British Democracy Forum
Web | Images | Groups | News | Advanced
Google
Worldwide Results UK Focused Results

Go Back   British Democracy Forum > General Politics > Immigration


You can remove this advert by logging in or registering
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-12-2006, 10:15 AM   #61 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 272
Soddball is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by This-England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soddball
Quote:
Originally Posted by This-England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soddball
Quote:
Originally Posted by This-England

And you think Japan and Korea come out of the World Wars well?
Only reason we are in decline is failed Thatherite economics.
Japan and Korea did not have pre-war industrial economies like ours. Japan has only become a really serious global player due to the evil capitalist Americans. Your claim is utterly spurious.

Perhaps you'd be kind to point me to an efficient and reliable public service in - ooh, let's be generous and say from 1975 to 1980. You know, one that Thatcher destroyed from its pinnacle of high quality.

At least you now accept that National Socialist is the correct term for your ideology.
Korea didnt have an economy after World War 2 and now look at them.
Im a Nationalist and Corporatist not a Socialist.
It was he Socialist over spending and Socialist Trade Unions that did the Corporate State so much damage in the 1970's,
It's strange however Britain last made a Surplus in 1978 under the Corporate state yet lost Billions every year under Thatcher.
Of course Thatcher and Major like the Socialists and Brown now have wasted billions.
Sweden, Japan, Korea and Singapore have all proved the superiority of Corporatism over both Socialism and Capitalism.
Don't dodge. Name me an efficient and reliable nationalised service during the period 1975-1980. Just one will do.

Singapore, btw, is a dictatorship.
British National Oil Corporation.
And your evidence is....?
Soddball is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote

You can remove this advert by logging in or registering
Old 10-12-2006, 08:42 PM   #62 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,682
This-England is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionist
This seems more like the reality of the 1970s:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Steyn
The past may be, as L. P. Hartley wrote, another country, but it’s rarely as foreign as Britain in the 1970s. Viewed from the United Kingdom of 2005, the day before yesterday is a banana republic without the weather. Inflation was up over 25 percent, marginal tax rates were up over 90 percent, and the only thing heading in the other direction was the pound, which nosedived so suddenly in 1976 that the chancellor of the exchequer, en route to an International Monetary Fund meeting, was summoned back from the departure lounge at Heathrow to try to talk his currency back up to sub-basement level. Her Majesty’s government had itself applied for a $4 billion loan from the IMF. Were the Britain of thirty years ago to re-emerge Brigadoon-like from the mists, it would be one of those basket cases that Bono hectors Bush about debt forgiveness for.

Such great Britons as the era could muster — Roger Moore, Michael Caine — had decamped to Switzerland and Beverley Hills. As if to underline the national decline, every flailing industry flew the moth-eaten flag: British Steel, British Coal, British Leyland. They were all owned by the state — even the last, which was the national automobile manufacturer. The government had taken all the famous British car marques — Austin, Morris, Rover, Jaguar, Triumph — and merged them into one. That’s right: the government made your car. Or, rather, a man called Red Robbo did, when he was in the mood, which wasn’t terribly often. He was the local union man at the Leyland plant in Birmingham, though he seemed to spend more time outside the gate, picketing. In Britain union leaders were household names, mainly because they were responsible for everything your household lacked. In the seventies if you opened The Times (when the print unions weren’t on strike) or watched the BBC news (when the miners weren’t on strike and the government hadn’t ordered the TV to close down mid-evening to conserve electricity), it was a parade of eminences from strange, unlovely acronyms such as ASLEF and SOGAT and NATSOPA and NACODS being received by the prime minister as if they were heads of state, which in a sense they were. Britain’s system of government in the seventies was summed up in the phrase “beer and sandwiches at Number Ten” — which meant the union leaders showing up at Downing Street to discuss what it would take to persuade them not to go on strike, and being plied with the afore mentioned refreshments by a prime minister reduced to the proprietor of a seedy pub, with the cabinet as his bar maids. The beer and sandwiches went only so far, and would usually be followed a day or two later by chaotic scenes on the evening news of big, burly blokes striking for their right to continue enjoying the soft, pampering workweek of the more effete Ottoman sultans.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1423517/posts

There's your corporate state in a nutshell!
Japan in the 1980's was a Corporate state too.
This-England is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2006, 08:44 PM   #63 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,682
This-England is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soddball
Quote:
Originally Posted by This-England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soddball
Quote:
Originally Posted by This-England
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soddball
Quote:
Originally Posted by This-England

And you think Japan and Korea come out of the World Wars well?
Only reason we are in decline is failed Thatherite economics.
Japan and Korea did not have pre-war industrial economies like ours. Japan has only become a really serious global player due to the evil capitalist Americans. Your claim is utterly spurious.

