The Public Sector - A Different Perspective

[Damik]

The consumer side of the economy in the socialist countries was not seen as important. That's why your dad had to wait and the quality was dire. It's nothing to do with the balance of private/public. EE had some of the best education and social care networks anywhere in the world in the same period as well as the highest social mobility the world has ever seen, etc.

have you lived there? as it seems you have a bit romantic view how it really worked there ...

[Kurt Barlow]

we are talking here about the public sector and not the state spending

in the Eastern Europe till 1990 the public sector was about 95% of the economy and clearly it did not work

for example my father bought a new car for about 45 months salary after tax; he had to wait 10 months for the delivery; he could not choose even a color; and the aircon was not even manufactured; and to compare it to the cars from the West it was a total crap

only thing which actually works is the capitalism and free market

Eh - are you the same Damik who idolises EDF and its publicly funded nuclear build programme?

I seem to recall EDF is largely state owned

[crashmonitor]

Well, I'm happy to agree that the state should not be making consumer stuff - Cars, TVs, PCs, etc.

In fact, I support the principles of markets. They make a good organizing principle for much of the economy.

But there is more to it than that.

Markets cannot function without trust. They cannot function without stable and relatively non-corrupt institutions. They cannot function if the big players are allowed to do whatever they like (such as: stomping the small players). They have limited time horizons.

And frankly, the provision of things like healthcare, education and pensions by the markets just does not work, any more than your state-manufactured car.

Governments need to be stable, they need to be transparent and they need to produce the safety need the lassiez-faire markets don't provide. The idea of 'public bad private good' is way to simplistic.

I think health and state pension are sacrosanct. No state pension is a drag on consumption (as in China, which given our indebtedness might be argued as a good thing) because the citizens are forced to save for an unknowable retirement period. Better to pool the risk in a State pot.. As for health; well it makes people scared witless without a safety net, as in US. Even if you are employed and in a scheme, you still get sleepless nights about the consequence of unemployment and no health cover. Any American living here will tell you about the psychological relief the NHS provides. I wouldn't fancy that as an extra worry.

[scrappycocco]

The solution is to get rid of the current worthless education system. Start teaching kids how to prosper in the world, not how to work in non-jobs.

[NorthamptonBear]

CI is not the answer......it is not a good idea to try and treat the symptoms of the faults instead of looking to cure the causes of why there is such a big disparity between the have far too much and the have not so much.......pulling up the level from below will only encourage higher inflation/costs thus causing CI to have to increase to meet the same buying power every year......starts off at £200 to end at £2000 and still nobody is any better off.....also everyone will want a piece of the action.

CI paid for by LVT is a good answer in my opinion.

Absolute safety net for some.

Allows returns on capital (equipment) and labour but reduces returns on speculation, hoarding and penalises inefficient use of land.

[NorthamptonBear]

CI can't work imo because £200 doesn't really start to cover the cost of welfare lifers....council tax, rent, disability top ups etc. before you even get to the basic income, so you would have to have CI+ for those considered more equal. The cost would be unaffordable.

Council tax should be replaced by LVT paid by the owners of the land.

Rent would be reduced by the application of Land Value Tax on the owners.

[crashmonitor]

The solution is to get rid of the current worthless education system. Start teaching kids how to prosper in the world, not how to work in non-jobs.

There was a girl on the Amazon production line last night on television who boasted her degree was all worth while, she could apply what she had learnt.

One things that strikes me about the 50% University participation target. Most of the graduates could have done the work they eventually get anyway.

You wonder what brain washing techniques go on in these Institutions. Certainly they probably come out with an over-inflated value of their worth....a recent study showed that pessimists made better employees because they had a more accurate impression of their true worth.

[bearwithasorehead]

have you lived there? as it seems you have a bit romantic view how it really worked there ...

Yes I have.

Not romantic at all.

The negatives (and there were many) do not mean that we should ignore the positives.

Just like the reverse in our own society

freedom and individualism without responsibility and reciprocity is an empty freedom.

[Damik]

Eh - are you the same Damik who idolises EDF and its publicly funded nuclear build programme?

