What's wrong with Britain 2012

[fido]

Twincam16 said:

And then what will the solution be? Kill the unproductive? Sterilise them? Imprison them in workhouses? Abandon and secede from 'unproductive' towns and cities and just leave them to rot?

No, much simpler than that. Spend as little as possible on them. Neccesity leads to invention - whereas lavishing them with generous benefits leads to apathy - and let's face it, they are generous given than you are even considering this approach to making a living.

[Bing o]

fido said:

Twincam16 said:

And then what will the solution be? Kill the unproductive? Sterilise them? Imprison them in workhouses? Abandon and secede from 'unproductive' towns and cities and just leave them to rot?

No, much simpler than that. Spend as little as possible on them. Neccesity leads to invention - whereas lavishing them with generous benefits leads to apathy - and let's face it, they are generous given than you are even considering this approach to making a living.

Finally someone gets it! Good luck selling that to 90% of the voters though. Best wait for the economy and currency to fully crumble so you have no choice left.

[oyster]

SpeedMattersNot said:

I just had two articles of road rage this morning, whilst driving my partner to work which is a 4mile drive.

Both consisted of drivers coming the other way with cars obstructing their lanes, with plenty of gaps, but deliberately coming head-to-head with me and making me reverse - so they could go 1 car gap further. The first driver angrily pointed that he wanted me to reverse so he could advance one space further (despite driving past several places to pull in).

The other was on a corner where I approached slowly, but he still felt it was his right of way to continue around the corner, drive past 2 gaps and when he did eventually pull into the only last gap he hooted at me and waved his fist.

I had to just suck it up and accept that there is no teaching people like that.

If we can work out what is wrong in these peoples lives, that they feel they can/have to do this sort of thing (probably daily) perhaps we could start finding out a solution.

The world we live in unfortunately rewards those people.

After all, they gained time by doing what they did and what did they lose?

In a bygone time, they would have lost face, or felt ashamed. But nowadays there is only praise for results, not for effort or method.

[highway]

Everytime a missile from a fighter jet or helicopter is fired by uk forces its £150k lost. Stop fighting wars in the middle east. Britain and America do more than the rest of the world. That's a few billion saved right there.

If we are worried about threats to the uk from overseas then redirect some funds to border control from these wasteful military campaigns. Stringent checks on any one entering the uk with links to Pakistan or Afghanistan or any other place where many may seek to do us harm. If in any doubt, don't let them into the uk.

Slash foreign aid. If we are to help other countries then why oh why are we not sending British workers to build them sewage systems, road networks, basically creating infrastructure using the aid money to finance it. How does that not make more sense than handing over cash?

[1point7bar]

jbi said:

metal thefts piss me off...

Lock the bds up and throw away the key

Sell it for scrap.

[12gauge]

highway said:

Just watched Question Time. Some of those people make me consider self harm..

Im not sure they are people. Im convinced 90% of the QT audience are programmable robots. Its the only logical explanation.

[speedy_thrills]

In my opinion the UK's biggest mistake has been to pursue economic growth based around an unbalanced model. Unbalanced on issues such as over reliance on a few industries, wealth distribution and continued under investment in productive areas of the economy. I see issues like welfare, crime, unemployment and deficit are symptoms rather than a cause.

The greatest political victory has been to get people to attribute the latter as causes of economic grief rather than consequences. It's a win-win for politicians because as economic growth falters people look to blame welfare, crime etc. rather than focusing on the unbalanced economic nature of the UK which would be more difficult to "fix" quickly. It's the literal embodiment of that old phrase "manufactured consent".

[1point7bar]

speedy_thrills said:

In my opinion the UK's biggest mistake has been to pursue economic growth based around an unbalanced model. Unbalanced on issues such as over reliance on a few industries, wealth distribution and continued under investment in productive areas of the economy. I see issues like welfare, crime, unemployment and deficit are symptoms rather than a cause.

The greatest political victory has been to get people to attribute the latter as causes of economic grief rather than consequences. It's a win-win for politicians because as economic growth falters people look to blame welfare, crime etc. rather than focusing on the unbalanced economic nature of the UK which would be more difficult to "fix" quickly. It's the literal embodiment of that old phrase "manufactured consent".

A very interesting post, however IMO the story of government and central banks in command and control of their economies is a manufactured consent.

[turbobloke]

1point7bar said:

speedy_thrills said:

In my opinion the UK's biggest mistake has been to pursue economic growth based around an unbalanced model. Unbalanced on issues such as over reliance on a few industries, wealth distribution and continued under investment in productive areas of the economy. I see issues like welfare, crime, unemployment and deficit are symptoms rather than a cause.

The greatest political victory has been to get people to attribute the latter as causes of economic grief rather than consequences. It's a win-win for politicians because as economic growth falters people look to blame welfare, crime etc. rather than focusing on the unbalanced economic nature of the UK which would be more difficult to "fix" quickly. It's the literal embodiment of that old phrase "manufactured consent".

A very interesting post, however IMO the story of government and central banks in command and control of their economies is a manufactured consent.

Beyond that, the post you replied to seemed dangerously close to 'victim of society' mythology.

For those able to go outside unsupervised and even run with scissors, unbalanced wealth distribution is going to arise from an unbalanced distribution of work ethic. It's possible to do well enough by tolerating boredom, or the power of muscles or mind. It's possible to negate that effect if arse and sofa remain very close friends. Nanny state interference to even out the wealth distribution by robbing hardworking class Peter to pay benefits class Paul is unfair.

[highway]

Have I mentioned my cola analogy yet...

We live in a democracy. Yet there is a choice ( really) between two political parties. Maybe two and a half. The differences between the two are effectively like choosing between coke and diet coke. Much the same. How is that choice.? Can we really do no better than that?

