Kindly Join Me In Wishing Baroness Thatcher Continued Good Health...

[Brendan]

CI

Have you ever thought about that fact that we use Roman script to write in but we ditched their numerical system for the Arabic one as is it just so much less cumbersome. While the Roman System works very logically, almost like an abacus, the Arabic system relies more on symbolism which simplifies it.

[????]

not really...I could just change it to "Century"

[immaterial]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> Of course.

>

> Should'a guessed... 'Immaterial' it's like,

> 'Whatever'

>

> Brendan, I think the challenge with those

> political formats weren't technical, but

> psychological.

>

> Humanity doesn't flourish in those environments.

> The lack of reward for extra effort undermines the

> desire to contribute, we work to the lowest common

> denominator, we are atrophied.

>

> Most left wing revolutionaries don't envisage this

> outcome, they merely demonstrate a poisonous greed

> where the 'redistribution' of wealth gives them

> more for doing less.

This, Keef, as an example of rightist drivel.

Ignoring the altruistic, cooperative, communitarian nature of man; focussing instead on the base, uncivilized drive to obtain more, whether that be profit or advantage over others.

Immaterial, in the sense of without matter.

[macroban]

A ~real~ Quid is 240.

I still do Babylonian maths.

[*Bob*]

immaterial Wrote:

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

> Immaterial, in the sense of without matter.

What do you do for a living?

Just out of interest.

[Marmora Man]

There is no reason why a modern state can?t take the stance to run all essential industries and services and run them with accountability to an elected parliament and therefore the electorate.

A fully Socialist / Marxist society would lack an essential mechanism for efficient management of the economy. The success of an economy depends upon its ability to allocate scarce resources - goods, labour or capital. Failure to do this effectively will lead, quickly, to difficulties and shortages of some goods and over-production of others.

In today?s market economy prices provide the necessary mechanism. A "State" that owns everything is essentially working in a "priceless" economy.

In a market economy if a good becomes scarce (or is of a perceived higher quality) its price rises, if it is in oversupply (or is perceived to be of poor quality) its price falls. In a totally managed economy where everything is in public ownership these pricing signals are absent and have to be replaced by some form of centralist oversight that assesses the needs of the country, regions, industries and individuals.

This inevitably creates anomalies of the sort that were routinely seen in the old USSR where the consumer had no mechanism by which to choose between competing goods - nor could the manufacturer assess any signals from their consumers, since there was no choice and non competition.

Adam Smith?s ?invisible hand? has proved over time to be the most efficient method of delivering the necessary signals and mechanisms to deliver an effective economy. It forces people to think about what other people want. Smith identified two ways to obtain the co-operation of other people ? the first was to appeal to the benevolence and goodwill of others. Smith felt this lead to a quote ?servile and fawning? fashion which he found quote ?repulsive? ? he said it generally met with very limited success. The alternative was to appeal to people's self-interest.

Quote: ?Man has almost constant occasion for the help of his brethren, and it is in vain for him to expect it from their benevolence only. He will be more likely to prevail if he can interest their self-love in his favour, and show them that it is for their own advantage to do for him what he requires of them. Whoever offers to another a bargain of any kind, proposes to do this. Give me what I want, and you shall have this which you want, is the meaning of every such offer; and it is the manner that we obtain from one another the far greater part of those good offices which we stand in need of. It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own interest. We address ourselves, not to their humanity but to their self-love?.

[Marmora Man]

Ignoring the altruistic, cooperative, communitarian nature of man; focussing instead on the base, uncivilized drive to obtain more, whether that be profit or advantage over others.

Immaterial - where, outside of small family / tribal groupings, does this altruistic, cooperative, communitarian society exist. Most such idealistic societies devolve into a "Lord of the Flies" type of chaos over time.

As a recipe for a new national / global society it has proved, time after time, as impossible to implement. Adam Smith had it right, see my post above.

[Alan Dale]

Removed

[*Bob*]

Alan Dale Wrote:

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

> You need competition for effective price

> discovery.

