Tony Benn RIP

Stevo_666

johnfinch wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

However a socialist politician who lived in a £3m house is quite possibly at odds with what he stood for.

Socialism doesn't mean everyone having exactly the same economically.

So what is an acceptable wealth differential from a socialist point of view and how would that be enforced ?

Stevo_666

nathancom wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

However a socialist politician who lived in a £3m house is quite possibly at odds with what he stood for.

Socialism doesn't mean everyone having exactly the same economically.

Anyway I imagine he inherited the house. Being a socialist doesn't mean you have to impoverish yourself if you happen to have inherited wealth either. Giving up his title was enough and more than most would do.

In the other Tony Benn thread in Commuting chat, one of the left leaning forumites argued that the children of the rich should not benefit from their parents good fortune - effectively that the state should confiscate the wealth of individuals when they die. Being a good socialist, do you not agree with this ?

nathancom

Stevo 666 wrote:

nathancom wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

However a socialist politician who lived in a £3m house is quite possibly at odds with what he stood for.

Socialism doesn't mean everyone having exactly the same economically.

Anyway I imagine he inherited the house. Being a socialist doesn't mean you have to impoverish yourself if you happen to have inherited wealth either. Giving up his title was enough and more than most would do.

In the other Tony Benn thread in Commuting chat, one of the left leaning forumites argued that the children of the rich should not benefit from their parents good fortune - effectively that the state should confiscate the wealth of individuals when they die. Being a good socialist, do you not agree with this ?

That is communism, as in wealth held in common.

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

finchy

Stevo 666 wrote:

johnfinch wrote:

Mr Goo wrote:

However a socialist politician who lived in a £3m house is quite possibly at odds with what he stood for.

Socialism doesn't mean everyone having exactly the same economically.

So what is an acceptable wealth differential from a socialist point of view and how would that be enforced ?

The idea behind socialism is that production be collectively owned, so wealth differential isn't actually important as long as people are getting out what they put in.

MaxwellBygraves

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

Stevo_666

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

florerider

Stevo 666 wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

Can you point me in the direction of the ones you have found who are right?

Stevo_666

florerider wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

Can you point me in the direction of the ones you have found who are right?

Another reason why I'm still busy - the hunt goes on

nathancom

florerider wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

Can you point me in the direction of the ones you have found who are right?

After your shocking display of economic theory that is rich.

Stevo_666

To be fair to FR, any socialist attempt to justify how their belief system can work in economic terms is usually shockingly amusing. The art is getting lefties to actually set it out - as they usually know that it will end up being laughed at once the detail plans are open to scrutiny

Like with Finchy above, who's gone all shy when asked about the detail...

finchy

Stevo 666 wrote:

Like with Finchy above, who's gone all shy when asked about the detail...

Eh? I haven't been asked for detail. :?

florerider

nathancom wrote:

florerider wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

Can you point me in the direction of the ones you have found who are right?

After your shocking display of economic theory that is rich.

No I think we established that I wanted an interest rate that was fair to the low paid through stamping down on inflation that is robbing them o f their living standard, wanted people who had saved for their retirement to have the benefits of savings income they expected, and an interest rate that stopped the rapid increase in property prices that price people out of the market and give them exhorbitant rates. We also seem to have established that your main interest is borrowing money to be able to buy property that is rapidly escalating in value, but not wanting to pay a reasonable rate for it, making a wild accusation about millions being made homeless as your sole pretence to avoid revealing your selfishness.

florerider

Any one else spot the irony

Tony Benn was the great supporter of Concorde, of which a whole 7 were made, and used to ferry wealthy individuals across the pond. The jobs making it soon dried up.

The capitalists Boeing made the 747, sold thousands, brought the era of cheap long haul to the masses and continues to employ thousands making it.

Great piece of R&D Concorde.

Ask not about TSR 2.

nathancom

florerider wrote:

nathancom wrote:

florerider wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

Can you point me in the direction of the ones you have found who are right?

After your shocking display of economic theory that is rich.

No I think we established that I wanted an interest rate that was fair to the low paid through stamping down on inflation that is robbing them o f their living standard, wanted people who had saved for their retirement to have the benefits of savings income they expected, and an interest rate that stopped the rapid increase in property prices that price people out of the market and give them exhorbitant rates. We also seem to have established that your main interest is borrowing money to be able to buy property that is rapidly escalating in value, but not wanting to pay a reasonable rate for it, making a wild accusation about millions being made homeless as your sole pretence to avoid revealing your selfishness.

