Tech and the rise of communism in the UK

What's Hot
1235

Comments

  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Chalky said:
    There are two ways to say this:

    There is a housing shortage, and the solution is to build more houses. 

    That sounds simple. But it is far more accurate to say:

    There are severe housing shortages in places where house buyers/renters WANT to live, and the solution is to build more houses where house owners and the environmentally-conscious DON'T WANT them to be built.

    This second description conveys the complexity of the problem and solution.

    This second description is also very simplistic and says nothing about land hording and poor use of land in general eg. the ludicrous situation in central Bristol around Bristol Temple Meads where there is little housing going up, around 60% vacancy in office blocks in that area whilst office blocks keep on going up, and the only new accommodation going up are student builds. Building more house on green belt land and areas that need to be protected because building houses on them is environmentally problematic is not the only answer. 
    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 4reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ChalkyChalky Frets: 5347
    Chalky said:
    There are two ways to say this:

    There is a housing shortage, and the solution is to build more houses. 

    That sounds simple. But it is far more accurate to say:

    There are severe housing shortages in places where house buyers/renters WANT to live, and the solution is to build more houses where house owners and the environmentally-conscious DON'T WANT them to be built.

    This second description conveys the complexity of the problem and solution.

    This second description is also very simplistic and says nothing about land hording and poor use of land in general eg. the ludicrous situation in central Bristol around Bristol Temple Meads where there is little housing going up, around 60% vacancy in office blocks in that area whilst office blocks keep on going up, and the only new accommodation going up are student builds. Building more house on green belt land and areas that need to be protected because building houses on them is environmentally problematic is not the only answer. 
    You see every challenge in the world as "Someone, somewhere, is doing something wrong" (to misquote Mencken), apparently a modern form of Puritanism.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Chalky said:
    You see every challenge in the world as "Someone, somewhere, is doing something wrong" (to misquote Mencken), apparently a modern form of Puritanism.

    Coming from a man of your standing, I am honoured. 

    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ChalkyChalky Frets: 5347
    Chalky said:
    You see every challenge in the world as "Someone, somewhere, is doing something wrong" (to misquote Mencken), apparently a modern form of Puritanism.

    Coming from a man of your standing, I am honoured. 

    Don't be, I was seated when I wrote it. :)
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • marantz1300marantz1300 Frets: 1470
    no surprises there then
    1reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • FretwiredFretwired Frets: 16282
    edited April 27
    Chalky said:
    There are two ways to say this:

    There is a housing shortage, and the solution is to build more houses. 

    That sounds simple. But it is far more accurate to say:

    There are severe housing shortages in places where house buyers/renters WANT to live, and the solution is to build more houses where house owners and the environmentally-conscious DON'T WANT them to be built.

    This second description conveys the complexity of the problem and solution.

    This second description is also very simplistic and says nothing about land hording and poor use of land in general eg. the ludicrous situation in central Bristol around Bristol Temple Meads where there is little housing going up, around 60% vacancy in office blocks in that area whilst office blocks keep on going up, and the only new accommodation going up are student builds. Building more house on green belt land and areas that need to be protected because building houses on them is environmentally problematic is not the only answer. 
    Want to build in a city? Build an office block with a crafty design (more in a moment). Can't let the building? Repurpose as flats (you design it in from the start) and save millions in tax. Two office blocks build locally now repurposed as luxury flats. Happening in London. It's a neat trick to get around planning rules and save money on tax.
    My pump-action drivel gun is smoking hot today!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • jpfampsjpfamps Frets: 1368

    Rates on business property raises almost exactly the same as coucil tax (both around 5% of Govt spending).

