[Closed] Thatcher's died according to BBC

I shall be avoiding all forms of media tomorrow and go for a ride. I may even have a glass of milk.

I'll check to see if there is a riot.

So as we have never had a free market economy how do you know it does not work? What is it that makes us need a state to regulate the economy, the country or more scarily individuals?

Dark satanic mills
Child labour
Child deaths at works
The reality is owners will do any number of moral ills to make some more money as a quick glance at history will tell you.

The stateless society with "unregulated individuals" has been tried we call it the Wild West and it was most unlike what you think will spring up from no rules as we all suddenly become nice because there are no rules.
the internet may also give you a current example of how nice everyone is when not regulated

Can you name me some countries that are fully unregulated free markets with no central or local government regulation?

Somalia? Or has someone else already done this one.
It does have local and central government regulation, but it appears to be completely ignored.

Dark satanic mills
Child labour
Child deaths at works

If you are talking about Victorian Britain there was state intervention, it wasn't a laissez-faire free market economy. And not just state intervention on social issues, but also infrastructure projects.

well [ having bothered to read the thread 😳 ] is that there was always regulation as the market is fundamentally flawed so you are correct that there was none - well there must have been at some point with barter I guess.

My view is that regulation is a reaction to what happened without it

well there must have been at some point with barter I guess.

The original question asked for an example of free-market capitalism, whilst their might have been no state intervention under the barter system, it wasn't capitalism.

Goes of to read even more of the thread 😳

My view is that regulation is a reaction to what happened without it

Interesting, isn't it?

Free marketeer = anarchist.

Neither of whom actually knows how human nature works, but both have a wonderful idea HOW it should.

We have to deal with the reality.

Democratic socialism is the only method that has ensured that the majority of humans are satisfied with their lives.

Embrace human nature.
Love all the people.
Treat others as you would yourself.
Judge your society by how you treat the least fortunate.
Bollocks to dogma.

I may even have a glass of milk.

I'm having a mr whippy.

Democratic socialism ? Very interesting, any working examples ?

why do you need to put a question mark after democratic socialism ?

Very interesting, any working examples ?

Clement Atlee 1945 would be an obvious homegrown example

I may even have a glass of milk.
I'm having a mr whippy.

I'm having a mr whippy.

i immediately thought of douglas hird from spitting image

mt - Member

So as we have never had a free market economy how do you know it does not work?

You can draw conclusions from historic situations which are, IMO, impossible to resist without resorting to irrationality.

We have a largely free market with specific controls. Companies go to great lengths to escape these controls, legally and otherwise. They're not normally especially strong controls either- not strong enough, once degraded, to stop the invisible hand from fisting itself. Ultimately, companies do what they want whenever they can get away with it.

Now, I know there are those who believe that the reason companies destroyed themselves was [i]because[/i] of these weak controls- that they create a false impression of safety which encourages organisations to act dangerously. And frankly, these people should be identified, and prevented from ever holding any position of responsibility, because they are quite mad.

We have laws in society. People break these laws, and invent new crimes that are outwith the existing laws. Do we believe they all do this because they just don't like laws? And that if we only did away with these silly laws, everyone would be lovely to each other?

When I was working for the bank (a bank now recognised widely as a benchmark for Being Shit), the culture where regulation was concerned was that of ignoring it- or rather, paying it enough attention to dodge it. Now they didn't do that out of some prankish sense of fun or challenge- LOL, it's the FSA, let's lead them a merry dance. They did it because they wanted to do things that regulations would prevent.

And then, they completely destroyed themselves. Could better regulation have stopped that? Perhaps- I suspect it'd largely have led to better deception/evasion. But you have to be nuts to think it happened [i]because[/i] of regulation. In a free market, they'd have done the same things, and more.

"More, better capitalism" imagines that placing a bucket of water at the foot of a cliff encourages people to jump off. And then, it imagines that kicking over the bucket will render the cliff completely safe.

And that's pretty much all I have to say about that.

I will be trying to avoid all the coverage of the funeral tomorrow. A Mr Whippy sounds like a good enough way of passing the time 😀

I shall be:

[img] [/img]

The one on the right I know about so doesn't get my support, the one on the left I have no idea, who is he?

Jim.

Jim who?, seriously, who is he?

You've not heard of Jim?

I think he lives here:

[img] [/img]

Junkyard - lazarus

euphemism ??

