Politics

[Renton 20517]

1 hour ago, Asprilla said:

It’s the only thing you can definitely affect though

What do you do for a living again?

[Asprilla 96]

12 hours ago, Renton said:

What do you do for a living again?

Daddy owns a chain of sweat shops

[Monkeys Fist 41418]

15 hours ago, Asprilla said:

Do you have any other modes other than snarky bellend?

[Asprilla 96]

Socialism is the answer to everything, right comrades? 😎

[Rayvin 5129]

8 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

Socialism is the answer to everything, right comrades? 😎

 

Mixed economy is a better solution. Socialism needs to be the general underpinning of society for us to reach a point where the vast majority of people are protected and looked after, but you still need to have an incentive to work and try to improve your lot in life to some extent, and I think capitalism therefore has a role to play, subservient to socialist values.

Ultimately this is all going to be moot in the end anyway. I'm not sure what capitalism's great plan for the world is once AI and full on automation is in play, but I rather fancy socialism is the thing with the better longterm outcome there.

Edited January 8, 2022 by Rayvin

[Tom 14002]

[Asprilla 96]

10 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

 

Mixed economy is a better solution. Socialism needs to be the general underpinning of society for us to reach a point where the vast majority of people are protected and looked after, but you still need to have an incentive to work and try to improve your lot in life to some extent, and I think capitalism therefore has a role to play, subservient to socialist values.

Ultimately this is all going to be moot in the end anyway. I'm not sure what capitalism's great plan for the world is once AI and full on automation is in play, but I rather fancy socialism is the thing with the better longterm outcome there.

Right except for I’m not sure about your last point, ie, what do we do when there are no more or at least too few jobs left?

 

Universal basic income is one idea being floated but us right leaning types are always going to be suspicious of being at the mercy of the state. At least it’s “an answer” to a problem that anyone can see coming towards us. I’m just not sure if it’s the right one but as yet the right don’t appear to have an answer.

 

equally what we have now arguably isn’t capitalism but corporatism (I know this isn’t news to many people but it’s good to differentiate)

 

I think whether you swing left or swing right most people would rather there weren’t people suffering

 

i guess the main difference is how we look at wealth. the right view it as an inevitable by-product of success and the left tend to look at it as a problem that needs to be solved

 

 

 

[Rayvin 5129]

1 minute ago, Asprilla said:

Right except for I’m not sure about your last point, ie, what do we do when there are no more or at least too few jobs left?

 

Universal basic income is one idea being floated but us right leaning types are always going to be suspicious of being at the mercy of the state. At least it’s “an answer” to a problem that anyone can see coming towards us. I’m just not sure if it’s the right one but as yet the right don’t appear to have an answer.

 

equally what we have now arguably isn’t capitalism but corporatism (I know this isn’t news to many people but it’s good to differentiate)

 

I think whether you swing left or swing right most people would rather there weren’t people suffering

 

i guess the main difference is how we look at wealth. the right view it as an inevitable by-product of success and the left tend to look at it as a problem that needs to be solved

 

 

 

Interesting points.

I'm not totally sold on UBI as a solution either. I think it is a solution insofar as it keeps us in the game (transitional), but it's not a solution in terms of why are we here and what are we aspiring towards. We would need a major reorientation of the way we think about things. Idealistically, I would suggest that we should pivot towards scientific advancement and exploration into space/deeper science/whatever and focus society around progress in those areas rather than individual gains. This obviously sounds very socialist indeed, but at least it's internally consistent within the ideology, more or less. I'm not sure how capitalism can survive so well once we reach this stage since the incredible disparity between rich and poor will eventually lead to a complete breakdown in society - i.e. the disparity gets so large, and the conditions for the none rich get so shit, that the system can't sustain itself.

If the state is the worry there though, for you, it could well be that decentralisation comes in and takes a lot of the burden of this, one way or another.

Agree on the capitalism versus corporatism point.

Agree on the left right suffering point. As I have tried to judge it over the years, I would argue from my end that the right is unwilling to make the individual sacrifices necessary to prevent suffering, and the right would argue that the left is unwilling to push people to resolve their own situations. But I don't think anyone wants people to suffer, no.

I think wealth disparity is a problem that needs to be solved. I don't actually mind too much about wealth when we're comparing millionaires and normal people - but billionaires? It's obscene. There's a really good graphic that demonstrates just how obscene it is, which I will link to here.

https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/

That looks obscene to me, and like a problem. A problem that will eventually destroy capitalism, I might add.

 

[Rayvin 5129]

That graphic is absolutely ludicrous to me every time I go through it, it really is utterly mental that we've allowed this to happen.