    Given that far more land is residential, ie busness rates are proportionally higher, there is a massive tax incentive for the government to get more commercial property built.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Chalky said:
    Don't be, I was seated when I wrote it. :)
    Sounds like a five-ply moment. 
    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Fretwired said:
    Want to build in a city? Build an office block with a crafty design (more in a moment). Can't let the building? Repurpose as flats (you design it in from the start) and save millions in tax. Two office blocks build locally now repurposed as luxury flats. Happening in London. It's a neat trick to get around planning rules and save money on tax.
    I know, there's such a block located five minutes from my relatively new locale here in sunny Sutton. As you say, multi-purpose depending on need. Sadly these ideas aren't as widespread outside of London. 
    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    jpfamps said:

    Given that far more land is residential, ie busness rates are proportionally higher, there is a massive tax incentive for the government to get more commercial property built.
    Which for the region of Bristol I'm talking about means more commercial property being built in a area that already has a lot of high quality commercial property that is empty.  
    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • SambostarSambostar Frets: 8375
    jpfamps said:

    Every time there is a new technology a load of economists have predicted it would destroy jobs.

    So far they have been wrong.

    Economic predictions being wrong, imagine that!

    But of course "it's different this time", a phrase that was used liberally before the banking meltdown......


    Much Like the agricultural and industrial revolution yes.  What life.  What you make it in a caravan pikie.



    It's the Playbus. We're not in control of ourselves. You're only as dumb as you're trained
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Jock68Jock68 Frets: 149
    mellowsun said:
    Automation and technology are productive and generate wealth, but this goes to the few, not the many, so eventually will lead to discontent.

    Redistribution of wealth via a citizen's income to replace all/most benefits, and flat rate of tax over the 10k citizen's income threshold, could be looked at.

    E.g. citizen's income of 10k for everyone of working age, offset by 50% tax. So if you earn 30k, you take home 10k citizen's income, plus 30k - 15k tax = 25k.

    If you earn 100k, 10k citizen's income plus 100k-50k = 60k take home

    If you earn 5k, you take home 10k + 5k = 15k

    The exact figures would need to be worked out and balanced, but it could work.
    Redistribution.. you mean theft from workers through force.  People are becoming wiser and know that redistribution does not work.  Why should I allow 40% of my income that I have worked for to be taken and redistributed?  Everyone has the right to make his own decisions, but none has the right to force his decision on others. People need to take responsibility for their actions, their inaction should not result in a workers hard earned reward being stolen.    Why should benefits exist, all they do is offer a way of life for a lot of people who do not want to work.    Once people realise that there is no Benefits no Free housing they will make better life choices.  Continuing to steal money from workers in no longer acceptable.
    Jock
    3reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ToneControlToneControl Frets: 4068
    Jock68 said:
    mellowsun said:
    Automation and technology are productive and generate wealth, but this goes to the few, not the many, so eventually will lead to discontent.

    Redistribution of wealth via a citizen's income to replace all/most benefits, and flat rate of tax over the 10k citizen's income threshold, could be looked at.

    E.g. citizen's income of 10k for everyone of working age, offset by 50% tax. So if you earn 30k, you take home 10k citizen's income, plus 30k - 15k tax = 25k.

    If you earn 100k, 10k citizen's income plus 100k-50k = 60k take home

    If you earn 5k, you take home 10k + 5k = 15k

    The exact figures would need to be worked out and balanced, but it could work.
    Redistribution.. you mean theft from workers through force.  People are becoming wiser and know that redistribution does not work.  Why should I allow 40% of my income that I have worked for to be taken and redistributed?  Everyone has the right to make his own decisions, but none has the right to force his decision on others. People need to take responsibility for their actions, their inaction should not result in a workers hard earned reward being stolen.    Why should benefits exist, all they do is offer a way of life for a lot of people who do not want to work.    Once people realise that there is no Benefits no Free housing they will make better life choices.  Continuing to steal money from workers in no longer acceptable.
    Did you hear the Radio 4 show about "Digital Nomads" in Lisbon, etc?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43927098

    fascinating to consider where this is going

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b0xjbm

    cheap cost of living, taxes optional

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Jock68 said:
    Redistribution.. you mean theft from workers through force.  People are becoming wiser and know that redistribution does not work.  Why should I allow 40% of my income that I have worked for to be taken and redistributed?  Everyone has the right to make his own decisions, but none has the right to force his decision on others. People need to take responsibility for their actions, their inaction should not result in a workers hard earned reward being stolen.    Why should benefits exist, all they do is offer a way of life for a lot of people who do not want to work.    Once people realise that there is no Benefits no Free housing they will make better life choices.  Continuing to steal money from workers in no longer acceptable.