Perhaps you'd be kind to point me to an efficient and reliable public service in - ooh, let's be generous and say from 1975 to 1980. You know, one that Thatcher destroyed from its pinnacle of high quality.

At least you now accept that National Socialist is the correct term for your ideology.
Korea didnt have an economy after World War 2 and now look at them.
Im a Nationalist and Corporatist not a Socialist.
It was he Socialist over spending and Socialist Trade Unions that did the Corporate State so much damage in the 1970's,
It's strange however Britain last made a Surplus in 1978 under the Corporate state yet lost Billions every year under Thatcher.
Of course Thatcher and Major like the Socialists and Brown now have wasted billions.
Sweden, Japan, Korea and Singapore have all proved the superiority of Corporatism over both Socialism and Capitalism.
Don't dodge. Name me an efficient and reliable nationalised service during the period 1975-1980. Just one will do.

Singapore, btw, is a dictatorship.
British National Oil Corporation.
And your evidence is....?
Well you prove to me it wasn’t efficient and reliable.
I don’t see why the government being the major shareholder in a company suddenly makes it inefficient.
This-England is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2006, 08:47 PM   #64 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,682
This-England is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionist
This seems more like the reality of the 1970s:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Steyn
The past may be, as L. P. Hartley wrote, another country, but it’s rarely as foreign as Britain in the 1970s. Viewed from the United Kingdom of 2005, the day before yesterday is a banana republic without the weather. Inflation was up over 25 percent, marginal tax rates were up over 90 percent, and the only thing heading in the other direction was the pound, which nosedived so suddenly in 1976 that the chancellor of the exchequer, en route to an International Monetary Fund meeting, was summoned back from the departure lounge at Heathrow to try to talk his currency back up to sub-basement level. Her Majesty’s government had itself applied for a $4 billion loan from the IMF. Were the Britain of thirty years ago to re-emerge Brigadoon-like from the mists, it would be one of those basket cases that Bono hectors Bush about debt forgiveness for.

Such great Britons as the era could muster — Roger Moore, Michael Caine — had decamped to Switzerland and Beverley Hills. As if to underline the national decline, every flailing industry flew the moth-eaten flag: British Steel, British Coal, British Leyland. They were all owned by the state — even the last, which was the national automobile manufacturer. The government had taken all the famous British car marques — Austin, Morris, Rover, Jaguar, Triumph — and merged them into one. That’s right: the government made your car. Or, rather, a man called Red Robbo did, when he was in the mood, which wasn’t terribly often. He was the local union man at the Leyland plant in Birmingham, though he seemed to spend more time outside the gate, picketing. In Britain union leaders were household names, mainly because they were responsible for everything your household lacked. In the seventies if you opened The Times (when the print unions weren’t on strike) or watched the BBC news (when the miners weren’t on strike and the government hadn’t ordered the TV to close down mid-evening to conserve electricity), it was a parade of eminences from strange, unlovely acronyms such as ASLEF and SOGAT and NATSOPA and NACODS being received by the prime minister as if they were heads of state, which in a sense they were. Britain’s system of government in the seventies was summed up in the phrase “beer and sandwiches at Number Ten” — which meant the union leaders showing up at Downing Street to discuss what it would take to persuade them not to go on strike, and being plied with the afore mentioned refreshments by a prime minister reduced to the proprietor of a seedy pub, with the cabinet as his bar maids. The beer and sandwiches went only so far, and would usually be followed a day or two later by chaotic scenes on the evening news of big, burly blokes striking for their right to continue enjoying the soft, pampering workweek of the more effete Ottoman sultans.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1423517/posts

There's your corporate state in a nutshell!
British Steel was making a Billion a year as a Nationalised industry.
After privatisation it was losing about the same amont a year.
As for British Coal it was by far the best Coal company in Europe with the highest producation levels and cheapest production costs.
As I remember at the time Thatcher banned exports of Coal and bought around 15% of our electricity from France while all so buying electricity from BNFL which was 3 times more expensive than British Coal.
This-England is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2006, 08:48 PM   #65 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,682
This-England is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unionist
This seems more like the reality of the 1970s:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Steyn
The past may be, as L. P. Hartley wrote, another country, but it’s rarely as foreign as Britain in the 1970s. Viewed from the United Kingdom of 2005, the day before yesterday is a banana republic without the weather. Inflation was up over 25 percent, marginal tax rates were up over 90 percent, and the only thing heading in the other direction was the pound, which nosedived so suddenly in 1976 that the chancellor of the exchequer, en route to an International Monetary Fund meeting, was summoned back from the departure lounge at Heathrow to try to talk his currency back up to sub-basement level. Her Majesty’s government had itself applied for a $4 billion loan from the IMF. Were the Britain of thirty years ago to re-emerge Brigadoon-like from the mists, it would be one of those basket cases that Bono hectors Bush about debt forgiveness for.