I seem to recall EDF is largely state owned

I am idolising all nuclear build programs. And the private would be better than public one.

Such as the US Westinghouse AP1000 reactor - 3.5 cents / kWh

[Damik]

Yes I have.

Not romantic at all.

The negatives (and there were many) do not mean that we should ignore the positives.

Just like the reverse in our own society

freedom and individualism without responsibility and reciprocity is an empty freedom.

I strongly disagree with you that there were any positives, but my family was not member of the party, so who knows ..

[Kurt Barlow]

I am idolising all nuclear build programs. And the private would be better than public one.

Such as the US Westinghouse AP1000 reactor - 3.5 cents / kWh

Lay off the crack m8

[Damik]

Lay off the crack m8

this is their public statement:

http://www.leabrook.co.uk/nuclear/nuc-lib/reactor-reports/index_files/AP1000-article.pdf

if I was the UK government I would make a public notice: come and show us please

[bearwithasorehead]

I strongly disagree with you that there were any positives, but my family was not member of the party, so who knows ..

cheap jibe about the party....

Did your family have access to free housing? I bet the answer is yes.

Why are you on this site? Remind me again.....

[R K]

People have a real problem understanding the scale of state spending. For every pound spend by anyone int the country anywhere in the country the state also spends a pound. You do your weekly shopping, the state spends the same amount as you, as well as everyone in the queue, everyone in the supermarket and in all supermarkets in the country. You buy petrol, the state spends the same amount as you and everyone else in the country combined. Every house or car that is sold, every pint of beer drunk, every loan taken out, every penny paid to anyone in the private sector, the state spends the same.

The state is incredibly big. As a proportion of the economy it's more than double the size of communist China's state. It consumes everything and impoverishes everyone.

Bizarre then to see so many Bentleys, Mercs, 4x4s, £3m houses, £2m flats, people chucking 1/3rd of their food in the bin, owning 2nd homes, holiday homes, paying £5k p.a. to play golf, eating out regularly etc etc.

Everyone is impoverished? Really?

[Bloo Loo]

Council tax should be replaced by LVT paid by the owners of the land.

Rent would be reduced by the application of Land Value Tax on the owners.

run that by me again?

[Damik]

Did your family have access to free housing? I bet the answer is yes.

nope; they had to self build one as they were in wrong jobs

and the free housing in the crazy gray block of flats was total crap

and there was no social mobility as there was no job market and it was quite difficult to relocate

and plenty of families had 3 or 4 generations living in 1b and 2b flats

it was just a total and unimaginable crap from left to right, top to bottom; even health care and life expectancy

I am not sure how and where your experience is comming from ???

Edited November 14, 2013 by Damik

[Kurt Barlow]

this is their public statement:

http://www.leabrook.co.uk/nuclear/nuc-lib/reactor-reports/index_files/AP1000-article.pdf

if I was the UK government I would make a public notice: come and show us please

Er - I think the UK have already been doing that bending over backwards to accommodate any willing Nuke builders.

Interesting article - dated 2003

[Damik]

Er - I think the UK have already been doing that bending over backwards to accommodate any willing Nuke builders.

Interesting article - dated 2003

well if you think that Indians, Chinese and Russians will pay 11 cents per nuclear kWh like British then you are mistaken

watch and learn

[bearwithasorehead]

nope; they had to self build one as they were in wrong jobs

and the free housing in the crazy gray block of flats was total crap

and there was no social mobility as there was no job market and it was quite difficult to relocate

and plenty of families had 3 or 4 generations living in 1b and 2b flats

it was just a total and unimaginable crap from left to right, top to bottom; even health care and life expectancy

I am not sure how and where your experience is comming from ???

Fair enough, but you're talking from a Polish perspective and the chronic housing shortage there was much worse than elsewhere.

Still, the opportunity to self build in commie land is something at odds with the picture you paint.

And while I don't dispute the cramped conditions and poor quality housing, that isn't any different to what we've got now, 40 years later, in the so-called capitalist west.

