Bring it on Elon!

So, love0c you are happy comparing our elected parliament with a never - elected man who suggested that the right party for a foreign country, in which he has no stake, is a Neo - Nazi organisation?
I understand that you dislike the ruling party, but is this a position you can defend?
Has Mr Starmer spoke of " gassing and shooting " a section of the electorate?

Chocolatelovinggram ??????????????

Chocolatelovinggran's question was perfectly clear.

Ohhowwelaughed

Maremia

Shinamae, thank you for admiting what many believe to be true, that Reform does NOT have a policy for the NHS.

How many times.. they say they want to swap to an insurance based model such as the French system.
Now I am sure even you would agree how they will do that would not be known until they could delve into the current workings of the dept of health.

They allude to France as an example of insurance based healthcare not using the French system.

I disagree they cant say more yet. They could give a broad brush idea of how it would affect state provision and individual provision - and the balance. Also, it's based on an incredibly high uncosted figure for health.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

And whilst Kemi gives her unwanted views on sandwiches and Starmer sucks up to the EU , Farage is talking to the grown ups.

That's a laugh! Grownups? Where are they

imaround

Came by to let you know that if you really do believe that Musk won't ask Reform for something in return for his $100 million, here he is telling you straight out that isn't true.

I don't Think the image that imaround posted in the quoted post will be in it, so here it is again.

I think what Musk says is very largely true. Until comparatively recently, before the introduction of universal suffrage, government has been the exclusive province of the 'upper classes'; they were wealthy themselves and had an affinity with the wealthy. So, of course government favoured wealth. It was all about protecting 'property' which includes wealth.

We now have a slightly more diverse mix of MPs/Ministers, but they mostly subscribe to the myth that wealthy people are wealth creators without who we wouldn't be able to manage.

But this is so wrong. Wealthy people dom't create wealth, they accumulate it from the less wealthy, because that is the way the financial system is set up to favour their accumulation. The quote below exemplifies this. Musk as acquired more and more businesses in order to enhance his opportunities to accumulate more wealth.

Yes, his businesses create economic activity by way of providing jobs and wages that can be spent into the economy, but the source of his 'wealth is ultimately the consumer who pays for his products. And the money the consumers use is money put into the economy by the state. Only the state can 'create' money (and banks under licence from the state, but the money they 'create' by way of loans is destroyed when the loans are repaid, so all it's doing is creating more economic activity, there is none left over to add to people's wealth)

In fact, the money that wealthy people have is state money which hasn't been returned to the state via taxation because the wealthy have favourable tax regimes and are adept at avoiding tax. So they are not only milking the consumer, they are milking the state. They are creating the deficit which everyone worries so much about. The deficit being the difference between the money the state issues and the money that is returned to it. It is peoples savings and investments, which those of us with a bit of spare cash can take advantage of, but the 'wealthy' have the lions share.

It makes me sad that revere the 'wealthy' so much when in fact all they are doing is contributing to inequality and taking money out of circulation which could be being used to improve the lives of 'ordinary' citizens.

Putting trust in the promises of the wealthy to improve 'ordinary lives' is foolish because all they're interested is accumulating as much of the public's money as they possibly can and Musk is a Grand Master at that...

Even if Elon were a successful businessman (which he isn't, he's only been successful in leveraging the money he was born into, into even more money), why on Earth would you want your government run like a business? Businesses only care about profits, government should only care about people.

The great economist, Adam Smith, was in the right of it 250 years ago

The interest of this third order, therefore, has not the same connexion with the general interest of the society, as that of the other two. Merchants and master manufacturers are, in this order, the two classes of people who commonly employ the largest capitals, and who by their wealth draw to themselves the greatest share of the public consideration. As during their whole lives they are engaged in plans and projects, they have frequently more acuteness of understanding than the greater part of country gentlemen. As their thoughts, however, are commonly exercised rather about the interest of their own particular branch of business. than about that of the society, their judgment, even when given with the greatest candour (which it has not been upon every occasion), is much more to be depended upon with regard to the former of those two objects, than with regard to the latter.