[Asprilla 96]

9 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Interesting points.

I'm not totally sold on UBI as a solution either. I think it is a solution insofar as it keeps us in the game (transitional), but it's not a solution in terms of why are we here and what are we aspiring towards. We would need a major reorientation of the way we think about things. Idealistically, I would suggest that we should pivot towards scientific advancement and exploration into space/deeper science/whatever and focus society around progress in those areas rather than individual gains. This obviously sounds very socialist indeed, but at least it's internally consistent within the ideology, more or less. I'm not sure how capitalism can survive so well once we reach this stage since the incredible disparity between rich and poor will eventually lead to a complete breakdown in society - i.e. the disparity gets so large, and the conditions for the none rich get so shit, that the system can't sustain itself.

If the state is the worry there though, for you, it could well be that decentralisation comes in and takes a lot of the burden of this, one way or another.

Agree on the capitalism versus corporatism point.

Agree on the left right suffering point. As I have tried to judge it over the years, I would argue from my end that the right is unwilling to make the individual sacrifices necessary to prevent suffering, and the right would argue that the left is unwilling to push people to resolve their own situations. But I don't think anyone wants people to suffer, no.

I think wealth disparity is a problem that needs to be solved. I don't actually mind too much about wealth when we're comparing millionaires and normal people - but billionaires? It's obscene. There's a really good graphic that demonstrates just how obscene it is, which I will link to here.

https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/

That looks obscene to me, and like a problem. A problem that will eventually destroy capitalism, I might add.

 

I’ll answer this one properly later (I have to do some errands) but I appreciate the discussion 👍🏼

[Howmanheyman 31847]

39 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

Interesting points.

I'm not totally sold on UBI as a solution either. I think it is a solution insofar as it keeps us in the game (transitional), but it's not a solution in terms of why are we here and what are we aspiring towards. We would need a major reorientation of the way we think about things. Idealistically, I would suggest that we should pivot towards scientific advancement and exploration into space/deeper science/whatever and focus society around progress in those areas rather than individual gains. This obviously sounds very socialist indeed, but at least it's internally consistent within the ideology, more or less. I'm not sure how capitalism can survive so well once we reach this stage since the incredible disparity between rich and poor will eventually lead to a complete breakdown in society - i.e. the disparity gets so large, and the conditions for the none rich get so shit, that the system can't sustain itself.

If the state is the worry there though, for you, it could well be that decentralisation comes in and takes a lot of the burden of this, one way or another.

Agree on the capitalism versus corporatism point.

Agree on the left right suffering point. As I have tried to judge it over the years, I would argue from my end that the right is unwilling to make the individual sacrifices necessary to prevent suffering, and the right would argue that the left is unwilling to push people to resolve their own situations. But I don't think anyone wants people to suffer, no.

I think wealth disparity is a problem that needs to be solved. I don't actually mind too much about wealth when we're comparing millionaires and normal people - but billionaires? It's obscene. There's a really good graphic that demonstrates just how obscene it is, which I will link to here.

https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/

That looks obscene to me, and like a problem. A problem that will eventually destroy capitalism, I might add.

 

Obscene.

[Isegrim 9595]

 

[Alex 34210]

2 hours ago, Isegrim said:

 

If Djokovic has been allowed entry then it had subsequently emerged he been given what appeared to be special treatment then you can absolutely guarantee Farage would feel been in full mock indignation mode over that too. 

[Alex 34210]

3 hours ago, Howmanheyman said:

Obscene.

Great post

[Howmanheyman 31847]

14 minutes ago, Alex said:

Great post

You heard it here first. 👍

[Asprilla 96]

On 08/01/2022 at 14:47, Rayvin said:

Interesting points.

I'm not totally sold on UBI as a solution either. I think it is a solution insofar as it keeps us in the game (transitional), but it's not a solution in terms of why are we here and what are we aspiring towards. We would need a major reorientation of the way we think about things. Idealistically, I would suggest that we should pivot towards scientific advancement and exploration into space/deeper science/whatever and focus society around progress in those areas rather than individual gains. This obviously sounds very socialist indeed, but at least it's internally consistent within the ideology, more or less. I'm not sure how capitalism can survive so well once we reach this stage since the incredible disparity between rich and poor will eventually lead to a complete breakdown in society - i.e. the disparity gets so large, and the conditions for the none rich get so shit, that the system can't sustain itself.

If the state is the worry there though, for you, it could well be that decentralisation comes in and takes a lot of the burden of this, one way or another.

Agree on the capitalism versus corporatism point.

