Capitalism Is Evil

Former Member · September 2001

Originally posted by Man Of Kent:
Steelgate - I know you have been around the boards in the last few days, I have read some of your other posts.

Can't you answer these questions then?

Obviously he has come across a bit of a stumper and needs a few days to think!

As for conditions in the 3rd world, if they are so bothered about working conditions over there why don't they do something about it? Why do WE have to even care? Like you said, our trade unions fought for better pay for us. If the workers in the 3rd world want something then let them get it themselves, like our ancestors did. This is one case where protesting is going to fall on deaf ears, because deep down very few people in the 1st world care that their counterpart gets paid less than them, especially as they can buy something over there a lot cheaper than we can. As soon as their cost of living reaches the level ours is then you will have a valid argument.

Former Member · September 2001

Most workers in Third World countries live in brutal military regimes and many have tried to form unions but failed due to the amount of oppresion in those countries. So it is up to workers in the west to campaign ofr better wages for them. Most trade unions support the rights of workers in the third world. It is a basic human right of all workers to have decent pay and working conditions which at the moment they don't have. Why should they have to live in poverty like they do when they companies they work for can pay them decent wages.

In a socialist society the workers would democratically decide what was needed to be produced. Socialism is far better than capitalism as under apitralism most of the wealth goes to a small proportion of the population. Capitalism is also suseptable to economic calapse do to things like over production. All the work that needs to be done will be shared out under socialism. This will mean far less time will be spent working. Heres a link that explains what socialism is. Man of Kent their are thousands and thousands of socialists in this country so I am not alone in my opinions.

The reason that no more than 300,000 people didn't march in Genoa was because first not eveeryone in world knew that the demonstration was taking place and not everyone was prepared to travel to Genoa.

By the way the next big demonstration is outside the Labour Party conference in Brighton on the 30th of September. This will be to protest against things like Labours unethical arms selling policy and its treatment of asylum seekers and other policies.

[This message has been edited by Steelgate (edited 13-09-2001).]

Former Member · September 2001

Originally posted by Steelgate:
and its treatment of asylum seekers and other policies.

[This message has been edited by Steelgate (edited 13-09-2001).]

I think the government is handling the problem as well can be expected. What do you suggest in all of your left wing glory? We give them even more handouts, how about instead of even bothering to locate them we simply give them money. Maybe that will stop them from working all together. Or how about we make sure they all win the lottery.

Have you not realised that the vast majority of claimants are talking an utter load of crap just to get here. What needs to be done is for the government to stop pussying around hiring people to relocate them, but instead to hire more people to decide who should stay and who shouldn't.

Former Member · September 2001

Most refugees are genuine and would not even be trying to get here is it wasn't for Britains' unethical arms selling policy which sells arms to waring countries and regimes like Turkey that use the weapons on minorities like the Kurds. Very few refugees are economic migrants. Most of them want to return home as soon as possible. No one gives up their home and job to go to another country unless they are forced to. Most are fleeing war zones. They do not deserve to be in prisoned in detention centres for montths on end or denied the right to work while they are here as many of them are highly skilled and could do jobs that would pay for their keep while they are here.

Former Member · September 2001

Can't you answer the question then? I think you missed a few...

Originally posted by ME
1. In a communist state, WHO decides what is 'needed' and what gets made?

2. How is this decision made?

3. In the event of a 50:50 split decision, who has the casting 'vote'?

4. If 300,000 people marched on Genoa, why do you think that approx 4 BILLION didn't?

5. In the exchange of services, which you referred to earlier, is a heart transplant equivalent to a take-away from a kebab restaurant? If so, how come? If not, why not?

6. If 90% of work is wasted, come the revolution, what will 90% of the workforce do all day? Afterall by this reckoning 10% produce all that we need at the moment. In fact, in the west, we have a surplus which will feed the 3rd world.

7. If this life is utopia, why aren't you ACTUALLY living it? Why buy a computer and I bet you have a job, and buy clothes, food etc. Or is this an example of the 'do as I say, not as I do' mentality usually associated with socialists?

8. I work for the Govt and not a corporation and I, like most of my fellow workers feel that we are exploited? Am I working for profit then? If so, who gets these profits?

Anyway, you again asserted that decisions would be made democratically. But how - ballot box, postal vote, show of hands - how?

If more than 300,000 people didn't know that the protest was going on then they obviously never pay attention to the media. This protest had been advertised since Stockholm, it was the biggest anti-capitalism protest since the last one (or something like that).

Good luck at the Labour Party Conference, I'm sure you'll be happy several hundred yards away from anything or anyone, nice to see you wasting a little more of the downtrodden workers hard earned money (we pay taxes you know). I suppose you are, at least, keeping the Police in work - it makes sure the unemployment level is lower <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">

Former Member · September 2001

Actually, my sister is in the Peace Corps (step sister, not my father's daughter) and she works in Niger (poorest country in Africa). It is not the industrial workers that are in abject poverty, it is the farmers. The industrial workers actually live in decent homes and can feed their families.