The proposal of any new law or regulation of commerce which comes from this order, ought always to be listened to with great precaution, and ought never to be adopted till after having been long and carefully examined, not only with the most scrupulous, but with the most suspicious attention. It comes from an order of men, whose interest is never exactly the same with that of the public, who have generally an interest to deceive and even to oppress the public, and who accordingly have, upon many occasions, both deceived and oppressed it.

We and the people in the US should take heed of Smith😆

Sorry for such a long post...

P>S What Musk doesn't realise is that the less money the US government puts into the economy by paying wages, etc. the less chance he has to accumulate more wealth because there will be less money kicking around for him to lay his hands on...

He's no economist...

What a shame; I thought those posts were helpful. I do wonder what the transgression was.

MaizieD

P>S What Musk doesn't realise is that the less money the US government puts into the economy by paying wages, etc. the less chance he has to accumulate more wealth because there will be less money kicking around for him to lay his hands on...

He's no economist...

At the most extreme, MaizieD, people still got rich using slaves and serfs, etc.

Doesn't Musk want the whole world to be a marketplace run by rich people not governments. (I'm feeling a bit out of my depth here). Perhaps he's relying on others to pay their workers.

Sudden worry ... isn't this a bit like China. Now definitely out of my depth. A world run by rich, unseen people and proles - I've been reading too many dystopian novels! But this man and his power do worry me.

But he's ultimately depending, even though he isn't aware of this, on the state issuing enough money into the economy. That state is the only creator of our money. It has to issue more and more over time to ensure that there is enough money to service the population as it grows. If we were still existing on the amount of money there was in the economy in, say, 1945, we'd all be very, very poor...

(As I said, banks can create money but there's never a surplus as it's all extinguished when the loan is repaid. Only state spending can create a surplus for the rich to grab because it isn't all returned via taxation)

Elon makes tens of billions of dollars off of US government in contracts and subsidies with Space X.

The reason he tried stopping our spending bill is because it would have limited his ability to expand to China, where they pay people pennies on the dollar.

He, and Bezos, have sued the National Labor Relations Board stating they are unconstitutional. Once this case goes through, which it will because of our Trump stacked Supreme Court, it will dismantle labor protections for union workers.

A Trump judge just overturned a Biden overtime ruling, resulting in fewer people being eligible for overtime.

Mars is the perfect place for him.

PoliticsNerd

What a shame; I thought those posts were helpful. I do wonder what the transgression was.

The most recent trite was responding to an estranged (grand)mother who said, "What hurt me most is realising my son is a cruel coward. As he hadn't got the guts to tell me to my face I no longer wanted. "

I stated that that sentiment sounds like it's more likely to come from a bitter ex rather than a caring parent.

Not to derail this politics thread.

Watch a elon/trump rally, than re-read your compelling, yet lengthy posts.

I think the concepts you bring up are too abstract for elon supporters to ever get behind.

I don't know how to phrase it any nicer. This is just the brass tacks.

Fear has been a long-standing tool for controlling the masses, and for good reason. Without enough mindfulness, our fear response outweighs rational thought.

I think for us to unite, we would need to find a way, somehow, to shift their fears (from immigrants & poors) towards the rich.

Yes those poor people who cant think. Probably shouldnt have the vote.

Galaxy

Yes those poor people who cant think. Probably shouldnt have the vote.

So you think that those people who believe that Musk will be the saviour of this country have really thought it through?

MayBee70

Galaxy

Yes those poor people who cant think. Probably shouldnt have the vote.

So you think that those people who believe that Musk will be the saviour of this country have really thought it through?

It's probably a remark in response to the condescending tone referring to the masses.

I meant it in a historical sense. It's a tale as old as the bible. But more recently, less than 100 years ago, hitler used fear to get things done.

Calling our immigrants "vermin", "animals", "criminals", and saying "their eating the dogs and the cats" is eerily familiar.

History comes in cycles I guess.

Galaxy

Yes those poor people who cant think. Probably shouldnt have the vote.

Even though it WOULD be a quick and easy solution. What I was saying was we should be more mindful. In the way we think, and the news sources we consume.

I believe if the masses (i.e. the public) were more informed (whether through better education or government initiatives to curb the rampant mis/disinformation) than we wouldn't need to take away your vote, since you would end up voting correctly (for lack of a better term).

your ?? you ??
Who are you referring to when you say your and you exactly?