A younger/pre-politics Margaret Thatcher is credited with being on the team that developed the Lyons 'soft scoop' method of softening ice cream. Allegedly the biggest competition to this/her system at the time was the 'Mr Whippy'. 😀

So we have had what some think is a pretty graphic example of a totally unregulated society in Somalia, I'm not fully sure this is really an unregulated given the religious input into certain parts of that country. However it's still very relivent example of in humanity but still does not answer the question of why we cannot have a society that allows a free market. Now don't get bogged down with companies, banks or institutions that have upset you. These are all made up of humans just like you and me, is there a fundamental human failing that allows us to do/ be complicit in activity that is selfish. Humans can often show cooperative behaviour that is outstanding in its selflessness but then again be constantly selfish on a daily basis. Is it that we need to see an overwhelming reason to understand why working collectively is better in the long run.

Farmers Blonde, Bradfield Brewery lovely.

Interesting, isn't it?
Free marketeer = anarchist.

Democratic socialism ? Very interesting, any working examples ?

Most Scandinavian countries have traditionally been much more socialist than us, and seemingly very successfully. They consistently score extremely highly on quality of life/standards of living ratings.

Do you think this country could go scandi-style then? All the scandinavian people i have met have been proper nice, friendly, open, cool people. maybe that's cos they were all arty types though. Dunno. Booze would be expensive though, that'd be a bummer.

Do you think this country'll go scandi-style then?

No, too much selfishness and lack of a sense of social responsibility in this country. Wonder why that might be.

Maybe there will be a wake up n smell the coffee time when people realise it is better to work together, for each other. I think the country will realise it is not some all powerful empirical force anymore and just a nice pretty island off the side of mainland europe with no real assets! Apart from great culture n history etc. maybe become a great tourist mecca or sommat. 😉

Grim, good question that on selfishness. The easy cop out answer would be to blame a politician ( living or dead). Though some believe that we are all a product of our environment, which must be true to an extent. If we have free will however we are all capable of choosing not to be selfish, so why don't we?

No, too much selfishness and lack of a sense of social responsibility in this country. Wonder why that might be.

Nail on the head.

The odd thing is despite this apparently (to me at least) being the case. On an individual level and national, we just don't appear to be enjoying any more success. By most measures a good deal less.

My experiences of Scandi types (actually almost entirely Swedish, and a few Norwegians who are generally a bit odd)are of well educated hard working pleasant folk to know with a great quality of life. One of the things that really stuck out about the Swedes was the quality and strength of the family unit. Really solid and well engaged.

I'm sure there are issues, and of course will not represent all Swedes.

I'm just getting on a coach to London & I've got 12 eggs.

http://llandudnojetset.wordpress.com/2013/04/16/im-probably-still-the-enemy-within/

If we have free will however we are all capable of choosing not to be selfish, so why don't we

i think its because ultimately our decisions are based partly on what is best for us and partly how are actions are judged in society.

Of course if there [b]is[/b] no society and we are excessively rewarded for looking after ourselves.....

jekkyl - Member

I'm just getting on a coach to London & I've got 12 eggs.

Hope you've also got a good lawyer.

piemonster - Member
I'm sure there are issues, and of course will not represent all Swedes.

I think it depends on where you met them, if it's people working over here then it's a pretty self-selecting group.

Hope you've also got a good lawyer.

we know he has a chicken, isn't that enough?

Apparently not.

[img] [/img]

May your aim be true.

Dog eggs?

Most Scandinavian countries have traditionally been much more socialist than us, and seemingly very successfully. They consistently score extremely highly on quality of life/standards of living ratings.

Though Sweden didn't get involved in WWII and sold steel and big guns to both sides, which probably helped a bit 😉

[img] [/img]

Gotta love that Bell, as ever.

I've just bought a cheap phone, in red. Does that count?

Have the R4 commentary on - I wonder what will transpire. My dad's a pretty committed socialist, and from N Yorks too. He's gutted about being stabbed in the back by Clegg [previously possibly electable option]- he's gone Green since.

I was raised to understand Thatcher was pretty damn awful - driving a steak into the heart of the working class. I haven't spoken to him in the last few days, I'll give him a call tonight and see what his take is. I'd think he'd have some interesting points, I'll try to post them.

Though some believe that we are all a product of our environment, which must be true to an extent. If we have free will however we are all capable of choosing not to be selfish, so why don't we?