    Presumably those high birthrates in poor foreign countries with no benefits is simply them not realising there are no benefit safety nuts. Once they do ET VOILA their problems will be solved and better life choices will occur because in Libertarian Land everyone on benefits is on them because they're a lazy fucking cunt. 



    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 1reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Phil_aka_PipPhil_aka_Pip Frets: 8802
    Jock68 said:
    mellowsun said:
    Automation and technology are productive and generate wealth, but this goes to the few, not the many, so eventually will lead to discontent.

    Redistribution of wealth via a citizen's income to replace all/most benefits, and flat rate of tax over the 10k citizen's income threshold, could be looked at.

    E.g. citizen's income of 10k for everyone of working age, offset by 50% tax. So if you earn 30k, you take home 10k citizen's income, plus 30k - 15k tax = 25k.

    If you earn 100k, 10k citizen's income plus 100k-50k = 60k take home

    If you earn 5k, you take home 10k + 5k = 15k

    The exact figures would need to be worked out and balanced, but it could work.
    Redistribution.. you mean theft from workers through force.  People are becoming wiser and know that redistribution does not work.  Why should I allow 40% of my income that I have worked for to be taken and redistributed?  Everyone has the right to make his own decisions, but none has the right to force his decision on others. People need to take responsibility for their actions, their inaction should not result in a workers hard earned reward being stolen.    Why should benefits exist, all they do is offer a way of life for a lot of people who do not want to work.    Once people realise that there is no Benefits no Free housing they will make better life choices.  Continuing to steal money from workers in no longer acceptable.
    Did you hear the Radio 4 show about "Digital Nomads" in Lisbon, etc?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43927098

    fascinating to consider where this is going

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b0xjbm

    cheap cost of living, taxes optional

    pikies beat them to that ...
    "Working" software has only unobserved bugs. (Parroty Error: Pieces of Nine! Pieces of Nine!)
    Seriously: If you value it, take/fetch it yourself
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Did you hear the Radio 4 show about "Digital Nomads" in Lisbon, etc?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43927098

    fascinating to consider where this is going

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b0xjbm

    cheap cost of living, taxes optional


    Yay, and fuck over the indigenous people when you're there working illegally on a tourist visa. 

    With the changes happening in Portugal as detailed in the link, it's gentrification on the next level. Someone comes in, makes money in the area, the locals get squeezed out. 

    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • FretwiredFretwired Frets: 16282
    Did you hear the Radio 4 show about "Digital Nomads" in Lisbon, etc?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43927098

    fascinating to consider where this is going

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b0xjbm

    cheap cost of living, taxes optional


    Yay, and fuck over the indigenous people when you're there working illegally on a tourist visa. 

    With the changes happening in Portugal as detailed in the link, it's gentrification on the next level. Someone comes in, makes money in the area, the locals get squeezed out. 

    It's not illegal. It's a benefit of being in the EU. Free movement .. so long as you register with the right authorities and pay tax you're OK. These people are self-employed.

    They're not the problem as they contribute. Is the property developers and the people looking for the next London, Madrid etc. Nice apartment for high days and holidays that can be rented out and earn income.
    My pump-action drivel gun is smoking hot today!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Fretwired said:
    It's not illegal. It's a benefit of being in the EU. Free movement .. so long as you register with the right authorities and pay tax you're OK. These people are self-employed.

    They're not the problem as they contribute. Is the property developers and the people looking for the next London, Madrid etc. Nice apartment for high days and holidays that can be rented out and earn income.
    I know it's not illegal. The "Yay" at the start of that comment was there to demonstrate mirth, the fuck for effect, and the lac k of content there for lack of content. I'm trying to raise my morale up via underhand commentary. 

    So I shall get more serious. In terms of gentrification, they are part of the problem. As the article states:

    "Agustin Cocola-Gant from the University of Lisbon has been studying the changes among the local Portuguese population of having thousands of digital nomads turning up on their doorsteps.