In actual fact EE housing is generally better quality and has bigger rooms overall than in UK. Even the panelak you refer too. It'll still be here when all the new build estates are falling down.

I do dispute your denial of social mobility though...... I'd rather take my chances in, say, 1970s Hungary as a first generation uni grad, than in 2010s UK.

[John51]

No need for CI+.

People adapt to the system they're faced with. Pre welfare state, multi generational families stayed together for economic survival. No need to pay for child care should a young mother find a job.

Similar will happen under CI. At present, my standard of living goes down if I become part of a couple. With CI it would be in my financial interests to pair up. (Hers too.) 2 single mothers sharing a 4 bed house has to be better than the current system. Every single mother I know has at some point teared up in front of me and sobbed about how miserable they feel. They get so depressingly lonely. Only one has managed to escape the glue trap. She did it by doing voluntary work (CAB) for a few years then suffered a really shit job before getting transferred to a decent position. (She's from the former East Germany.)

What could all those people in non jobs really be achieving? The first Harry Potter book was written thanks to state subsidy and Rowling has more than paid back her benefits in taxes. Similar with many musicians who learned their craft while on the dole.

[erat_forte]

Not only would it be great economically, but it is morally correct too. Its almost like the universe intended it.

Attempting to have the government creating jobs until full employment is just such a step backwards it is painful to even read. How on earth are people still this stupid.

Yes it is amazing that people think that everyone should stand on their own two feet, and that the State has the moral duty to do a lot of pushing to get them to!

[Damik]

Fair enough, but you're talking from a Polish perspective and the chronic housing shortage there was much worse than elsewhere.

Still, the opportunity to self build in commie land is something at odds with the picture you paint.

And while I don't dispute the cramped conditions and poor quality housing, that isn't any different to what we've got now, 40 years later, in the so-called capitalist west.

In actual fact EE housing is generally better quality and has bigger rooms overall than in UK. Even the panelak you refer too. It'll still be here when all the new build estates are falling down.

I do dispute your denial of social mobility though...... I'd rather take my chances in, say, 1970s Hungary as a first generation uni grad, than in 2010s UK.

you need to compare the West Germany, Swiss and Austria with the Poland, Czech and Hungary after 1960 till now ...

UK is a special case ...

BTW the main reason for the Berlin Wall was that everybody with a half a brain was leaving the Socialistic paradise ...

More than 2 .6 million East Germans escaped to West Berlin or West Germany from 1949 to 1961. Many people had to suffer under repressions of the Communist system or wanted to live a better life in the West. The East German government saw no other way to prevent from escaping to the West via Berlin than closing the border between East and West Berlin on August 13, 1961.

Edited November 14, 2013 by Damik

[Damik]

What could all those people in non jobs really be achieving? The first Harry Potter book was written thanks to state subsidy and Rowling has more than paid back her benefits in taxes. Similar with many musicians who learned their craft while on the dole.

with the current level of benefits in quality (you are better off than working) and quantity I am expecting the tsunami of British literature and musical treasures every minute ...

[tomandlu]

Not only would it be great economically, but it is morally correct too. Its almost like the universe intended it.

Attempting to have the government creating jobs until full employment is just such a step backwards it is painful to even read. How on earth are people still this stupid.

Not stupid - I'd prefer CI (as I made clear), but realistically an expanded public sector workforce could accomplish the same goal, which is to solve the problem of ensuring that optimised production benefits all rather than just the owners of the means of production.

[winkie]

Not stupid - I'd prefer CI (as I made clear), but realistically an expanded public sector workforce could accomplish the same goal, which is to solve the problem of ensuring that optimised production benefits all rather than just the owners of the means of production.

What is the point of that.....firstly we can't afford it, secondly why pay people to do stuff for the sake of it when they could be working doing something more useful and productive in their free time, their own time......a job is only worth doing if it is a job that is needed for at a price that people can afford to pay ie us who will pay for it by extra taxes or extra debt and debt interest.......a mum at home baking a cake and looking after the children has got to be better than sitting in some office doing nothing useful but wanting to be paid for it, because it is 'worth it' when it is clearly not.