It is fairly clear that ruthless selfish self centred individuals without empathy or social responsibility * are the ones who make their way to the top be it a banker a politiican or the local drug dealer and this appeals to those who want money above everything else.
It seems odd to design a society to let them win though.

* i am sure some business people and millionairres have asense of social responsibility but it is not as big as there desire to accquire wealth and or power as they could give it all away.

Steve Bell's a genius. Why his works aren't hanging up there with the likes of Picasso and Manet and Rembrandt I'll never know.

Grim, good question that on selfishness. The easy cop out answer would be to blame a politician ( living or dead). Though some believe that we are all a product of our environment, which must be true to an extent. If we have free will however we are all capable of choosing not to be selfish, so why don't we?

Whilst you can't blame everything on Thatcher, given that both sides would say she was a massively influential politician, and the right are now attempting to canonise her, I think it's fair to say she has had an impact on turning greed and selfishness into virtues, cheered on by the oligarchy through their newspapers etc.

And Labour, while they did some good things, largely carried on her legacy.

We've been brainwashed into believing that greed is a natural human instinct and is completely fine - it's not.

"To cure the British disease with socialism was like trying to cure leukaemia with leeches."

Daily Mash hit the nail again:

1) Baroness Thatcher’s coffin leaves Westminster and is taken up Whitehall to Downing Street where it will be removed from the hearse and dropped on Geoffrey Howe. A soldier, sailor and RAF pilot will then kick the former foreign secretary in the stomach for a full minute.

2) The coffin is then taken to the BBC headquarters at Bush House where it will be used to smash open the doors before the union flag is removed temporarily and stuffed into Evan Davis’s smart-alec mouth.

3) At Bush House the coffin will be placed on a gun carriage used in the miners’ strike and flanked by serving members from 14 of Britain’s biggest hedge funds.
Canary Wharf has been fitted with a massive hinge so that it can bow in tribute to its creator

4) The coffin continues along the Strand where it will stop for 90 seconds so that some hippies and communists can tell it to **** off.

5) In Fleet Street, a representative of the Murdoch family will place on top of the coffin a single white rose and a large gold brick.

6) At Ludgate Hill the coffin will then stop for another 90 seconds where a platoon of middle-aged women from Guildford will stand guard around it while chanting ‘she was too good for the lot of you’.

7) The procession then continues to St Paul’s Cathedral where it will be officially upstaged by the Queen and Geri Halliwell.

8 ) The coffin will then be carried into the cathedral by members of the cast and crew of Top Gear.

9) The funeral service will be conducted by some Christians through gritted teeth. Readings include St Paul’s Letter to the Saudi Arabians Urging Them to Buy a Shitload of Tornado Fighter-Bombers.

The body will then be removed from the coffin, placed in a large perspex tube and taken to a secret underground laboratory in Liechtenstein.

Woppit, another quote:

“today I break my self-denying ordinance and for a very good reason – to express my outrage at the callous and unjust treatment of Senator Pinochet,”

If we went back to simpler times when humanity evolved to live in small kinship groups it seems quite unlikely that we would sit there with one individual having all the wealth whilst the rest of struggled not least as i guess we would have done some direct action and robbed them /ostracised them from the community
Oddly it took the evolution of society and larger groups to enable this iniqitous spread of resources.

Like Grum i dont beleive selfishness is somehow one of our core beliefs no matter how many times I get told it.
SOme folk are selfish and they justify it by suggesting we all are when in reality it is them who are selfish to the extenet they want his form themselves
[img] http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQF4I2UAaWOubXU2jDhQJwbVFCL2riuBD07tBtTEml9L8OK98FGTQ [/img]
and ignore this so they can have more
[img] [/img]
Its frankly vulgar and shames humanity IMHO that we let folk get away with it tbh. The acceptance of greed and the iniquitous spread of wealth/resources literally kills people we could save - probably only need the top 3 richest folk in the worlds wealth to do most of it

Make 3 people poorer and change the lives of millions
Greed is not good

and before they start --human nature-- what is it-- its not being greedy and selfish--that would not be an evolutionary advantage ...

Once people can become detached from the consequences of their actions , two things basically need to be in place --empathy --or selfishness-- one is encompassing and progressive, the other is spiteful and divisive--most people will benefit from the former, but history shows that if you allow the latter to gain control of power, things are not very nice for most people.

try explaining that to a tory though...

pardon my ire, but they are bloody animals

Don't insult animals!