Correctly - in whose opinion?

Allira

your ?? you ??
Who are you referring to when you say your and you exactly?

Correctly - in whose opinion?

I guess I had "MaizieD" in mind when writing that as I've only read the most recent posts on this thread, but it's meant to apply to anyone who wrote (lengthy) posts about topics more abstract than the usual fear-mongering that right-wing talking heads like to constantly espouse.

FriedGreenTomatoes2

^People are influenced by propaganda, whether they realise it or not. Some people challenge what they hear or are told, but some don't^

And some people are just sick and tired of what they see in front of their eyes as they walk around their towns and cities. And yes see on all tv channels (so no bias). Many of us truly want Change. Some hoped Starmer would supply it. Some didn’t vote for him because they had a gut feeling he wouldn’t be able to supply it.

Many of our institutions are swollen yet broken. The old boy network stymies Change.

Many who voted Reform (me for one) want real Change. A new broom to sweep clean if you will. Brush out all the deadwood instead of throwing more money at it. “Drain the Swamp” as Trump called it. Any why not?

Our services aren’t working, the NHS is, according to Wes Streeting (of whom I had higher hopes) who said it’s actually broken, the Civil Service seems full of “Yes Ministers”, Starmer is knocking on the EU door just because HE (who wanted that 2nd referendum) thinks it’s a good idea (clue: it’s not, they have better negotiators and will take him to the cleaners for sure) and we are about to go into recession thanks to Reeves policies. Water, rail and energy are expensive and in a mess. Councils spend money unwisely then cry “we’re bankrupt” and raise their demands.

Prisons are full.
Irregular migrants are in our hotels at our expense.
The Police can’t cope (thanks Theresa May the worst Home Secretary we have ever had for hollowing that service out in the good name of austerity).
The judiciary has a huge backlog waiting for Court sittings (yet what’s the point there’s no prison spaces m’Lud).
Knife crime 🔼
Stabbings 🔼
Shoplifting by organised gangs in town centres 🔼🔼
Potholes aren’t filled
There are enough Cass report has been ignored (shamefully) by some institutions
There are enough dentists (unless you happen to have arrived on our shores in a rubber boat).
We just don’t feel we are being listened to any more!

Blimey. And that’s just SOME of the mess citizens of the UK can SEE for themselves.

Vote Reform if you want Real Change. It’s the only way now it’s gonna happen. Patriotic feelings are not unlawful. We ought not to be shy of saying we want better for our country.

You've given an articulate and graphic account of so much that is 'wrong' socially, politically and economically with our country - and we've all watched the deterioration of our public services over the years.

However - I have a question for you FGT, and I know that, unlike some who make bold statements and then 'disappear' from the radar - you actually engage with those who respond to you. So... with that in mind...

All that you have so vividly outlined in your post has come about over the last 14 years or so under the tutelage of the previous government. We can argue - rightly - that they inherited the fall-out from some of the previous government's policies - the Blair years - like, for example, the fall-out from the Iraq war. Nevertheless, the stagnation of our society still happened under Tory rule. From Cameron to Sunak. The Tories are, broadly, free-market, small-state libertarians

So here's my question - predominantly, free-market libertarianism is the ideology espoused by Reform, the free-market economy.

How does that tie with our public services which will require huge injections of public spending if they are to not only survive, but be prevented from collapsing all together? Reform have briefly insinuated they will be 'fixed'- but how?

Tory and Reform ideology spring from the same Hayekian principles, basically, so how will Reform, in effect be any different from the last crop of Tories? Isn't Reform really the new, De Luxe model of Toryism?

Voting correctly dear God. I dont even know where to start.

Galaxy

Voting correctly dear God. I dont even know where to start.

We/everyone has polar opposite views, with each side adamant theirs is the truth. Since our views are mutually exclusive, one side HAS to be correct, logically speaking.

Only time will definitively tell which side was wrong.

Are you talking about imaround's deleted posts on here DroppedOut? Your post seems to bear no relation to what I read and was commenting on.

Wrong thread perhaps?