Reducing inflation by making everyone so poor that they had no money to spend on anything but mortgage repayments. It is a terrible idea. Inflation hasn't been particularly high, especially considering the expansion of the money supply via quantitative easing. I think the high point in recent years was around 3.8%, which is nothing compared to the double digit rates under Maggie/Major.

There hasn't been a sharp rise in housing prices since 2008 until the short-lived help-to-buy scheme which was quickly ended once the potential for creating a new housing bubble was made obvious to George Osbourne. Low interest rates have saved millions from repossession and have made this recent recession much less painful for working people that it could have been. From your City ivory tower you are clearly incapable of seeing this.

For my own part, we have a minimal amount left to pay on our mortgage with a young family. Anyway it is not an investment that I am looking for an increase on since there would be an equivalent increase in other properties we might look to move to, and since we are likely to want to move to a larger property, a stagnant property market personally benefits me most (please note that my personal situation has little effect on my opinion on this matter). We see it as a living cost and not in any way an investment. I am sure most people are the same.

You are, as before talking rot. Increasing interest rates during the recession would have been a terrible idea whatever political end of the spectrum you live on, unless much more significant inflationary pressures had forced our hands. This was not the case. You mentioned working in the City. What do you specialise in?

Jim C

They don't make em like Tony Benn anymore. Stuck to his principles. Always honest. Sad day. loved by his family , friends, neighbours and the local shopkeepers from what I understand. Top bloke

pinno

arran77 wrote:

Not many politicians like him nowadays, a true socialist leftie who stood up for the little man.

Just waiting for Stevo and Frank the Tank to wade in, probably with very different views

You said it Arran.

When I was in naam, Cheltenham, Tony Benn spoke at the town hall on one of his nationwide tours. Of all places, Cheltenham was the only venue to be sold out. Due to this, he repeated the talk and was sold out on the second night.

Whilst the Stevo's of the world want to break everything down to facts, figures and stats.

I'll list some polocies that are nothing to do with facts and figures and are open to scrutiny.

1977 - Dennis Healey tried to cap mortgages to 3.5 times annual income. Perhaps if the Tories hadn't quashed it, we would not be in the housing crisis we are in now. To compound this fact:
1985 - Thatcher got rid of the Rent Authority so now landlords can charge what they like whilst councils are cutting down on housing benefit !!
1991 - Further degeneration of the political framework with the abolition of Parish Councils. Great, more disenfranchising of the people through centralisation.
1988 - Abolition of the Highlands and islands Development board. A great organisation doing a great job.
1987 - Disbanding of the GLC, a great council now replaced by puppet mayors.
Disclaimer: The dates may be a little out but the rest is true.

It is not all about facts and figures, it is often to do with direct policies that affect everybody in very different ways.

RIP Mr Benn, a heavyweight intellectual that current politics lacks. Maybe this is the very end of political ideology and that is a cause for concern for everyone, left and right of the divide.

florerider

nathancom wrote:

florerider wrote:

nathancom wrote:

florerider wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

Can you point me in the direction of the ones you have found who are right?

After your shocking display of economic theory that is rich.

No I think we established that I wanted an interest rate that was fair to the low paid through stamping down on inflation that is robbing them o f their living standard, wanted people who had saved for their retirement to have the benefits of savings income they expected, and an interest rate that stopped the rapid increase in property prices that price people out of the market and give them exhorbitant rates. We also seem to have established that your main interest is borrowing money to be able to buy property that is rapidly escalating in value, but not wanting to pay a reasonable rate for it, making a wild accusation about millions being made homeless as your sole pretence to avoid revealing your selfishness.

Reducing inflation by making everyone so poor that they had no money to spend on anything but mortgage repayments. It is a terrible idea. Inflation hasn't been particularly high, especially considering the expansion of the money supply via quantitative easing. I think the high point in recent years was around 3.8%, which is nothing compared to the double digit rates under Maggie/Major.

There hasn't been a sharp rise in housing prices since 2008 until the short-lived help-to-buy scheme which was quickly ended once the potential for creating a new housing bubble was made obvious to George Osbourne. Low interest rates have saved millions from repossession and have made this recent recession much less painful for working people that it could have been. From your City ivory tower you are clearly incapable of seeing this.

