Maybe we should take Eugenics more seriously?

[DodgyAgent]

The indebtedness may be a fact but it is still a cliche because you are using it to verify an argument without arguing the point properly. It is all very well you saying the the West is in hoc but you are not explaining why this is a bad thing or whether we are better or worse off than we would have been had it not been for the liberalisation of the financial markets. You are also using this "fact" as a cliche to blame Margaret Thatcher, which begs the questions why then if it was so bad why did ensuing governments not change it or not supervise it?

By the same argument we can blame the problems of the welfare state on Beveridge for starting it in the first place.
If Beveridge didnt start welfare we wouldnt have any benefits scroungers.

[DodgyAgent]

I don't think you understand the meaning of cliche.
A fact is not necessarily a cliche
The indebtedness of the West is a matter of record. And its not necessarily bad to have debt provided you can pay it back by growing your economy. But Italy, Spain et. al cannot pay back their debt.
And now that the froth of financial services has abated, neither can we.

If the liberalisation of markets had not been allowed, perhaps we wouldn't have had the illusion of wealth that the City and Wall Street seemed to create over the last 25 years.
Financial services were seen as an alterntive to manufacturing by Thatcher and our current situation shows how deluded that was.

So we should still be supporting British Leyland and AtW would be driving around in an Austin Maxi?

[sasguru]

So we should still be supporting British Leyland and AtW would be driving around in an Austin Maxi?

We should have supported indigenous manufacturing, yes.*
We should have tried harder to not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Everyone else does it, not least that bastion of free enterprise, the US.

*Even the Tories are making noises about this now.

[Ignis Fatuus]

I don't think you understand the meaning of cliche.

A cliche to me is like a red rag to a bull.

[Robinho]

We should have supported indigenous manufacturing, yes.
We should have tried harder to not throw out the baby with the bathwater.
Everyone else does it, not least that bastion of free enterprise, the US.

So what if everyone else does it? If their foreign taxpayers are supporting foreign businesses that will sell to us. Then their taxpayers are essentially giving us money. Hence there is no reason for us to do it just because others are.

The key to a good economy is to minimise government intervention. There is basically no need for it at all.

[Old Greg]

This is where you are going wrong though. Capitalism doesn't mean a system designed to favour people with capital. It is a system which allows you to freely have capital. You are describing a feudal or serfdom system where landowners can exploit the peasants who cannot own land themselves.

No, feudalism prevents movement between classes. Your class, and therefore your economic freedom, is defined by your birth - largely.

Fascist capitalism does not constrain movement between classes (and I am ignoring the racial elements of some variants of fascism at the moment), but instead protects the position of the class itself. It is important to distinguish between the class and the individuals who make up that class.

So capitalism does indeed allow people freely to have capital and therefore to deploy that capital to make profit. However, democracy and trade union activity will to an extent frustrate the ability to deploy the capital, through regulation, punitive taxation, collective bargaining and industrial action. Democracy will do this because of a perceived public interest and trade unionism through a perceived interest of groups of workers. Pure capitalism must be freed of these restraints, and this is exactly what fascism does through its suppression of democracy and trade unionism.

[sasguru]

The USA?

I think that Germany looks after most of its citizens better than the US does.
The US may have a higher standard of living, but the Germans have a better quality of life.

[sasguru]

The key to a good economy is to minimise government intervention. There is basically no need for it at all.

If that were true then the US would be the best economy in the world.

[Robinho]

So capitalism does indeed allow people freely to have capital and therefore to deploy that capital to make profit. However, democracy and trade union activity will to an extent frustrate the ability to deploy the capital, through regulation, punitive taxation, collective bargaining and industrial action. Democracy will do this because of a perceived public interest and trade unionism through a perceived interest of groups of workers. Pure capitalism must be freed of these restraints, and this is exactly what fascism does through its suppression of democracy and trade unionism.

No this is exactly what Anarcho-Capitalism or Libertarianism does. Fascism control large parts of the economy - this is not capitalistic. Punishment of the working class is not a capitalistic concept. Collective bargaining is capitalistic - capitalism is about negotiating for the sale of goods and services. What is not capitalistic is giving trade unions unnatural rights.

[Robinho]

I think that Germany looks after most of its citizens better than the US does.
The US may have a higher standard of living, but the Germans have a better quality of life.

No way. The wealth divide is large in the US but the poor are no poorer than the poor in Europe.

The government isn't your mother, people can look after their own lives.