Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by EUBanana

  1. And really, why shouldn't she? If a normal girl (or guy) can't even afford a roof over their head without being a debt slave for their entire life, what a sorry state we have reached.
  2. Clearly you know nothing about it. Ahh, sweet assumption.
  3. I think what Injin means is, the government doesn't do that, because it can't get away with it. When it can get away with it, it will do that. This is probably accurate.
  4. Like I said, I'm not an anarchist, so it may be a separate argument, but thats the one I'm having! The point is the government is too big. You can be extreme and say there should be no government at all - I put that down to people being so annoyed at government they think nothing is preferable. Then when you suggest the government should be, say, halved, people get antsy and talk about chaos in the streets, the breakdown of society without strong government, etc. This stuff just isn't true. Its an especially relevant argument now (the size of the state) given we have people talking about actually increasing the size of the state yet further - bank nationalisations, greater tariffs, maybe even stuff like price controls and capital seizure might happen before the dust has settled. And the fact that we all have to work that much harder to pay for the public sector.
  5. You're missing the point though really, you don't need to be an anarchist to agree with me at least - point is the state really doesn't equate to the infrastructure, and the Victorians still had government, but one taking up 5% of GDP, not 50% of GDP. And yet railways were built and society didn't collapse, in fact, far from it. The current state of affairs regarding the states role is really a post WW1 paradigm only (and parts of it, post WW2). This doesn't make 1918 (or 1945) Year Zero though, we really could and did do without such a parasite on our backs in the past.
  6. I'm not quite sure what this has to do with the GWR. Isambards old man got a bailout? Fact is the London Underground and all the railways in this fair land bar a very few were set up without the government in a role any greater than that of a guide, and often a fairly light guide at that. In any case, the majority of it was built before 1914, when the government share of GDP was miniscule compared to what it is now, so even if the government was involved in some way, it was a government on a completely different scale to the one we have now. We had a minimal state until WW1. It didn't seem to hold up the British Empire or Industrial Revolution though, or even social and political change (Great Reform Act? Parliament Act 1911?).
  7. Infrastructure does not equate to the state, not even remotely. Think about what you are saying, at least. Brunel didn't work in the public sector now, did he?
  8. I'm curious - what do you think should have happened to those mining communities?
  9. If there really was fascism it'd be libertarians first up against the wall, before even the Jews.
  10. That at least is complete nonsense, Callaghan is at least as much to blame as Thatcher was, if anybody was. It certainly wasn't "engineered". If it was, why such shock that the war happened? And the Conservative cabinet was going to let the Argies keep the Falklands, it was only when Admiral Leach gatecrashed a Cabinet meeting that things changed.
  11. This sort of thing is why in 1936 so many Spanish priests got lynched.
  12. Sure, but GDP per capita, adjusted to 21st century prices, was of the order of £1500 a year in 1900. This is long before they even had penicillin. Back in the days of the Great Stink. There are a lot of factors that caused abject poverty, and even the rich didn't have healthcare as we would know it (they dont saw the arms off people without anaeshetic anymore) because it hadn't been invented yet. There was certainly a very strong civil society in the Victorian era, a great deal of progress - including social progress - was made, and yet the government had nothing to do with it. They were, however, 150 years behind us technologically.
  13. Way back in the 19th century state spending was a couple of percent of GDP rather than half of GDP. I don't think people generally equate the Victorian era with anarchic chaos...
  14. This sort of thing reminds me a bit of Verisign and Thawte, which is a private certification system. OK, of computer programs not qualifications, but same deal. Universities used to be privately funded. In fact US universities are to a great extent and this is supposed to be one reason why UK ones are, in comparison, such garbage. It isn't like companies would be funding advanced surfing degrees is it.
  15. Shows that people can be as thick as a hippo sandwich then, considering they've got a LOT more to get excited about now than they did in 1997.
  16. I used to be one of them, but eventually changed my mind, figured it wouldn't work very well. So now I'm just a libertarian, positively mainstream these days almost...
  17. Presumably Injinworld would be... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchist_Catalonia
  18. Thats because we've been told we're rich when we're not. Nothing to do with "greed and narcissism", its more "We're as well off as France, Sweden or the US, so we will live a French, Swedish or American lifestyle.". Then people find out that to live that lifestyle they need to be in debt up to the eyeballs, but they figure everybody else must be too and thats "the way it is". Then they find out they are a debt slave, but again, thats "the way it is". Then people have breakdowns. There is nothing virtuous about austerity unless you're a monk. And I rather like plasma TVs. Not that I have one, but I would like one, of course I would, if I wasn't aware of my bank balance. But you do have to live within your means, and the nation has been collectively conned by Gordenron Brown on just what "our means" are.
  19. You gotta be kidding. "Materialism"? We got the whole nation living in shoeboxes and taxed to the hilt. What "materials" do they have exactly? Its hardly surprising people get mental health problems when they have to spend £200k on a home when they earn 15k a year. You'd get plenty more 'material' somewhere like Sweden, I can assure you, where having two houses is almost the norm. Materialism has nothing to do with it. The fact is that this country is poor, despite what the GDP stats say. Our standard of living is diabolical compared to the rest of developed Europe. It isn't "materialism", because relatively speaking we dont got as much.
  20. Dunno, I thought it was terrifying. This is only a foretaste of the pain to come and people are already shouting, begging for the government to save them, led by people ideologically all in favour of Big Government (by definition anti-freedom), when the government caused the problem in the first place. I can see how the Nazis got in. Imagine five more years of this. By that time people will be ready to do anything, anything at all, to be saved by Leviathan.
  21. Very true, I did computer science as a mature student, and I'd also done intensive comp sci courses offered in the private sector. The uni stuff was a much broader base so valuable in that regard, but the private courses I did just blew the degree out of the water in terms of practical skills. Universities hardly seem to even teach coding any more, you would've thought with computer science programming would be pretty key... Nope! Shame those intensive courses are so expensive, or I'd do some more. 2 weeks 9 till 5 with a class of 8-10, you sure do learn alright.
  22. Now that Mandy is a Lord the only way we'll ever get rid of him is murder. He's there till the day he dies.
  23. Well, in fairness I was talking more to vicmac. I care as much about China as a I do about the Congo, ie I don't. They have their problems, and thats the point, they are problems that belong to them, not us. We have plenty of problems of our own. Like I said, I care about Brits. Ironic really, is that globalisation, to care about Brits? So happens I think free trade will benefit all of us, China's meteoric GDP growth which was terrifying the Yanks a year back was on the back of free trade. They might well be at the 19th century level of industrialisation but thats better than being in the 18th in a paddy field. However that is the almost by the by, a happy byproduct.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.