    "They see people coming from the north of Europe, that don't speak Portuguese, who are taking their places. The shops, the stores are changing, they're losing the places where they meet with their friends and neighbours."

    All of a sudden trendy coffee shops are replacing local family run cafes. As Mr Cocola-Gant points out, all those people like Jemma and James are earning far more than the locals.


    That's a clear form of gentrification. 


    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • FretwiredFretwired Frets: 16282
    Fretwired said:
    It's not illegal. It's a benefit of being in the EU. Free movement .. so long as you register with the right authorities and pay tax you're OK. These people are self-employed.

    They're not the problem as they contribute. Is the property developers and the people looking for the next London, Madrid etc. Nice apartment for high days and holidays that can be rented out and earn income.
    I know it's not illegal. The "Yay" at the start of that comment was there to demonstrate mirth, the fuck for effect, and the lac k of content there for lack of content. I'm trying to raise my morale up via underhand commentary. 

    So I shall get more serious. In terms of gentrification, they are part of the problem. As the article states:

    "Agustin Cocola-Gant from the University of Lisbon has been studying the changes among the local Portuguese population of having thousands of digital nomads turning up on their doorsteps.

    "They see people coming from the north of Europe, that don't speak Portuguese, who are taking their places. The shops, the stores are changing, they're losing the places where they meet with their friends and neighbours."

    All of a sudden trendy coffee shops are replacing local family run cafes. As Mr Cocola-Gant points out, all those people like Jemma and James are earning far more than the locals.


    That's a clear form of gentrification. 


    It's called progress. The Romans did it when they arrived and displaced the locals. You can't stop it. All you can do is ensure some of the wealth trickles down to those at the bottom. It's simply part of the economic development of a country.

    Gentrification is actually good. It creates nice places to live. I worked in the USA in 1990s and saw areas of Boston and New York transformed from run down crime ridden ghettos into safe vibrant places people wanted to live.

    In the UK people are returning to the town centres as shops move out and bars, restaurants and clubs open and developers build blocks of flats and and houses.


    My pump-action drivel gun is smoking hot today!
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ToneControlToneControl Frets: 4068
    Did you hear the Radio 4 show about "Digital Nomads" in Lisbon, etc?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43927098

    fascinating to consider where this is going

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b0xjbm

    cheap cost of living, taxes optional


    Yay, and fuck over the indigenous people when you're there working illegally on a tourist visa. 

    With the changes happening in Portugal as detailed in the link, it's gentrification on the next level. Someone comes in, makes money in the area, the locals get squeezed out. 

    yes, did you get a chance to listen to the show, they really explain how it has driven the locals out
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ToneControlToneControl Frets: 4068
    Fretwired said:
    Did you hear the Radio 4 show about "Digital Nomads" in Lisbon, etc?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43927098

    fascinating to consider where this is going

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b0xjbm

    cheap cost of living, taxes optional


    Yay, and fuck over the indigenous people when you're there working illegally on a tourist visa. 

    With the changes happening in Portugal as detailed in the link, it's gentrification on the next level. Someone comes in, makes money in the area, the locals get squeezed out. 

    It's not illegal. It's a benefit of being in the EU. Free movement .. so long as you register with the right authorities and pay tax you're OK. These people are self-employed.

    They're not the problem as they contribute. Is the property developers and the people looking for the next London, Madrid etc. Nice apartment for high days and holidays that can be rented out and earn income.
    I think a lot of them don't pay tax

    For those who do pay tax, it's hard to say their actions are immoral really - they are bringing cash to an area, but of course gentrification has losers as well as winners, in any time, and town.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ToneControlToneControl Frets: 4068
    Fretwired said:
    Fretwired said:
    It's not illegal. It's a benefit of being in the EU. Free movement .. so long as you register with the right authorities and pay tax you're OK. These people are self-employed.

