State of the parties as 2015 General Election looms.

[MrGongGong]

facilitating them to participate in democratic society,

Depends on what you mean by "democratic society"
It seems that one recently popular parties idea of this is to simply find out what most people want and then do that, regardless of any evidence of the harm it might do or even a thought about how people arrive at their opinions.
To suggest otherwise these days is to be seen as "elitist" or "patronising" or worse still "mocking".

There seems to be little exploration (in political communications) of whether different methods of making decisions might be better for different types of decisions just a simple "let the people decide".

(as I've said before) It seems blatantly obvious to me that we don't use this principle to decide on really important stuff like flying aeroplanes, heart surgery or vibrato

In Britain, for example, the top 3,000 earners pay more income tax than the bottom 9,000,000 earners in total. You can't run an NHS, welfare benefits system, etc, vital for eradicating poverty, without these innovative, talented people, why disincentivise them?

HA HA HA

You really have bought Dave's myth haven't you!
The assumption that somehow the "top" earners are in that position because they are "innovative and talented" IS true for some BUT you don't have to spend too many days hanging around with them (i'm not saying where though!) to realise that this is a rather blanket generalisation. Many people with huge amounts of money seem to have acquired it in spite of their complete lack of "talent" or "innovation".

[Beef Oven!]

Originally posted by MrGongGong

Depends on what you mean by "democratic society"
It seems that one recently popular parties idea of this is to simply find out what most people want and then do that, regardless of any evidence of the harm it might do or even a thought about how people arrive at their opinions.
To suggest otherwise these days is to be seen as "elitist" or "patronising" or worse still "mocking".

Liberal representative democracy

There seems to be little exploration (in political communications) of whether different methods of making decisions might be better for different types of decisions just a simple "let the people decide".

(as I've said before) It seems blatantly obvious to me that we don't use this principle to decide on really important stuff like flying aeroplanes, heart surgery or vibrato

Maybe, but that is not precluded by free-market capitalism or representative democracy. Indeed many entrepreneurial high-achieving businesses run their business on a very cooperative decision-making basis.

You really have bought Dave's myth haven't you!
The assumption that somehow the "top" earners are in that position because they are "innovative and talented" IS true for some BUT you don't have to spend too many days hanging around with them (i'm not saying where though!) to realise that this is a rather blanket generalisation. Many people with huge amounts of money seem to have acquired it in spite of their complete lack of "talent" or "innovation".

Some undoubtedly pay the most income tax because they have inherited their income, but it's a tiny proportion and they are not the driving force. You know Alan Sugar and Richard Branson aren't from the landed aristocracy!

We're talking about entrepreneurs here, not the landed aristocracy!

[amateur51]

You know Alan Sugar and Richard Branson aren't from the landed aristocracy!

We're talking about entrepreneurs here, not the landed aristocracy!

Oh yes, Branson & Sugar are much wealthier and more avaricious

[MrGongGong]

You know Alan Sugar

Oh yes, what a great example he is
A man who became obscenely rich by selling crap technology that doesn't work properly to people to stupid to realise.

Would you want a country of Sugar's or companies like Bowers and Wilkins?

[Beef Oven!]

Oh yes, what a great example he is
A man who became obscenely rich by selling crap technology that doesn't work properly to people to stupid to realise.

Would you want a country of Sugar's or companies like Bowers and Wilkins?

Lord Sugar and Sir Richard Branson are the type of people you need to run the sort of businesses that create wealth.

Creating wealth reduces poverty. Poverty is an evil, it must be eradicated.

The system we have is free-market entrepreneurial capitalism, and it works very, very well indeed.

[MrGongGong]

Lord Sugar and Sir Richard Branson are the type of people you need to run the sort of businesses that create wealth.

Creating wealth reduces poverty. Poverty is an evil, it must be eradicated.

The system we have is free-market entrepreneurial capitalism, and it works very, very well indeed.

Bollocks
We don't need idiots like Sugar with their "sell everything" ethos encouraging aggressive consumption. The man has NO soul, the sooner he buggers off to Spain the better.

Not EVERYTHING is a competition.

Bristol car or Amstrad emailer ?

Choose one

Kind of sums it up though.
What sort of society do we aspire to become
One that values greed above everything else?

Vote Spiv get Spiv

[Beef Oven!]

MrGongGong

Bollocks

Same to you with brass knobs on.

We don't need idiots like Sugar with their "sell everything" ethos encouraging aggressive consumption. The man has NO soul, the sooner he buggers off to Spain the better.

