Who did you vote for? Tories never say..

[gallinello]

Whilst not being a Blairite, Brownite or a 'traditional' Labour voter or supporter - I have no love for the activities of this 'deformed' workers' party, which even out-toryed the Tories in its pandering to the interests of the bosses, vis-a-vis privatisation and futile foreign, military adventures - even I understand this "appalling financial hole" is actually a crisis of Capital and not a result of mis-management on a local, UK level.

And, yes, a large section of the proletariat have always voted for the representatives of their class enemies, but what does that prove other than:

The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas, i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society, is at the same time its ruling intellectual force.

Karl Marx

[????]

you a sociololgy lecturer at a poly galli?

[gallinello]

I wish, Squids! Just another wage-slave trying to make sense of this skewed, corrupt, unjust system.

[LegalEagle-ish]

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> What are you doing back here anyway, Alan?

>

> Are you on a temporary ban from Camberwell Online?

>

>

> I feel I ought to say - there have been a few

> changes round here in your absence. You can't just

> waltz in, take over the steam press and expect to

> be Top Dog again..

Haha - I'd forgotten about that one. Prisoner Cell Block H - all time favourite late night viewing!

[annaj]

"You used to bring me roses,

I wish you would again,

But that was on the outside,

And things were different then......"

[LegalEagle-ish]

Total class!

[josiebee]

I don't really know what crisis of capital means but you can't overlook UK level mismanagement. Gordon Brown as chancellor increased public spending year on year to enormously swell the size of the public sector so that loads of people got dependent on it (I'm thinking of (mis) management, ngo type jobs - increasing the number of bureaucrats etc).He probably did that in the hope that when it came to his turn to be pm we would vote him back in cause we don't want to loose our jobs. So that seems like throwing money away at one level cause in the end I don't think it increases our overall national productivity cause probably so much of the money gets spent on imports. But also I think he encouraged banks to really lower interest rates so that we could all borrow loads of money and not too much attention was paid to how the money got paid back. And then the money couldnt get paid back and the banks collapsed. And it was also to do with our strong links with the US (thank you Mrs Thatcher) so when they went under we did too. But in fairness having the connection with US through the city brought loads of money into the country which the labour government also benefitted from...

Anyway I do agree with Marx there - and I think the ideology of those with money and power would certainly have us believe that it was a crisis of capital rather than their fault....

[Marmora Man]

Well done Maurice and Marmora man for owning up. Can't have been easy.

I guess we all know it's embarassing to admit but I'd still like to better understand why.

It was easy and not at all embarassing - Labour have blown it in spades. I am a Libertarian and prefer smaller government and greater personal responsibility. I voted Conservative as it is the only mainstream political party that has in its programme some elements of what I believe in.

In theory the Liberals should be my ideal home but:

1. They are unlikely to gain power

2. They have signed up, long ago, to a woolly left of centre view of life that requires larger and larger institutions to govern us the people.

My views on tax arise, naturally, out of my libertarian values. Smaller government = lower tax BUT libertarianism also requires the individual to take responsibility for their own actions - making arrangements for educating children (home or independent schools), for health (pay as you go or health insurance) and for old age (family looks after family [as we have done for last 5 years] or pay as you go or insurance).

[SeanMacGabhann]

or pay as you go or insurance).]

And when you set your weekly budget at ?10 or whatever it was last year MM, how far do you think some individuals can "make arrangements" for all of these things. Especially given the fact that in your world the state wouldn't be funding all of the free schools for people on low budgets anyway?

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

Don't be silly Sean, that's what the workhouse is for.

[Marmora Man]

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> or pay as you go or insurance).]

>

> And when you set your weekly budget at ?10 or

> whatever it was last year MM, how far do you think

> some individuals can "make arrangements" for all

> of these things. Especially given the fact that in

> your world the state wouldn't be funding all of

> the free schools for people on low budgets anyway?

But I'd have a larger budget as my taxes would be lower. The whole Libertarian "thing" also includes local charity - something that has taken a major knock since the creation of a welfare state. Pre 1948 there was, contrary to popular belief, a pretty decent healthcare system. Consultants worked fro free in charitable hospitals, employers ran 1p week subscription clubs to also subsidise healthcare etc.

I was talking last week to an arts administrator (now there's a strange profession, becoming a specialist in taking government money to manage amusements)- he was protesting against cuts in Arts Council funding. In the US anyone who makes good is expected, and under pressure from peers and society, to give back something to his community. Most obvious examples are Bill Gates and Warren Buffet but other - less high profile businessmen do this all the time. Whole schools, libraries, orchestras, hospitals are endowed by private charity.

KIngs College Hospital is our local hospital. Unless someone actually visits it - it is unlikely that they'll ever give a penny in charitable donations - and even at a visit the opportunity for giving is usually limited to a fairly dingy "Friends Shop" run by well meaning, but unprofessional, retirees. In the US and Canada most, if not all hospitals employ a professional to raise money for the hospital - with targets measured in millions of dollars.

In the UK we've handed over much of such charitable works to the welfare state. Libertarianism would seek to reverse this and, such actions would do more for binding communities together than ever "The Social Services" would..

[Jeremy]

It sounds like you actually admire the US healthcare system!

[taper]

It's not a good system the US one. Very inefficient. Read Matthew Yglesias's blog for some good analysis.There is much to admire in American philanthropy though I agree. In fact I heard somewhere US banks were the bigget donors to the London Bombings Fund.

[Marmora Man]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> It sounds like you actually admire the US

> healthcare system!

No I admire the philanthropy that is an inescapable part of US life. Everything from people bringing food to neighbours in trouble (happened to an old (British) friend of mine where the local church organised a rota to feed his wife and family while he was in hospital with life threatening diseaase. He wasn't a church goer at all - this was just an expression of community charity) to great hospitality to travellers (I was invited with six friends to a Thanksgiving Dinner simply because I was a vaguely known to a friend of a friend and had just arrived in the area) to the massive gestures of charity from the likes of Gates & Buffet.

Having worked with the US healthcare system in New York, Virginia and Texas I would not describe it as inefficient - certainly not when compared with the NHS. One aspect of US healthcare I do admire is the degree to which clinicians are in charge of their departments, the degree to which they understand the financial imperatives of their world and the relatively small managerial class in their hospitals.

[taper]

It's inefficient in so far as, at the aggregated level, it costs much more than our and comparable systems, for less good health outcomes.

[Brendan]

The swathes of poor people without insurance who go untreated must also add to its efficiency.

I bet it gives them real motivation to get better jobs.

[Alan Dale]

removed

[Marmora Man]

Rather than address my question as to why you are ashamed of being a Tory you have merely demonstrated that you are ashamed. Less ashamed than some but still ashamed.

Why?

I really don't understand you. I voted Tory. I'm certainly not embarrassed that I did. Why do you think I should be?

[Alan Dale]

removed

[Ted Max]

To avoid irritating posters on internet message boards badgering them with leading questions.

[Alan Dale]

removed

[*Bob*]

Ted voted the same as me.

[Alan Dale]

removed

[*Bob*]

no comment

[bigbadwolf]

I can confirm that both *Bob* and Ted Max voted for the highest bidder.