    They're not the problem as they contribute. Is the property developers and the people looking for the next London, Madrid etc. Nice apartment for high days and holidays that can be rented out and earn income.
    I know it's not illegal. The "Yay" at the start of that comment was there to demonstrate mirth, the fuck for effect, and the lac k of content there for lack of content. I'm trying to raise my morale up via underhand commentary. 

    So I shall get more serious. In terms of gentrification, they are part of the problem. As the article states:

    "Agustin Cocola-Gant from the University of Lisbon has been studying the changes among the local Portuguese population of having thousands of digital nomads turning up on their doorsteps.

    "They see people coming from the north of Europe, that don't speak Portuguese, who are taking their places. The shops, the stores are changing, they're losing the places where they meet with their friends and neighbours."

    All of a sudden trendy coffee shops are replacing local family run cafes. As Mr Cocola-Gant points out, all those people like Jemma and James are earning far more than the locals.


    That's a clear form of gentrification. 


    It's called progress. The Romans did it when they arrived and displaced the locals. You can't stop it. All you can do is ensure some of the wealth trickles down to those at the bottom. It's simply part of the economic development of a country.

    Gentrification is actually good. It creates nice places to live. I worked in the USA in 1990s and saw areas of Boston and New York transformed from run down crime ridden ghettos into safe vibrant places people wanted to live.

    In the UK people are returning to the town centres as shops move out and bars, restaurants and clubs open and developers build blocks of flats and and houses.


    Certainly any housing in or adjacent to Manchester city centre was grim 25 years ago. Now it's trendy, and the city is a nicer place to be.

    I also think that gentrification gets too much criticism.
    But I think it's probably necessary to have some framework in place to support the displaced
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Axe_meisterAxe_meister Frets: 2152
    The problem is we are rapidly moving towards a society with increased automation where soon only a certain proportion of the population will be able to work. What do you do with those who want to but can't.
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Jock68Jock68 Frets: 149
    Jock68 said:
    Redistribution.. you mean theft from workers through force.  People are becoming wiser and know that redistribution does not work.  Why should I allow 40% of my income that I have worked for to be taken and redistributed?  Everyone has the right to make his own decisions, but none has the right to force his decision on others. People need to take responsibility for their actions, their inaction should not result in a workers hard earned reward being stolen.    Why should benefits exist, all they do is offer a way of life for a lot of people who do not want to work.    Once people realise that there is no Benefits no Free housing they will make better life choices.  Continuing to steal money from workers in no longer acceptable.

    Presumably those high birthrates in poor foreign countries with no benefits is simply them not realising there are no benefit safety nuts. Once they do ET VOILA their problems will be solved and better life choices will occur because in Libertarian Land everyone on benefits is on them because they're a lazy fucking cunt. 



    They choose to have a large number of children in the hope that some will survive and look after their parents when the parents get old.  This is their way of managing a system of no benefits.  They have the right to live their lives without my interference. In the UK people who have no work can be supported by Charities, this would be more honest than stealing money from workers.  No one can make the Benefit system numbers work, this nation has so much debt that we do need to wake up and face reality.  Continuing on this path will only lead to even more debt, "you can evade reality, but you  cannot evade the consequences of evading reality"
    Jock
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Fretwired said:
    It's called progress. The Romans did it when they arrived and displaced the locals. You can't stop it. All you can do is ensure some of the wealth trickles down to those at the bottom. It's simply part of the economic development of a country.

    Gentrification is actually good. It creates nice places to live. I worked in the USA in 1990s and saw areas of Boston and New York transformed from run down crime ridden ghettos into safe vibrant places people wanted to live.


    That premise works if there is a universal concept of what constitutes 'a nice place to live'. Your idea of nice is going to differ to mine. 

    It also only works if you assume "gentrification = always good". It isn't. It can be good. It can also be fucking horrible. 

    I'm mindful of a friend of mine whose childhood was spent in a rough part of Kent. She hates gentrification because of the air of superiority it has regarding what was there before, a sense of "Close down the greasy spoon, replace it with a branch of Le Pain Quotidien, so much better".



    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Certainly any housing in or adjacent to Manchester city centre was grim 25 years ago. Now it's trendy, and the city is a nicer place to be.