Is it philosophy hour?
Everyone is selfish.

my mate has posted--that " the cortege is getting heckled and booed"--can't think of many who get that-- feelings run deep-- its an expression against an ideology...our voices are not often heard ..but on such occasions ....

Everyone is selfish.

SOme folk are selfish and they justify it by suggesting we all are

But it takes different forms depending the desired (selfish?) needs of the individual. This is based on the fact that everyone wants gratification of some sort.

So the conclusion is surely life is not fair we need to build a utopia to make it fair, revolution perhaps ?

So the conclusion is surely life is not fair we need to build a utopia to make it fair, revolution perhaps ?

the present system needs turning on its head as they say-- reforms and appealing for crumbs just don't work-- so yes the big R word is needed--

Quote from the office
One of the ladies - "the flowers on the coffin are beautiful"
Reply from our resident cynic - "something else that's died for Thatcher!"

[img] [/img]

cheekyboy. Aye but who will be in charge after the revolution. Not any of you lot, you are all so selfless and empathetic you'll either never come to a consensus or more like one of you will end up in charge by whatever means possible because you know you are right and should be in charge. Then you'll split factions and start killing each other.

I'd be happy to sell you all guns for a small consideration to settle your differences. See there is a role for a tory.

yunki +1

I couldn't let this one away.

Churchill do it for you?

No idea what he was like, but I think he did somethign positive for the country.

If churchill was such a great tory why do you think the got rid of him right after the war?

CharlieMungus - Member

I couldn't let this one away.

Churchill do it for you?

No idea what he was like, but I think he did somethign positive for the country.

If churchill was such a great tory why do you think the got rid of him right after the war?

Nor could I

Selective use of facts.
Prime Minister twice (1940–45 and 1951–55)

Yeah, but if he was a such a leader wh did they get rid of him at the first chamce they could?

And even in '51 it wasn't by majority.

Ah Churchill, the massive racist, concentration camp proponent and general hater of indigenous people.

here we go again.

Bet you can't remember Churchill's funeral.

No, but that's not the point.

I remember Walpole's funeral. eeeeeee was a wrongun aint no mistakin.

wasnt churchill booted out because he was opposed to the creation of the NHS? he voted against it several times, very much against the mood of the population

well that was a brilliant use of 10 million quid and on a day when unemployment rose by 70,000, how very apt

kimbers - Member
wasnt churchill booted out because he was opposed to the creation of the NHS? he voted against it several times, very much against the mood of the population

Yes but can you remember his 12th Birthday? Bet you can't.

Strangely, Clement Attlee was one of Margaret Thatcher's most admired political figures...

I've been trying to avoid any coverage of the funeral. Quite successfully too. Yay for me!

Though to me, this article by Seamus Milne in todays Guardian, sums up my own feelings on the matter

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/apr/16/bury-not-just-thatcher-but-thatcherism ] It's time to bury not just Thatcher - but Thatcherism[/url]

And then turned over to the financial pages, and I think this sums up her true legacy as well as anything....

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2013/apr/16/big-six-energy-suppliers-tax ]Energy Suppliers pay little or no corporation tax[/url]

Yep... this whole privatisation thing has been a rip-roarng success

Who paid for his funeral. I'm sure the was a protest, everyone was really quite.

"wasnt churchill booted out because he was opposed to the creation of the NHS? he voted against it several times, very much against the mood of the population"

A WW2 veteran told it was because he'd got a lot of em killed with his daft idea's. They wanted some else who'd not send them out to fight the Russians. Who was PM in the Korean war?

mt - Member

Who paid for his funeral. I'm sure the was a protest, everyone was really quite.

Probably not the protestors because they might be on benefit so what are they complaining about? More handouts?

The welfare state should go. No if or but.

Most good PMs apply common sense.

A WW2 veteran told it was because he'd got a lot of em killed with his daft idea's. They wanted some else who'd not send them out to fight the Russians. Who was PM in the Korean war?

MrsCat's grandad voted against him after the war because after fighting from D-Day to the end of the war, they sent him to the Middle East rather than demobbing him and sending him home to his family. Would imagine that there were a lot of people like him.

Would Churchill have attacked the Russians? Really?

Probably. he was constantly pissed wasn't he? He'd have started on them in a kebab house, for looking at his bird

Leave it Winston!!! Eees not wurth it!!!!