f1_fan

iTrader: (9)

LOL at this thread... one of the great mysteries of the Internet... the SN NSR definition of socialism

Luan Pra bang

With out going too much into detail the current class system is usually broken down by sociologists in to the working class, lower middle ,middle middle ,upper middle and upper class. These definitions are not strictly wealth related, one of the great levelers socialist policies has produced is the abilty for the working class to become wealthy. In the Victorian era and pre victorians the upper class had money and education the working class did not, the dossers just went hungry. Hence the original working class were that, workers while the upper class profited from that work. Now thanks to socialism we can have millionaires who are working class. Just becuase we are not a socialist nation does not stop socialism having a massive and positive impact on out society.

warrenm2

You've really lost the plot lately haven't you...

boomer

Try looking up Bourneville or Port Sunlight or Saltaire (or many other examples) to see how those nasty upper-class b4stards exploited the dumb working class!!!



mb

ALi-B

iTrader: (1)

Those pesky philanthropists and their evil exploitation of the working classes.

And what of Bourneville? - 130 years of serving the working class, only to be bought out by a faceless plastic cheese manufacturer .

Bluebird Toffee went the same way (now a business/enterprise park).

boomer

...i must admit, i don't buy Cadbury any more (and i do miss the Crunchie bars).

mb

zip106

Only one person on this thread has got it right.

And she's 80 years old...

Martin2005

I assume whilst this thread has taken the usual slightly right of centre tone, that we are NOT suggesting that capitalism, unchecked is a good idea for anyone?

Capitalism need controlling as much as socialism needs eradicating

I agree with those who say socialism doesn't work, it never has and never will, for the reasons already stated. This doesn't mean that socialism hasn't delivered vital and necessary reforms to our system, as already mentioned health and education and perfect examples.
The state does have a key role to play, the argument (as ever)is about how much of a role. It's worth remembering that despite all the big statements about maggie and capitalism chucked around on here the difference in size of the state between even Thatchers government and Blairs was relatively small.

cster

Long time no see dude.
BTW I think the education and health systems in this country are perfect examples of the mediocrity that can only be produced by what is in effect, government monopoly provision.
Unfortunately, I was not bought up in this country, so I have not had the advantage of the Government/BBC/Education system/NHS trying to brain wash me into thinking otherwise.
I don't blame people for believing this dogma - this is a pretty strong combo.
It is a bit of a shame that it has not bought about more equality in health and education, as if it did, one could almost justify the lack of choice/money wasted.

Luan Pra bang

Your inability to articulate a sentient response that is in any way relevant too the subject under discussion makes me think that our state education has failed you.

The Zohan

Agreed!

boxst

Education system, yes. Mediocre at best, tending to the lowest common denominator and producing a generation that is educationally sub-standard to most of the rest of the (educated) world.

NHS is interesting. Having travelled around, generally the UK is okay. Not brilliant, but okay. Certainly better than America, worse than say Germany.

Martin2005

I'm all for the reforming our public services, getting more private investment in and making them better.
For me the NHS is not about dogma, whether it's run by the 'state' or by private enterprise is irrelevant. What matters is that it delivers quality healthcare for the whole population.
My point was without socialism it would never of been set up in the first place, and that would be a bad thing.

Martin2005

Having very recently done the trawl around all our local state comprehensive schools for my son who starts next year, all I can say is that I was blown away by how good they ALL were.

There is absolutely no comparision between the state school I attended 25 years ago and what is on offer today. There has been a massive upgrading in equipment, teaching methods and teacher ability.

I struggle to understand your comments in the context of what I have recently experienced.

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

Germany does not have an NHS system. You need private medical insurance or you have to pay for any treatment yourself.

TelBoy

Wurzel, given the UK will be in that situation within 20 years or so, do you think it works well as a system or are there people who fall by the wayside because they can't/won't pay?

Martin2005

Based upon the teaching aids/equipment, training ,attainment, and the sheer amount of school/home work kids have to do these days.


It's an age old trick for one generation to do down the next. 'It was much better in my day...' well on the evidence of my own eyes and relatives in the system, todays system offers much a much higher standard of education than it did when 'I were a lad'

boxst

Really? I thought that if you were in work you paid some contribution to insurance and if not or on a low income it was free. Just checked that with my German colleague and that seems accurate?

boxst

My judgement is not based on a comparision with the past, but on foreign people who have come to England and then attended secondary school.