    I also think that gentrification gets too much criticism.
    But I think it's probably necessary to have some framework in place to support the displaced

    What I remember of Gorton at the turn of the century wasn't period. But that isn't quite what I'm getting at. There is a place that demanded some cash coming into it to spruce it up. Even I could have bought a bloody house there in 2001 and I've got nowt. 

    I'm more on about the gentrification which comes along and tries to squash the community already there. Often it's one that does have lower end housing, a strong arts scene, a lot of independent small traders and cafes. You could go to Stokes Croft in Bristol and it's a safe place, some great cafes and pubs, and a great vibe to it, but the gentrification brigade want to ump all over it. That kind of gentrification to me means "making an area acceptable for middle class folk". 


    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • HeartfeltdawnHeartfeltdawn Frets: 11045
    Jock68 said:
    They choose to have a large number of children in the hope that some will survive and look after their parents when the parents get old.  This is their way of managing a system of no benefits.  They have the right to live their lives without my interference. In the UK people who have no work can be supported by Charities, this would be more honest than stealing money from workers.  No one can make the Benefit system numbers work, this nation has so much debt that we do need to wake up and face reality.  Continuing on this path will only lead to even more debt, "you can evade reality, but you  cannot evade the consequences of evading reality"

    Some thoughts:

    1. So poorer countries of no benefits feature people who, when fornicating sans prophylactic, are thinking "Yes, must pop some more kids out to care for us and the parents when we get older". That's a remarkably forward thinking approach all of these populations in various countries are taking. Quite how it plays out against the background of war and famine, I am not qualified to say but over-qualified to guess at: very badly. So here's another reason: maybe they're fucking for the sake of fucking. 

    2. Benefits in this country also includes pensions. I'd wager that pensions are the larger problem and that it's increased length of life rather than Wayne and Waynetta Slob fucking us over. But that would obviously not fit in with your 'beat the poor' approach.   

    3. The final stanza, namely the Ayn Rand "Quote" is curious as it is part of a trope regularly thrown at me on this forum by people who are... special. "Reality". Somehow they see things the rest of the world does not, and so we have something here about evasion and all the rest. 

    What makes it special is that this "quote" about reality is actually more like Chinese whispers. 

    https://quoteinvestigator.com/category/ayn-rand/

    "Quote Investigator: In 1961 Ayn Rand spoke at a symposium titled “Ethics in Our Time” held at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. The paper Rand delivered contained a passage that partially matched the saying under examination. The semantics were similar, but the wording was distinct. For example, the phrase “evade reality” was employed instead of “avoiding reality”. Boldface has been added to excerpts: 1

    He is free to make the wrong choice, but not free to succeed with it. He is free to evade reality, he is free to unfocus his mind and stumble blindly down any road he pleases, but not free to avoid the abyss he refuses to see. Knowledge, for any conscious organism, is the means of survival; to a living consciousness, every “is” implies an “ought.” Man is free to choose not to be conscious, but not free to escape the penalty of unconsciousness: destruction.

    Perhaps the modern saying attributed to Rand was based on a paraphrase or summary of the text above. Alternatively, future researchers might someday locate a superior match."


    So the reality about the reality quote is that it really didn't happen so next time a quote on reality from some equally well versed specialists in reality would be appreciated. Suitable specialists could include Doctor Who, Doctor Steven Strange, and Ozzy Osbourne (on the basis that he at least sang on Master of Reality with Black Sabbath). 

    I make Jeremy Paxman look like Fingermouse. 
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • MarshallMarshall Frets: 141
    edited June 23
    Jock68 said:
    Jock68 said:
    Redistribution.. you mean theft from workers through force.  People are becoming wiser and know that redistribution does not work.  Why should I allow 40% of my income that I have worked for to be taken and redistributed?  Everyone has the right to make his own decisions, but none has the right to force his decision on others. People need to take responsibility for their actions, their inaction should not result in a workers hard earned reward being stolen.    Why should benefits exist, all they do is offer a way of life for a lot of people who do not want to work.    Once people realise that there is no Benefits no Free housing they will make better life choices.  Continuing to steal money from workers in no longer acceptable.