Agree on the left right suffering point. As I have tried to judge it over the years, I would argue from my end that the right is unwilling to make the individual sacrifices necessary to prevent suffering, and the right would argue that the left is unwilling to push people to resolve their own situations. But I don't think anyone wants people to suffer, no.

I think wealth disparity is a problem that needs to be solved. I don't actually mind too much about wealth when we're comparing millionaires and normal people - but billionaires? It's obscene. There's a really good graphic that demonstrates just how obscene it is, which I will link to here.

https://mkorostoff.github.io/1-pixel-wealth/

That looks obscene to me, and like a problem. A problem that will eventually destroy capitalism, I might add.

 

yeah I don’t know what you do about massive/obscene wealth.

I can’t imagine wanting to hoard on anything like that scale.

But as Elon Musk says, giving money to the government feels like giving it to people who are extraordinarily bad at managing money and he has a point (not saying he shouldn’t pay tax obviously)

 

American government spending especially is completely out of control although obviously so much of their budget is defence spending and other non welfare departments

 

it seems like much of it is syphoned off to god knows where

 

 

[Rayvin 5129]

7 minutes ago, Asprilla said:

yeah I don’t know what you do about massive/obscene wealth.

I can’t imagine wanting to hoard on anything like that scale.

But as Elon Musk says, giving money to the government feels like giving it to people who are extraordinarily bad at managing money and he has a point (not saying he shouldn’t pay tax obviously)

 

American government spending especially is completely out of control although obviously so much of their budget is defence spending and other non welfare departments

 

it seems like much of it is syphoned off to god knows where

 

 

I would be interested in seeing the gap between incomes taken and government expenditure on that front. I mean it must be public knowledge to some extent in order for the government itself to be accountable.

Governments could absolutely spend the money better, we've seen that with PPE scandals and so on over the last year. You need rules in place to ensure the money isn't given away through intentional corruption (i.e. the Tories) or through poor and unaccountable management (Labour, at least as far as their local councils go). Transparency is very important as a result.

I've often thought that a good way of solving this problem would be to bring in private sector consultants who specialise in efficiency/cost savings and pay them a -fair- rate, but incentivise them further by saying that they get a 10% percentage of any savings made over the course of the coming 5 year period or something like that. This means they are encouraged to fix as many problems as possible first time around. Obviously you need to have pushback from the management structure of whatever service you're dealing with to ensure non-financial performance metrics are adhered to, but that would be the give and take you would normally expect. After the 5 years, the service just keeps the lasting benefits. However, full disclaimer, I'm a management consultant who specialises in reducing costs and efficiency, so I would say all of this  

[Asprilla 96]

11 minutes ago, Rayvin said:

I would be interested in seeing the gap between incomes taken and government expenditure on that front. I mean it must be public knowledge to some extent in order for the government itself to be accountable.

Governments could absolutely spend the money better, we've seen that with PPE scandals and so on over the last year. You need rules in place to ensure the money isn't given away through intentional corruption (i.e. the Tories) or through poor and unaccountable management (Labour, at least as far as their local councils go). Transparency is very important as a result.

I've often thought that a good way of solving this problem would be to bring in private sector consultants who specialise in efficiency/cost savings and pay them a -fair- rate, but incentivise them further by saying that they get a 10% percentage of any savings made over the course of the coming 5 year period or something like that. This means they are encouraged to fix as many problems as possible first time around. Obviously you need to have pushback from the management structure of whatever service you're dealing with to ensure non-financial performance metrics are adhered to, but that would be the give and take you would normally expect. After the 5 years, the service just keeps the lasting benefits. However, full disclaimer, I'm a management consultant who specialises in reducing costs and efficiency, so I would say all of this  

Yeah that last paragraph sounds good 👍🏼

 

my frustration with the characterisation of there being two completely opposite sides with good guys on your side and bad guys on the other is that people aren’t focussed on the stuff that might actually make a difference

 

 

 

 

[Rayvin 5129]

I think I can safely and sincerely agree with that.

[Isegrim 9595]

 

[PaddockLad 16636]

Herr Flick

[Alex 34210]

Herr Farage is absolutely fucking shameless like. What a prize cunt  

[Isegrim 9595]

 

[Kid Dynamite 6856]

At least we know why the entire party backed Cummings to the hilt...

 

 

[Gemmill 42956]

The stance that No 10 (and whoever they send out to do the interviews tomorrow) is taking - we won't comment because Sue Gray is doing her investigation - is a terrible idea btw. That just leaves a void which will be filled by people other than themselves.

They really haven't got a clue.