do you not think that 40% of ones total output (on average) in life is a bit steep?

Look at it as “cost”………you get to keep 60% as “profit”, whilst you pay 40% to society as cost. Doesn’t seem like a bad deal to me. Specially as the alternative is you op out of society and have nothing. Well apart from maybe a shelter made of branches and a few berries to eat.

Torminalis – you seem to be very confused.

anticapitalist backlash

erm, dude, I think you got the wrong end of the stick here, I am arguing in favour of capitalism and less government intervention into the free markets unless there is actual criminal behaviour.

rather naive, trading beads and shells version of capitalism that you describe

It was meant to be simplistic to prove a point. I am aware of some of the the complexities beyond the berry trading, though do not presume that I am not at the very least slightly naive.

tried to live in a tent and it was a bit cold

Bit cold?!? Not half…

less government intervention into the free markets unless there is actual criminal behaviour.

And how do you define what is criminal behaviour?

Torminalis – you seem to be very confused.

It’s all pretty clear from where I am sat.

Capitalism gets blamed for a whole lot of the worlds ills. I am trying to argue that government intervention is as bad, if not a whole lot worse for society and the wellbeing of individuals. I have used war, protectionism, the criminalisation of the innocent and the unreasonable tax burden to try and make my case. You may not agree, but to suggest I am confiused is both patronising and wrong. I have my opinions and I am happy to subject them to scrutiny, which I hope you agree is a vital part in refining ones beliefs and passing them on where appropriate.

So cough up, pay your taxes, and stop whingeing.

“Because everything is perfect, our money does not pay for the death and suppression of millions across the globe and we should all be grateful.”

You very definitely didn’t give the impression that were perfectly happy paying your taxes and that your only objection was how it was being spent.

unreasonable tax burden? That is a construct not an absolute.

I think our tax burden is too low. I would prefer higher taxers to provide better services.

Heres one for you. Without benefits paid for by taxes crime would increase ( as people stole to get a bite to eat) So paying benefits makes your cosy little middleclass life safer

erm, dude, I think you got the wrong end of the stick here

Don’t think he did – I assume he was referring to your backlash against anticapitalists.

What you seem to be failing to grasp is that just because capitalism works well for you doesn’t mean it works well for everyone – in order for you to do well it means lots of people round the world are getting screwed instead.

You also seem to be forgetting that capitalism drives protectionism, war etc. Criminalising people, well yes I agree I suppose. And as for the unreasonable tax burden, well boo hoo. Again, the vast majority of the world’s population would kill to swap places with you.

I am arguing in favour of capitalism and less government intervention into the free markets unless there is actual criminal behaviour.

But on the other hand you’re saying that governments let business interests (be it weapons manufacturers, alcohol, etc) ride rough-shod over the proles. Which is it? Would the arms manufacturers stop selling weapons to countries that perpetrate atrocities if they were less heavily regulated? Looking back through history, have the people with the money always acted responsibly? (Clue: the answer’s no.)

This is just a limp anti-New Labour rant a decade too late.

You very definitely didn’t give the impression that were perfectly happy paying your taxes and that your only objection was how it was being spent.

I do accept that as a civilised society we have to provide safety nets for the weakest and most vulnerable as I have stated all along.I also believe we would have to pay a lot less if we didn’t have to sponsor the various governments’ misadventures and attempts to manipulate the free market to the advantage of their most vested interests.

But on the other hand you’re saying that governments let business interests (be it weapons manufacturers, alcohol, etc) ride rough-shod over the proles. Which is it?

Exactly. Like I said, confused.

I also believe we would have to pay a lot less if we didn’t have to sponsor the various governments’ misadventures and attempts to manipulate the free market to the advantage of their most vested interests.

Yes, damn those intervening Governments from preventing those controlling the Free markets to the advantage of their own vested interests.

I do accept that as a civilised society we have to provide safety nets for the weakest and most vulnerable…….

Why, ffs, do people always keep on about taxes being necessary provide for the weakest and most vulnerable ?

Our taxes are used to pay for our infrastructures and universal welfare provisions.

If you are really concerned about “the weakest and most vulnerable” then empower them and provide them with jobs and living wages …….not tax handouts.

WE are a low tax low spending county compared to comparable nations such as Germany and France – to say nothing of the Netherlands and Scandinavia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP

This is just a limp anti-New Labour rant a decade too late

Its actually ani statist argument which will be relevent all the while that we still live in a heavily statist world.

capitalism works well for you doesn’t mean it works well for everyone

I don’t see big government working that well either.

I would prefer higher taxers to provide better services

That has not historically been the case though. I think that communities and individuals can provide for the needs of society much better than centralised government.