    Presumably those high birthrates in poor foreign countries with no benefits is simply them not realising there are no benefit safety nuts. Once they do ET VOILA their problems will be solved and better life choices will occur because in Libertarian Land everyone on benefits is on them because they're a lazy fucking cunt. 



    They choose to have a large number of children in the hope that some will survive and look after their parents when the parents get old.  This is their way of managing a system of no benefits.  They have the right to live their lives without my interference. In the UK people who have no work can be supported by Charities, this would be more honest than stealing money from workers.  No one can make the Benefit system numbers work, this nation has so much debt that we do need to wake up and face reality.  Continuing on this path will only lead to even more debt, "you can evade reality, but you  cannot evade the consequences of evading reality"
    Curious -> Who does "this nation" owe "so much debt" to exactly ?

    "Truth is treason in the empire of lies” G.Orwell

    Feedback link -  http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/133389/marshall#latest

    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • Jock68Jock68 Frets: 149
    Marshall said:
    Jock68 said:
    Jock68 said:
    Redistribution.. you mean theft from workers through force.  People are becoming wiser and know that redistribution does not work.  Why should I allow 40% of my income that I have worked for to be taken and redistributed?  Everyone has the right to make his own decisions, but none has the right to force his decision on others. People need to take responsibility for their actions, their inaction should not result in a workers hard earned reward being stolen.    Why should benefits exist, all they do is offer a way of life for a lot of people who do not want to work.    Once people realise that there is no Benefits no Free housing they will make better life choices.  Continuing to steal money from workers in no longer acceptable.

    Presumably those high birthrates in poor foreign countries with no benefits is simply them not realising there are no benefit safety nuts. Once they do ET VOILA their problems will be solved and better life choices will occur because in Libertarian Land everyone on benefits is on them because they're a lazy fucking cunt. 



    They choose to have a large number of children in the hope that some will survive and look after their parents when the parents get old.  This is their way of managing a system of no benefits.  They have the right to live their lives without my interference. In the UK people who have no work can be supported by Charities, this would be more honest than stealing money from workers.  No one can make the Benefit system numbers work, this nation has so much debt that we do need to wake up and face reality.  Continuing on this path will only lead to even more debt, "you can evade reality, but you  cannot evade the consequences of evading reality"
    Curious -> Who does "this nation" owe "so much debt" to exactly ?
    I believe banks,private institutions, pension schemes and foreign investors but we pay £40 billion + in interest every year. Some people may be happy to continue to run up the debt and let the next generation pay for it, but that is not responsible.  Being unemployed is not an excuse, being poor only encourages you to vote for people who will continue to pay you to do nothing.  Immigrants do not want to come to this country for the weather, they come here for a better way of life.  So how do they find work when we have over a Million people here already that are unemployed and they cannot find work.  Benefits is one large ponsy scheme and does not work, people need to wake up and stop it.  If not we will all end up living in mud huts and 25% of the nation unemployed... you can be assured that there will be no benefits then.

    Back to the original comment, there will be jobs that we have not even thought of available in the future, 40 years ago no one ever thought of millions of people being employed in IT.
    Jock
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
  • ICBMICBM Frets: 31625
    Jock68 said:

    I believe banks,private institutions, pension schemes and foreign investors but we pay £40 billion + in interest every year. Some people may be happy to continue to run up the debt and let the next generation pay for it, but that is not responsible.
    Correct, but the only effective remedy is the one you don't like.

    Cutting public spending cannot by itself reduce the debt - successive governments of both parties have been genuinely trying to do so for decades... it simply can't be done without harming core services more than it saves money.

    The only solution is tax rises.

    At this point it doesn't even matter who has run the debt up the most - although in fact it's the Tories - but we simply must pay it back to save the sheer waste of that 40 billion a year, which makes the possible benefits cuts seem like small change.
    "Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone."
    0reaction image LOL 0reaction image Wow! 0reaction image Wisdom · Share on Facebook Share on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.