For my own part, we have a minimal amount left to pay on our mortgage with a young family. Anyway it is not an investment that I am looking for an increase on since there would be an equivalent increase in other properties we might look to move to, and since we are likely to want to move to a larger property, a stagnant property market personally benefits me most (please note that my personal situation has little effect on my opinion on this matter). We see it as a living cost and not in any way an investment. I am sure most people are the same.

You are, as before talking rot. Increasing interest rates during the recession would have been a terrible idea whatever political end of the spectrum you live on, unless much more significant inflationary pressures had forced our hands. This was not the case. You mentioned working in the City. What do you specialise in?

Reducing inflation makes people poor,

Really shown your level of understanding now haven't we?

What do I do. Lets just say my earliest achievement in my early 30 s was to get a new factory built employing a hundred or so people, and in terms of keeping people in work I went on from there. Not in the financial sector.

nathancom

florerider wrote:

nathancom wrote:

florerider wrote:

nathancom wrote:

florerider wrote:

Stevo 666 wrote:

MaxwellBygraves wrote:

nathancom wrote:

Glad to see you are fighting leftieism wherever it rears its head.

He's like Bikeradars very own little Joe McCarthy.

It's a dirty job but somebodys got to do it

Anyhow, I'm busy, there are lefties who are wrong on the interweb...

Can you point me in the direction of the ones you have found who are right?

After your shocking display of economic theory that is rich.

No I think we established that I wanted an interest rate that was fair to the low paid through stamping down on inflation that is robbing them o f their living standard, wanted people who had saved for their retirement to have the benefits of savings income they expected, and an interest rate that stopped the rapid increase in property prices that price people out of the market and give them exhorbitant rates. We also seem to have established that your main interest is borrowing money to be able to buy property that is rapidly escalating in value, but not wanting to pay a reasonable rate for it, making a wild accusation about millions being made homeless as your sole pretence to avoid revealing your selfishness.

Reducing inflation by making everyone so poor that they had no money to spend on anything but mortgage repayments. It is a terrible idea. Inflation hasn't been particularly high, especially considering the expansion of the money supply via quantitative easing. I think the high point in recent years was around 3.8%, which is nothing compared to the double digit rates under Maggie/Major.

There hasn't been a sharp rise in housing prices since 2008 until the short-lived help-to-buy scheme which was quickly ended once the potential for creating a new housing bubble was made obvious to George Osbourne. Low interest rates have saved millions from repossession and have made this recent recession much less painful for working people that it could have been. From your City ivory tower you are clearly incapable of seeing this.

For my own part, we have a minimal amount left to pay on our mortgage with a young family. Anyway it is not an investment that I am looking for an increase on since there would be an equivalent increase in other properties we might look to move to, and since we are likely to want to move to a larger property, a stagnant property market personally benefits me most (please note that my personal situation has little effect on my opinion on this matter). We see it as a living cost and not in any way an investment. I am sure most people are the same.

You are, as before talking rot. Increasing interest rates during the recession would have been a terrible idea whatever political end of the spectrum you live on, unless much more significant inflationary pressures had forced our hands. This was not the case. You mentioned working in the City. What do you specialise in?

Reducing inflation makes people poor,

Really shown your level of understanding now haven't we?

What do I do. Lets just say my earliest achievement in my early 30 s was to get a new factory built employing a hundred or so people, and in terms of keeping people in work I went on from there. Not in the financial sector.

reducing inflation BY making people poor. If your reading comprehension fails that easily it is no wonder your economic ideas were so dire.

Put it like this, people with assets want high interest rates as those assets are loaned out in one shape or form. People without assets want low interest rates to keep the cost of their borrowing down. In a recession caused by excessive public and private debt then increasing interest rates is only going to make things worse. Understandably you, as an asset rich individual, want an increase in interest rates but you need to look beyond your own nose sometimes to see what will benefit society, especially in time of need...

Stevo_666

florerider wrote:

What do I do. Lets just say my earliest achievement in my early 30 s was to get a new factory built employing a hundred or so people, and in terms of keeping people in work I went on from there. Not in the financial sector.

