Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
getdoon_weebobby

Karl Marx Was Spot On

Recommended Posts

Could stay at home mums vote in this brave new non-dumbocracy

I doubt it. Their immediate financial contributions to society would render them too politically illiterate to vote in KingBingo's fantasy dystopia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Exactly how does being a basic rate tax payer guarantee that someone is politically literate?

It does not, but they are far more likely too. Far more. If you think I have no understanding of mob rule I suggest you have no understand of this countries underclass. Spend some time talking to your local police, GP or teachers. Find out that 2% of the population consume a massively disproportional amount of state spending. Better still sign up a special constable with your local force. I guarantee your change your mind pretty fast after you meet these people the police spend all day dealing with.

If someone is suddenly made redundant through no fault of their own, why should this person also lose their right to vote just because they are no longer paying tax? The very notion seems ridiculous to me.

I admit the way I said it was over simplistic. You could easily work out a credit system. You needed X many credits to be a citizen. This could be based on years over the last 10 that you have paid tax. So someone that has been out of work for a short period is still eligible.

This could also be the answer to the stay at home mum issue as they would be in tax paying properties.

This sort of scorecard is common enough when working out entitlements in a lot of our tax system, and very common for immigration systems.

I would turn your second point around since the basis on which it is proposed is not apparent to me. Why should people who have been sent to jail NOT be considered suitable to vote. Does one stop being a citizen if one has spent time in prison for whatever reason?

Because they have broken the rules which society operate in a serious enough manner to warrant imprisonment. Seems more than obvious to me.

I would turn your second point around and suggest to you that maybe people who have served time for child molestation should be allowed to work in schools. After all why it impact on their choice of job if the time is served according to your logic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bo11ox.

The suggestion is, if I want to vote, I get a job, which is a bit easier than acquiring land.

Not if unemployment continues to rise as it is. If the economy collapses and we have, say, five million unemployed one would also get a shrinkage in the electorate. The areas hit hardest by the economic collapse would then be those where people would be least likely to have the power to vote against the incumbent government, leading to a maintenance of the status quo.

I think the whole idea is entirely misguided. I agree that the UK electoral system is in need of reform (I have always been an advocate of PR) but reducing the number of eligible voters is not the answer to the UKs problems. What one would be better doing is encouraging MORE participation in elections so that people on long-term benefits, ex-prisoners and so forth, feel that they have a vested interest in society. Removing their rights as citizens is not going to encourage this. Instead it would just lead to wider disenfranchisement and more social instability. I don't know why I even need to spell these things out to people. Democracy was hard fought for. These rights should never be removed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It does not, but they are far more likely too. Far more. If you think I have no understanding of mob rule I suggest you have no understand of this countries underclass. Spend some time talking to your local police, GP or teachers. Find out that 2% of the population consume a massively disproportional amount of state spending. Better still sign up a special constable with your local force. I guarantee your change your mind pretty fast after you meet these people the police spend all day dealing with.

even more than city bankers? The chairman of northen rock alone has cost the state a bob or two.

I admit the way I said it was over simplistic. You could easily work out a credit system. You needed X many credits to be a citizen. This could be based on years over the last 10 that you have paid tax. So someone that has been out of work for a short period is still eligible.

This could also be the answer to the stay at home mum issue as they would be in tax paying properties.

THat still wouldn't work - you would disenfranchise most full time students because they did't live in tax paying properties and wouldn't have "built up credits". This approach to sufferage is going to be somewhat arbitrary, grossly unfair and inherently undemocratic.

Because they have broken the rules which society operate in a serious enough manner to warrant imprisonment. Seems more than obvious to me.

I would turn your second point around and suggest to you that maybe people who have served time for child molestation should be allowed to work in schools. After all why it impact on their choice of job if the time is served according to your logic.

I think your comparison is somewhat specious rather than my logic being flawed. I would clearly agree that certain kinds of offenders should be barred from working in certain kinds of job, but I don't see what that has got to do with voting rights. The comparison is wholly invalid. If someone had been jailed for electoral fraud then I might be willing to concede that they shouldn't be allowed too close to a balot box, but as a general principle it just doesn't make sense to me.

I think we are coming from quite different ideological viewpoints so I guess its unsuprising we are having difficulties seeing the others point of view....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Old Capitalism

large (and increasing levels of) borrowing --- short termism -- make as much money as possible before co. collapses -- load debt onto next generation

New Capitalism

Low borrowing --- business grown at a slower rate --- or Peston as says---

"For many, the New Capitalism may well seem fairer and less alienating than the model of the past 30 years, in that the

system's salvation may require it to be kinder, gentler, less divisive, less of a casino in which the winner takes all."

I'd call it Decent Capitalism. .... as opposed to the sh1t capitalism that Brown has fostered.

www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/newcapitalism.pdf

What we will be left with when it's all over will be 'less of a casino in which the winner takes all.' Ie., something similar to the situation in the middle ages: the winners will already have it all. There will be nothing left on the table to win.

When the dust settles we'll find that as a result of the whole debacle a few people 'in the know' have gotten much richer and much more powerful at others' expense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Unfortunately he never said that:

http://meganmcardle.theatlantic.com/archiv...1/faux_marx.php

You can read/search Das Kapital for free here:

http://www.bibliomania.com/2/1/261/1294/frameset.html

Was wondering if it was fake ... in 1867 the concept of selling houses to workers, let alone 'technology', would be a bit much to expect even of Marx ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure about the Communism thing though, doesn't that involve hippies with beards and dope running the country? That can never succeed. Maybe a ruthless dictatorship, I would speculate. Dictatorships are proven (Genghis khan in his greatness ran half the globe for example). Cull the weak, that the strong might thrive. Screw communism, pathetic idea if ever there was one. Supporting those that are weak (and always have been, and always will be) is folly. This is communism, this is democracy, this is a cancer. And another thing, the only thing that ever pissed off Jesus was the money lenders. He chinned them, and so should we.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 317 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.