He's not an idiot and because capitalism has been, and continues to be so successful at reducing world poverty, we need it, so we need people like him. He's originally from just up the road from me, I've met him, he's good guy, stop saying bad things about him.

Not EVERYTHING is a competition.

True, but so many things are, naturally.

Bristol car or Amstrad emailer ?

Choose one

We live in a free-market society, so there are more than those two choices (isn't that one of your false tracheotomies, or whatever you call them?).

[Flosshilde]

Lord Sugar and Sir Richard Branson are the type of people you need to run the sort of businesses that create wealth.

'Wealth' isn't created - simply shifted around. At the moment it's being shifted from poorer people to richer people. Even if things like the NHS, education etc are counted as 'wealth' (& it would seem that that is only 'wealth' for poorer people, while richer people have actual money) that is still being shifted from poor to rich as health services are privatised & public money goes into private hands , state schools are removed from local democracy - the only control poor people have over their 'wealth' - & into the control of academies and central government, and higher education is less accessible because of fees & student loans.

[Flosshilde]

Lord Sugar and Sir Richard Branson are the type of people you need to run the sort of businesses that create wealth.

I don't think either of those are very good examples - What has Sugar done (apart from featuring on a TV programme)? & I think Branson's companies have mostly been failures; his greatest success has been creating a brand, & he now puts his money into idiot things like selling space flights to rich idiots.

[MrGongGong]

I've met him, he's good guy, stop saying bad things about him.

Why are you taken in by these "characters" ?
You sound like my father, "You can trust John Major son, he's got honest eyes" :oooops:

I would suggest that we need something else entirely.

At least Bill Gates is giving all his money away to actually do something good in the world

[Beef Oven!]

'Wealth' isn't created - simply shifted around. At the moment it's being shifted from poorer people to richer people. Even if things like the NHS, education etc are counted as 'wealth' (& it would seem that that is only 'wealth' for poorer people, while richer people have actual money) that is still being shifted from poor to rich as health services are privatised & public money goes into private hands , state schools are removed from local democracy - the only control poor people have over their 'wealth' - & into the control of academies and central government, and higher education is less accessible because of fees & student loans.

Wealth does not pre-exist, it has to be created.

If anyone has stolen any wealth from poor people they should go to prison.

Whether the NHS is in the hands of public or private hands is not the matter, people still receive care. Thankfully, the NHS is in the public sector.

University is far more accessible now than it ever was (when I went to university fees were paid for us, and we got a grant, but less than 10% of all youngsters went, now it is close to 50%, and from a much bigger teenage population.

[amateur51]

Lord Sugar and Sir Richard Branson are the type of people you need to run the sort of businesses that create wealth.

Creating wealth reduces poverty. Poverty is an evil, it must be eradicated.

The system we have is free-market entrepreneurial capitalism, and it works very, very well indeed.

Creating wealth has the potential to reduce poverty, through the exploitation of workers of course, but it just never seems to work that way, does it.

[Beef Oven!]

I don't think either of those are very good examples - What has Sugar done (apart from featuring on a TV programme)? & I think Branson's companies have mostly been failures; his greatest success has been creating a brand, & he now puts his money into idiot things like selling space flights to rich idiots.

If you don't know what Lord Sugar has done, apart from featuring on a TV programme, then you are in no place to judge whether or not he's a good example.

Branson is a genius entrepreneur, has been highly successful creating wealth and employment and opportunities. He also has some of the most progressive, empowering and people friendly employment practices in his businesses.

And you contradict yourself somewhat when you say that his businesses have been failures, but funds a space programme.

[Beef Oven!]

Why are you taken in by these "characters" ?
You sound like my father, "You can trust John Major son, he's got honest eyes" :oooops:

I would suggest that we need something else entirely.

At least Bill Gates is giving all his money away to actually do something good in the world

Your dad sounds like a good bloke, they say it misses a generation ;-)

Bill Gates is a good example. Hovering 50 miles above Maslow's triangle as he does, he no longer has a need for all his money, so he gives lots of it away. Capitalism rocks!!

[MrGongGong]

I've never been to Albania but it does seem that many of the current ideas about "wealth creation" bear a striking similarity to the way in which some folks in that country approached finance.
We really could do with a realignment.
People working in the city who are simply gambling on the possibility of a commodity having a different value to what it is today might be "generating wealth" but are engaged in an activity that is ultimately pointless.
Barn the Spoon, on the other hand, makes something that people need, as do the folks at B&W.

http://spitalfieldslife.com/2012/11/13/barn-the-spoon-spoon-carver/

Worth 1,000 of your spiv chum Sugar