Such great Britons as the era could muster — Roger Moore, Michael Caine — had decamped to Switzerland and Beverley Hills. As if to underline the national decline, every flailing industry flew the moth-eaten flag: British Steel, British Coal, British Leyland. They were all owned by the state — even the last, which was the national automobile manufacturer. The government had taken all the famous British car marques — Austin, Morris, Rover, Jaguar, Triumph — and merged them into one. That’s right: the government made your car. Or, rather, a man called Red Robbo did, when he was in the mood, which wasn’t terribly often. He was the local union man at the Leyland plant in Birmingham, though he seemed to spend more time outside the gate, picketing. In Britain union leaders were household names, mainly because they were responsible for everything your household lacked. In the seventies if you opened The Times (when the print unions weren’t on strike) or watched the BBC news (when the miners weren’t on strike and the government hadn’t ordered the TV to close down mid-evening to conserve electricity), it was a parade of eminences from strange, unlovely acronyms such as ASLEF and SOGAT and NATSOPA and NACODS being received by the prime minister as if they were heads of state, which in a sense they were. Britain’s system of government in the seventies was summed up in the phrase “beer and sandwiches at Number Ten” — which meant the union leaders showing up at Downing Street to discuss what it would take to persuade them not to go on strike, and being plied with the afore mentioned refreshments by a prime minister reduced to the proprietor of a seedy pub, with the cabinet as his bar maids. The beer and sandwiches went only so far, and would usually be followed a day or two later by chaotic scenes on the evening news of big, burly blokes striking for their right to continue enjoying the soft, pampering workweek of the more effete Ottoman sultans.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1423517/posts

There's your corporate state in a nutshell!
It was Socialist over spending and interference and Socialist Trade Unions that tarnished the image of the Corporate state.
This-England is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2006, 11:46 PM   #66 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,115
Internationalist has some supporters
Default

This-England, you have changed your argument. You previously said it was Thatcher that did all the damage but now it was socialism prior to Thatcher that did all the damage!

The fact is that Britain before 1979 was an economic basket case - indeed, the "sick man of Europe". The reforms in the 1980s helped to turn the situation around but we have a legacy of low productivity, and oversized public sector and declining industries.

Your statement about British Steel is bizarre. It did become profitable in the late 1980s when it was cut back drastically in preparation for privatisation, but we must all recall the loss-making industry of the 1970s that was costing the taxpayer (famously) £1 million per day.

British Leyland was so poor that it lost its huge advantage in the market place and even its eventual sale to BMW failed to turn it round. IIRC BMW sold it for £10 and gave a soft loan of hundreds of millions just to get it off their hands.

You only cite something as being corporatism when it shows signs of success but postwar Britain demonstrates the ultimate failure of that economic model. It may be effective for developing countries wishing to build key industries rapidly but you cannot run a diverse and complex economy by command and control.

Anyway, I know where you are coming from with this corporatist idea: fascism, pure and simple.

I fear that we have strayed off topic however. Sorry, mods. :roll:
Internationalist is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2006, 02:44 PM   #67 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 272
Soddball is just starting out
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by This-England
Well you prove to me it wasn’t efficient and reliable.'
No. You made the claim, not me. It is not up to me to disprove a claim you made, it is up to you to prove it! If you can't prove it, then retract it and admit your ideas of public ownership are wrong.

Quote:
I don’t see why the government being the major shareholder in a company suddenly makes it inefficient.
That is why you think public ownership is a good thing. Let me explain why it makes it inefficient.

If the government part-owns a company, that company is linked inextricably with the government of the day and its politics. In the hands of unscrupulous (read: all) politicians, this means that the company becomes a direct policy arm of the government. The directors of the company will formulate business strategies that are unworkable or that benefit the government, knowing full well the government will bail them out. The government will create policies that distort the market further to fit their own benefits, forcing other companies to close and creating unemploment.

So a government-owned company reduces competition, which keeps prices for consumers artificially high. It reduces the number of other companies competing which increases unemployment. And because there is not enough competition this means that the company can be as slack and useless as it likes and will still make a profit.
Soddball is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote
Old 11-12-2006, 02:51 PM   #68 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,115
Internationalist has some supporters
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soddball
The directors of the company will formulate business strategies that are unworkable or that benefit the government, knowing full well the government will bail them out.
Quite right. And the unions also know that the government will bail them out.
Internationalist is offline  
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!FuzzFizz It!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT. The time now is 12:46 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This site is owned and operated by MyCartel Limited © 2007. Hosting: BookFizz.
This site supports Label My Food and Politigg
My latest commercial site: Cell Phone News 2.0 - [Mobile version]

Mobile version

Politishop

eXTReMe Tracker
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.1.0