Negative liberty. Google it.

[speedy_thrills]

turbobloke said:

Beyond that, the post you replied to seemed dangerously close to 'victim of society' mythology.

Not at all, we elected the governments after all. What choice did they have but to give us more of what we wanted by not sufficiently constricting the money supply indirectly feeding an asset bubble.

turbobloke said:

For those able to go outside unsupervised and even run with scissors, unbalanced wealth distribution is going to arise from an unbalanced distribution of work ethic. It's possible to do well enough by tolerating boredom, or the power of muscles or mind. It's possible to negate that effect if arse and sofa remain very close friends. Nanny state interference to even out the wealth distribution by robbing hardworking class Peter to pay benefits class Paul is unfair.

I partially agree on work ethic however I can't wholly attribute people income or lack thereof to laziness.

Through measuring things like intergenerational earnings elasticity it can be observed that in some countries the income of the house you are born into is more likely to reflect your income than in others. If you'd like it tells you that in a country like the U.S. you are much less likely to succeed in life if you aren't from the right background. Although as Steinbeck noted "Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat, but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." Perceptions can be important.

I simply don't believe that poor people from the UK or US are much more prone to idleness that people in Austria or Denmark. The equality of opportunity must be a cornerstone of a capitalist economy or the population will turn to an alternative economic system. This is already happening with the Conservatives struggling to find support in the UK and if you saw Barack Obama speaking last week he was appealing towards adopting some socialist principals in the U.S. as part of his election rhetoric.

[WhoseGeneration]

[quote=speedy_thrills] The equality of opportunity must be a cornerstone of a capitalist economy or the population will turn to an alternative economic system./quote]

"Equality of opportunity" has been the expressed aim of past Governments of the UK.
So, why has that not led to economic success?

[turbobloke]

speedy_thrills said:

Through measuring things like intergenerational earnings elasticity it can be observed that in some countries the income of the house you are born into is more likely to reflect your income than in others.

I don't doubt it, and I'm sure there are all sorts of correlations to point out beyond that one.

However, correlation isn't the same as cause and effect. We only need one example, though there are far more, showing success from very unfavourable backgrounds and the notion of causality is dispelled. Without that, it's just so-what.

In that kind of situation isn't parental example as material as parental wealth? I'd say yes in which case we need a means to override that and money won't do it very well as the abject failure of welfare state largesse in the recent past has shown.

Each individual makes up their own mind and makes their own decisions. Too many people make bad decisions and expect everybody else to pick up the tab. It's perfectly possible to make better or worse decisions without taxpayers being mugged to fund the bad ones.

[turbobloke]

WhoseGeneration said:

speedy_thrills said:

The equality of opportunity must be a cornerstone of a capitalist economy or the population will turn to an alternative economic system

"Equality of opportunity" has been the expressed aim of past Governments of the UK. So, why has that not led to economic success?

I'd say because it was soon warped to become 'equality of outcome' and by force including redistribution of wealth. If it was ever anything else! Most politicians believing too much in social bks is one way of putting it, but it's hardly surprising as they think they have a money tree and in their dreams they must wear their knickers on the outside.

Equality of opportunity allows for bad decisions not to take up opportunities, which means some people can't afford shiny things, and to bleeding heart socialists - and fat wallet socialists too it seems - that's bad, and the fault of society not the people taking the bad decisions. Also in their dreams.

[1point7bar]

Is there anyone who dares to deny the greatest number the greatest happiness?
Poverty and insecurity are statist welfare war cries but they fail to perceive the generators, why would they?
Inequality of incomes and wealth are codependent with competition and thus intuitively are causes of prosperity and abundance.

[highway]

Well we are past the half way point in the year. How much better is our society now? Why are governments seemingly unable to change lives of the majority of the people for the better when many of the answers are so simple?

[Hitch78]

Opinions are simple, the answer less so. Why don't you start a political movement and change it all yourself?

[highway]

Because anyone running as an independent ends up either bankrupt or painted by the media to look like a crackpot.

How can democracy equal aligning yourself to labour or conservative which effectively is the system we have.

[chris watton]

highway said:

Because anyone running as an independent ends up either bankrupt or painted by the media to look like a crackpot.

How can democracy equal aligning yourself to labour or conservative which effectively is the system we have.

...and labour and conservative have now morphed into one or the same. I wonder if they ever step outside from life in their little Westminster bubble, and advised only by people in that very same bubble.

[ukwill]

highway said:

Well we are past the half way point in the year. How much better is our society now? Why are governments seemingly unable to change lives of the majority of the people for the better when many of the answers are so simple?

Because politics tends to get in the way. Take something fundamental to society, like education. Over the last decade we more than doubled the amount of money pumped into our education system. And yet, the latest PISA rankings show that we have continued to slip down the rankings.

So we've chucked money at the problem, but the problem has continued to grow.

Does this suggest that the problem with education is due to budget constraints, or does it point to something else?

The stats would clearly suggest that it's not a money problem. That, unfortunately, is where any collective agreement tends to end.

Education is utterly ruined by politics. I genuinely feel sorry for kids today because it is they who are being used as pawns in the ongoing war between Govt (of all colour) and Teaching Unions.

Rest assured, what you imagine to be a logical approach to a solution will be seen as a blatant attack on the rights/livelihood/inherent structure of those who are actually intent on maintaining the status quo.

Politics today is so utterly ineffectual. We are crying out for a proper leader. Another Thatcher would be ideal - and by that I don't mean either right or left wing. I mean someone with the conviction and purpose necessary to get a job done, even if that means some won't like it and/or others will want to dance on your grave.

We need someone to make tough decisions and stick by them. Not simply crap themselves the minute the media jump on their back. fk the media, none of us voted for the likes of Toynbee or Littlejohn to shape our society.