS- said:

The point is people expect the state to provide for them in a way which it appears that people didn't in the 19th century.

Except - and I know you weren't implying otherwise - the State doesn't provide anything, it's profitable businesses and high earners (net contributors) that provide pretty much everything.

Not to overlook the other half of the game, its only thanks to those that pay for the goods and services offered that provides the completion of the circle. Without the buyers the Company is dead.

For me the Government provides the mechanism for Society to evolve.

[turbobloke]

crankedup said:

turbobloke said:

AJS- said:

The point is people expect the state to provide for them in a way which it appears that people didn't in the 19th century.

Except - and I know you weren't implying otherwise - the State doesn't provide anything, it's profitable businesses and high earners (net contributors) that provide pretty much everything.

Not to overlook the other half of the game, its only thanks to those that pay for the goods and services offered that provides the completion of the circle. Without the buyers the Company is dead.

Are they nearly all entrepreneurs or mostly employees? Without successful businesses and wealth creators where would their jobs and wages appear from? Businesses do export goods and services from time to time.

crankedup said:

For me the Government provides the mechanism for Society to evolve.

Is that a nod to being 'progressive' the weasel word for socialism?

If what you say is valid then when Labour got in over the last 40 years, Society regressed. The term they use for their approach ought to be regressive.

Governments interfere rather than having the skill and diligence to plan effectively for improvement, though some are less bad than others, and it must happen sometimes as a sheer fluke. Labour interferes more, and more incompetently, hence the more applicable term 'regression'.

[BGARK]

Is it possible to split the country into such areas, communists in Scotland soon to be running the show anyway?

On a serious note if you wanted to make a move to somewhere genuinely fair, where would it be, can the PH massive buy a county somewhere and turn it into a gated community. I am happy help build the gun turrets!

[BGARK]

crankedup said:

For me the Government provides the mechanism for Society to evolve.

Forming a government is not high on the list of common survival techniques, I wonder why?

[wc98]

gruffalo said:

I don't believe we would accept communism, while I agree we do accept queuing as an example I think that is more an overt politeness.

The reason I think we as a nation would not is that we are too questioning. 10 years ago or so I started working for a Chinese company here in the UK, in my first board meeting I asked a one word question of the UK MD, that was a simple "why", it caused many frowns and lots of shocked faces from the Chinese in the room, they quite simply couldn't understand what had just happened, a senior leader being questioned was unthinkable.

That is why I hope that we would never accept such a totalitarian idology as communism.

i have had similar experience with senior people from an american company . you get billy big bks attitudes from both capitalist and communist countries.

[RobinBanks]

BGARK said:

Forming a government is not high on the list of common survival techniques, I wonder why?

Being decisive and level-headed is though, which is supposed to be the role of government. Whether it accomplishes that or not is a different discussion.

[BGARK]

RobinBanks said:

Being decisive and level-headed is though

I agree, which is generally what successful business owners and entrepreneurs are, they deal with huge amounts of pressure, learn quickly from their mistakes and have a passion to genuinely make things work well for everyone in their team. If they fail, they don't "get another go at it" for 5 years with zero accountability.

Please name one politician that has these credentials.