I wish that these people in 3rd world countries would have forced wages and conditions as well as ours. The industries would pack up and come home. See they would have to automate everything to make it worth their while to produce products in these countries and then they would have to spend millions educating them to be able to work the machinary. Well now if they had it your way the whole 3rd world would completely starve to death and sink completely back into the dark ages. Wow like the idea. Then we would have plenty of jobs for all the people who come to this country and everyone would stop bitching about them taking our jobs <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.thesite.org/ubb/biggrin.gif">

You really are brilliant!

Former Member · September 2001

Steelgate needs a brain enema. <IMG alt="image" SRC="http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/smilie/newsaw.gif">

[This message has been edited by Vlad the Impaler (edited 15-09-2001).]

Former Member · September 2001

Man of Ken, I have already answered some of your questions and provided a link that answers the rest of them.

In a socialist society there would be a sharing out of work so that all the workers did all the work that was needed to be done. This would drastically reduce the working week and prevent unemployment.

There would be no exchange of services what people needed people they would be allowed to take subject to availability rationing would ensure no shortages.

People would be required to work in exchange for access to goods and services.

What was needed to be produced would have to be democratically decided by workers councils that would have representatives in the government. We already know most of what needs to be produced already, housing, clothing, food etc.

click on Frequently asked questions for a more in depth explanation.

BBH, all workers in third world countries are paid a fraction of what workers are paid in the west. The companies that employ then use them as cheap labour and can afford to pay then decent wage without having to leave these countries as they make such vast profits.

Here are some more links to socialist parties and activist websites.
socialist workers party
Workers Power
WorldSocialism.com
Urban75 website for anti-capitalist activists
Schnews news from direct action frontline

[This message has been edited by Steelgate (edited 15-09-2001).]

Former Member · September 2001

People would be required to work in exchange for access to goods and services. People would be required to work in exchange for access to goods and services.

Um isnt that exactly the same system we have now?..The way you put it sounds like something out of the soviet gulags..Work and you will eat, dont and die.

So with all this make enough to survive and nothing else what happens to those who cant work? What happens to the elderly and infirm? Are people going to double their work week supporting others for no gain whatsoever? What about the disabled and injured? Seeing as nobody is making any more goods than they need why would they make more for those that cant make it themselves?

Former Member · September 2001

No it is nothing like the same system we have now, because people would not be working to make vast profits for the bosses. Instead they would be working for the benefit of all. Everyone would benefit as the working week would be drasticaly reduced and all the wealth created would be evenly distributed. In any system people would still have to work to produce the essentials like food. Socialism would allow the greatest distribution of wealth though.

Those who can't work would still be entitled to access to goods and services just like they are now. Very few people are incapable of doing no work at all so these people would be small percentage of the population. As the working week will have been reduced so much people would have to work much harder to provide for these people.

Former Member · September 2001

Originally posted by Steelgate:
Man of Ken, I have already answered some of your questions and provided a link that answers the rest of them.

No, I don't think that you have. What you actually to is send me to vague websites which are fine on soundbites but contain very little detail. THAT is what I am after.

If you want to change my viewpoint, you need to give me the detail to make my own mind up. I'm not going to be convinced just because you repeat the same statements time and time again.

In a socialist society there would be a sharing out of work so that all the workers did all the work that was needed to be done. This would drastically reduce the working week and prevent unemployment.

WHO shares out the work? (and don't tell me that its 'the workers' becuase I find it a little hard to believe that the 500,000+ who work in the NHS getting together in a room to decide who does what). WHO will be telling me what I will be doing, or do I get to choose for myself?

There would be no exchange of services what people needed people they would be allowed to take subject to availability rationing would ensure no shortages.

Rationing? So WHO decides how much I get of anything? Who is it that decides what I need?

People would be required to work in exchange for access to goods and services.

Pretty much the status quo then. If I don't work, I don't get paid. If I don't get paid then I can't buy anything. Money being the exchange mechanism and the key to access...

What was needed to be produced would have to be democratically decided by workers councils that would have representatives in the government. We already know most of what needs to be produced already, housing, clothing, food etc.

Ah, the ruling elite. Only 'representatives in the government'? So who would form the remaining members of the govt?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Now can I have DIRECT answers to these...

1. In the event of a 50:50 split decision, who has the casting 'vote'?

2. If 90% of work is currently wasted, come the revolution, what will 90% of the workforce do all day? Afterall by this reckoning 10% produce all that we need at the moment. In fact, in the west, we have a surplus which will feed the 3rd world.

3. If this life is utopia, why aren't you ACTUALLY living it? I bet you have a job (if so - who do you work for - what industry?). You've obviously bought a computer and buy clothes, food etc. Or is this an example of the 'do as I say, not as I do' mentality usually associated with socialists?

4. I work for the Govt and not a corporation and I, like most of my fellow workers feel that we are exploited? Am I working for profit then? If so, who gets these profits?

You may recognise them - this is the THIRD time I've had to post them.

Capitalism Is Evil

Comments