I have to go and watch This Is England and pay some attention to MrsT, back in the morning to continue…

That has not historically been the case though. I think that communities and individuals can provide for the needs of society much better than centralised government.

What? Show an example please. Thats just nonsense.

What? Show an example please. Thats just nonsense

RNLI

RNLI

PMSL! 😀

RNLI – they provide food and housing for the poor do they?

Go on Ernie!….

139,000 lives saved without a single penny of government money!

The statment made was

provide for the needs of society much better than centralised government.

I take it by your exclusion of emergency services from the needs of community you’re agreeing with me that there is no need for the Fire and Ambulance service to be funded by general taxation run from central or local government

Yes of course ratty, the “needs of society” can be provided in exactly the same way as the RNLI operates……..we can abolish taxation !!!

LOL ! 😀

C’mon Ernie – make your point,

whats the difference between the Fire brigade (tax funded) and the RNLI (entirely independent charity)?

Which of the two provides what is described as the exemplar, best rescue service of its type in the world?

Isn’t giving money to charity pretty socialist anyway? Surely according to capitalism if something is worth doing there should be a profit in it no?

without a single penny of government money!

Gift Aid?

If you want an example of what happens when emergency services get run by private enterprise, look at how the fire services of New York used to run. If you didn’t have insurance, they weren’t putting out your house.

Gift Aid?

Oh no you’ve been done again, Labby! 😆

Carry on though, it’s funny.

Zulu-Eleven – Member

C’mon Ernie – make your point,

whats the difference between the Fire brigade (tax funded) and the RNLI (entirely independent charity)?

Size, complexity, number of callouts, coists involved.

~quite a lot really

Erm, TJ…..if the Fire Brigade was funded by voluntary contributions, I think there might still be a need for taxation.

As the “needs of society” go a little beyond just sea and fire rescue.

Although I look forward to ratty explaining how we are all going to “muck in together” and therefore taxation won’t be necessary……..I had no idea ratty was a communist 😀

size, complexity, number of callouts, coists involved

Bollocks, thats simply a matter of scale – RNLI is by definition concentrated on coastal communities, the local community clubs together to provide a service to all – absolute proof that communities and individuals can provide for the needs of society much better than centralised government.

therefore taxation won’t be necessary..

reductio ad absurdium again, nobody claimed this – however there’s no doubt that the role of the state can be reigned in substantially and replaced with “big society”.

TJ – you asked for an example of communities providing for the needs of society, and you’ve been given a proven, established successful one!

the community clubs together to provide a service to all

Sounds very socialist to me…

So tell me ratty, since the RNLI is mostly staffed by volunteers, will most public sectors workers suddenly become volunteers ?

Will you be giving up a few days every week to teach in a school or go on the beat as a policeman or maybe repair a road ?

Don’t forget, you’ll still need time to go fund raising to pay for school buildings, materials, electricity, etc.

The fire brigade is already mostly staffed by volunteers who have full time jobs Ernie.

WWill you be giving up a few days every week to teach in a school or go on the beat as a policeman

Already done it luvvie!

what have you done for your society ?

TJ – you asked for an example of communities providing for the needs of society, and you’ve been given a proven, established successful one!

So the RNLI provide food and shelter for the needy do they?

totally differnt to fire service anyway.

A few more wily sea dogs and we can get rid of the coastguard.

– however there’s no doubt that the role of the state can be reigned in substantially and replaced with “big society”.

Really – I think you will find there is lots of doubt – infact there is good experience to say it wont and can’t

hahahahahahahah TJ

you asked for an example – you got one

totally differnt to fire service anyway.

Yeah TJ – a fast response emergency service that saves peoples lives is totally different from the fire service! I suppose mountain rescue is totally different too, and cave rescue…

Ratty – you are weird.

How does a teh RNLI show your point

I think that communities and individuals can provide for the needs of society much better than centralised government.

So becaues the RNLI can provide its very limited service communities and individuals can proved hospitals, services for the disabled, food and clothing and that sort of thing?

How about mental health services? Child protection, care for the elderly

Ridiculous even by your standards

very limited service

I presume that by very limited, you mean limited to the sea?

I guess a bit like how mountain rescue offers a very limited service, in that they only deal with people who need rescuing?

Who mentioned hospitals and care services? you asked for an example

what have you done for your society ?

Hey…….you’re making it sound as if not everyone would rush to help to volunteer in your brave new world 😕

……..you don’t feel very confident about your idea after all ?

Yeah I’d be up for it……..I’ve always fancied being a doctor. And I guess there’ll be plenty of vacancies when no one is getting paid anymore. Maybe brain surgeon……..wad ju reckon eh ?

Yup – you got it. So how are you going to provide mental health services on your model?