> How much should a train ticket from London to

> Wakefield cost?

> Without hundreds of parallel tracks then we cannot

> rely on true competition. What does that leave?

The coach, I suppose.

[Marmora Man]

Alan Dale Wrote:

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

> You need competition for effective price

> discovery.

>

> Without hundreds of parallel tracks then we cannot

> rely on true competition. What does that leave?

Road (car,motorbike, bicycle, coach), air (scheduled airlines, private airlines, helicopter), canals, by foot.

[DaveR]

Or hitching, or taking a cab, or flying (to Leeds-Bradford).

Although isn't the real question how much you'd have to pay someone to leave London and go to Wakefield?

[Chick]

Hanging is still too good for her.

[Keef]

That was constructive. Well done.

[Huguenot]

The irony Immaterial, is that you demonstrate on this thread exactly the kind of personality traits that would undermine your ideal society.

You seem to doubt your fellow man, to accuse them of crimes they haven't committed. Despite your accusations most of the correspondents on the forum would be the first to pick you up if you fell, and the first to hand you a tenner if you were down on your luck.

Regardless of this, you see enemies within, you have no trust, and demonstrate no capacity to engage with your fellow man outside of disparagement and abuse.

This is no way to create an egalitarian environment where people are comfortable working communally. Trust is a two way street.

Physician, heal thyself.

[immaterial]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> You seem to doubt your fellow man, to accuse them

> of crimes they haven't committed. Despite your

> accusations most of the correspondents on the

> forum would be the first to pick you up if you

> fell, and the first to hand you a tenner if you

> were down on your luck.

>

> Regardless of this, you see enemies within, you

> have no trust, and demonstrate no capacity to

> engage with your fellow man outside of

> disparagement and abuse.

Intriguing response.

All this character analysis from you after just a few one/two-line postings on my part, commenting on the views of a cabal of South London reactionaries (you know who you are!) Little did I realise it would elicit such a well-balanced, considered, profound analysis of my psychological failings.

For this I am truly indebted to you, but tell me how long have you been suffering from this pathological urge to over-exaggerate?

[gallinello]

Welcome to the Forum; better get used to it!

[????]

Reactionary=people who disagree with my point of views....

[DaveR]

Immaterial, have you met PROSouthwark? Or gallinello?

I think you'll all get on famously. Actually, knowing the Left, you'll hate each other and plot endlessly behind each other's backs, and bicker about whether it should be "People's Co-operative Democratic Movement" or Co-operative Democratic People's Movement".

[Keef]

Splitter!!!

[david_carnell]

Splitters!

Edit: You bugger Keef - 30 secs too quick with Monty Python references.

[woofmarkthedog]

immaterial Wrote:

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

> but tell me

> how long have you been suffering from this

> pathological urge to over-exaggerate?

.....................................................................

Ages & ages.....& them some...why?

[Huguenot]

Over-exaggerate?

Judging by that exemplary tautology there'll be a pots and kettles scenario here.

Mind you, through the fug of your rage I'm not sure if you'll see it ;-)

Let's have some more silly blather shall we?

I had the good fortune to live in China for a couple of years, but I didn't see you there?

[AllforNun]

actually i'll wish her well with 2 bricks

[Eliza.D]

LegalEagle-ish Wrote:

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

> Jah Lush Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Ha! Tony light blue touch paper and stand well

> > back.

> >

> > I hate Thatcher and all that she stands for and

> > when she dies and hopefully it will be soon I

> will

> > one of many thousands of people queuing up to

> > dance on her grave.

>

>

> Me too!!

Me three and we are in good company. Elvis Cosetello wrote 'Tramp the dirt down'about how he felt about her.

[Tony.London Suburbs]

Lets be frank and honest here, Margeret did have her faults.

The important point some Posters seem to be missing is that she meant well.

Undeniably she inherited plenty of mess and sorted it out in her own inimitable fashion and there were casualities.

Let him or her cast the first stone, I say...