Well done that man - we need more people like you. If there were more people prepared to take risks (including the proverbial shirt on their backs), invest and create jobs like this, we would definitely be in a better position as a country. Unfortunately it's far easier for people to sit on their ar$es and bang on about how unfair things are and how people who are not prepared to do anything like that should get a bigger slice of the pie from those that do without doing anything to earn it.

Interesting how you made this point and Nathancom totally ignored it. Where does he think jobs come from in the first place?

The interest rate and inflation point depends on your own situation, it won't suit everyone but that's a question for the Bank of England more than anyone else.

florerider

And do you know the really funny thing Stevo?

We benchmarked the pay as 1st quartile. Can't even be accused of driving wages down.

Stevo_666

florerider wrote:

And do you know the really funny thing Stevo?

We benchmarked the pay as 1st quartile. Can't even be accused of driving wages down.

Damned if you and damned if you don't.

It's a pity that some people just don't get it: just the fact that you created a business and jobs makes you a hate figure for some of the very people who benefit from what you did. The UK has a bit of an attitude problem on this front, pity really.

PS: if you need a bit of free corporate tax advice, drop me a PM . [Watch leftie blood pressure go through the roof any time now]

ukiboy

He was a typical champagne socialist and ultimately, if he got his own way, Britain would have been f***ed!
Still, as a God fearing and devout man, I will pray for his soul, even though I am true blue... I'm sure Tony and Maggie are chatting about all sorts up there in Heaven.. RIP both of them

RDW

'Champagne socialist' seems a remarkably inappropriate term for a lifelong teetotaler who renounced his free seat in the Lords and became more radical with age!

mamba80

This is pointless, as much as I like good left v right internet debate, we had all that with the Bob Crow thread, just days ago.

some asked that the TB RIP wouldn't descend into a cat fight.

He was great orator and I very much admired him.

BelgianBeerGeek

mamba80 wrote:

This is pointless, as much as I like good left v right internet debate, we had all that with the Bob Crow thread, just days ago.

some asked that the TB RIP wouldn't descend into a cat fight.

He was great orator and I very much admired him.

He was a great orator, professional politicial, and you admired him. These people are vermin, making a very good living from others. You do know that, don't you.

pinno

BelgianBeerGeek wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

This is pointless, as much as I like good left v right internet debate, we had all that with the Bob Crow thread, just days ago.

some asked that the TB RIP wouldn't descend into a cat fight.

He was great orator and I very much admired him.

He was a great orator, professional politicial, and you admired him. These people are vermin, making a very good living from others. You do know that, don't you.

Are you that cynical about politics?

Earning a good living? In the scheme of things, not nearly enough. Not nearly enough to attract the right sort of people into the job.

RideOnTime

RIP

BelgianBeerGeek

pinarello001 wrote:

BelgianBeerGeek wrote:

mamba80 wrote:

This is pointless, as much as I like good left v right internet debate, we had all that with the Bob Crow thread, just days ago.

some asked that the TB RIP wouldn't descend into a cat fight.

He was great orator and I very much admired him.

He was a great orator, professional politicial, and you admired him. These people are vermin, making a very good living from others. You do know that, don't you.

Are you that cynical about politics?

Earning a good living? In the scheme of things, not nearly enough. Not nearly enough to attract the right sort of people into the job.

Yes I am that cynical about politics. P'raps Benn didn't need the money and did it instead of doing something
constructive, like driving a bus, or building walls or something. Politics is awash with money, two of my local councillors "earn" about 52K a year for sitting on some committees (They are a married couple). When pushed they admitted some committees took about a half hour of their time a year. As Diane Abbott once said "Politics is a nice easy, indoor job without heavy lifting - who wouldn't want that for their children?"

pinno

@BBG.

Here's some things to consider.

You need councils. You need people to organise the repair and maintenance of roads, schools, sewerage, hospitals, waste.
At a national level, you need someone to set tax rates, allocate money to the councils for the above, negotiate terms and conditions of trade, set budgets for health, welfare, defences.
You cannot do any of this without politicians and politics. Without a say in the process of delegating responsibility and allocating resources, it would be anarchy.

However, someone quite eloquent once said "The people get the government they deserve".

florerider

I have come across new and old labour MPs and Tory MPs and a few Ministers. Also a few from the devolved assemblies.

they all wanted to make a contribution for the good. Much less difference between them than between us lefties and righties in the outside world, which comes as a surprise.

I'm off to my man cave beneath the rickety bridge now for some kid stew.