My Polish Brother-in-law for various complicated reasons came and stayed with us for a year and at 13 he had already been taught and exceeded GCSE 'A' grade maths and physics.

Martin2005

My son is 10 and took last years maths GCSE as an excercise at school (he's getting extra maths tuition as part of a gifted and talented programme run by the school) and got a grade C.
There are plenty of bright British kids around who are very well served by our education system

boxst

That somewhat proves the point. You shouldn't be getting a 'C' at GCSE when you are 10. I'm sure he is gifted, but not by that much. The level at which GCSE is pitched is for the lowest common denominator. Even getting an A* means very little when the content of that exam doesn't even remotely stretch the talented children.

Luan Pra bang

I would have to agree that current education standards are shocking, as they were 15-20 years ago. I would expect most 12 year olds could pass them with proper teaching. My experiences from the level of study expected in Eastern Europe and the baltics supports this pretty strongly.

Martin2005

I think you are being grossly unfair.

All i see is kids with huge amounts of work to do, the amount of homework these days is unbelievable!!

Frosticles

iTrader: (1)

Ah, Happy days when politics was interesting.

Wurzel

iTrader: (1)

To be honest I am not 100% sure how it all works.

When I started work here i was told I HAD to have private medical insurance. There was 2 options though a public thing or a private thing if you earnt over x amount. But if you opted for private you coul dthen not switch to the public one. But if you opted for public you could switch to private if you got betetr paid. Either way you have to pay something and it is exstortionate and seriously abused.

There is a 3rd option if you earn serious money where you are deemed able to afford medical bills as and when you need to pay them so do not need medical insuarance.

When I was taken to hospital by a red cross ambulance not long after getting here, the first thing the nurse did before the Dr would see me was check my insurance details on a computer. After I had convinced her I was in sured with xyz company the doctor saw me and I was admitted for 10 days and had an operation to set my broken ankle.

I then got a bill for the stay in hospital, a bill for the doctors time, a bill for the operation and materials used and I also got a bill from the red cross for my trip in an ambulance. All of which I had to submit to my insurance company, who paid me and not the hospital and I had to pay the hospital and the red cross.

Maybe your German friend can confirm things better but I am pretty sure there is no NHS system here like there is in the UK otherwise why was my insurance checked before I was seen by a doctor?

If you go and visit a GP or a dentist you get a bill aswell.

GlesgaKiss

I look forward to it.

Luan Pra bang

Most countries in Europe have universal health care, you make mandatory contributions similar to NI but usually at a higher rate. It would appear that despite much stronger socialist streaks runnning through many northern European nations thay have a better standard of living than the UK. Could it be that it is the people who live in England not the political system that does not work ?

Here are some figures from the nordic countries

In 2001, the wage-based unemployment benefits were around 90% of wage in Denmark and 80% in Sweden, compared to 75% in the Netherlands and 60% in Germany. The unemployed were also able to receive benefits several years before reductions, compared to quick benefit reduction in other countries.
Public expenditure for health and education is significantly higher in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in comparison to the OECD average.[6]
Overall tax burden are among the world's highest; 51.1% of GDP in Sweden, and 43.3% in Finland, compared to 34.7% in Germany, 33.5% in Canada, and 30.5% in Ireland.


So if they have such good benefits and still work why dont English people ?

alloy

here here Tel!!! Nice post!

JTaylor

I've not read as widely as you on China so you have the advantage; I'm just a dilettante, really. In terms of a "drift" occurring in the "wrong" direction, are you referring to recent government intervention? With regards to objectivism, yes, I was referring to Ayn Rand, but not specifically to the US. It was more the notion that the 'greed is good' crowd used to walk around with copies of Atlas Shrugs and there was this whole Nietzschean 'übermensch' philosophy that went with it. Take Alan Greenspan, formerly master of the universe and one of Rand's most ardent followers (and best friend). The natural extension of the philosophy was his laissez-faire policy and in my view that, coupled with ruthless individualism, has led to virtually the whole of the western world being on the cusp of economic collapse. Not a good look, and I'd wager that if that policy had been pulled further to the centre with some sensible regulation, we'd be in far better shape. This is the main thrust of my point - it's about balance, I guess. Mature democracies need a socialist voice in order to keep the worst elements of capitalism in check.