Overpopulation and sustainability in the UK

[Bort 34]

21 minutes ago, sonyc said:

I don't disagree with anything you've said really Bort. It is a sticking plaster and isn't ideal. My point is that there isn't enough philanthropy (but my take on more ethical capitalism is more than mere philanthropy) but that so much more of the debate can be moved towards business having a wider responsibility as a matter of course. Systemised. In other words, one has a pie - but the allocation of the pie must be fairer. And yet why shouldn't there be folk who still attempt to make the pie bigger. An awkward metaphor I accept. Too many people are too greedy. 

I see this change (more responsible) as a way that leads to a wider societal and political change - towards a better understanding of socialism / ideas of fairness. I am unsure whether this should be via gradual change or a faster more direct rebellion (revolution). I'm probably more in tune with a Fabian approach because change can be more easily absorbed. Yet, sometimes in life certain things need far more of a jolt. It needs the masses to rise up. And I'm sure many of us have joined some causes.

I am not a fan either of Labour and the Conservatives - different sides of the same coin? I didn't vote for Blair as I felt he was not radical enough. I wanted his administration to do well because of what went before. The same will go for Starmer. He will (possibly) replace a shocking government. The worst I have known. Yet, I expect I won't feel he is going to be radical enough for me. I do understand though Starmer has to try to be electable. Maybe a Labour win will lead to more progressive policies. It's a hope. I await the manifesto.

I don't expect much change in my lifetime. I feel my days are limited. But maybe in the lifetime of my children?...not sure about that either. The one positive thing I do see is much more discussion on fairness. Younger people think differently to those who went before. That gives me some hope. 

The Japanese article is interesting yes. Industrial / corporate working practices do appear to be different. Nothing's perfect of course. 

 

I can relate to a lot of this line of thinking, back when I was less radical than I am now. The problem is that you can't force the private sector to work more in the common interest unless you have a strong government which exerts authority over that sector. In Labour and the Conservatives, as you allude to, we have two parties who have both been captured by corporate influence and are currently unable to deliver the change we need. If/when he wins, Starmer will bring in some milquetoast welfare policies at best, because that's all he'll be allowed to do without Labour losing their funding.

So, alternatives? As you say, the question has been reform or revolution. In Corbyn here and Sanders in the US, we have two recent examples of candidates who wanted to reform society in the interest of fairness. Either of them winning would have represented a step in the right direction. Instead, they were both kneecapped by a hostile media and right-wing elements within their own parties. Meaningful reform which threatens the status quo will always be blocked by the capitalist class.

Which brings us to revolution. It would require extreme social dissatisfaction with current conditions, extensive organisation, and a unified party with clear goals, but there are historical precedents for success. The most interesting in my opinion is the CPC in China - they've vastly, vastly improved living conditions for their population and for the last 40 years or so (following the post-Mao reforms), they've done so by utilising state authority and central planning to direct the power of capitalist development so it operates for the benefit of wider society. Is that so different to what we want, and need, to happen in this country?

Before anyone jumps in and pipes up with something along the lines of "that's authoritarianism, which is basically fascism!" - if we look at the Nazis, their stance was that "enterprises should be in private hands wherever possible". Fascism erodes state ownership, and the CPC are doing no such thing (not to mention the lack of eugenics-based mass murder - no, not even the Uyghurs, their population and life expectancy are increasing if you actually look at the data).

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

15 hours ago, wcorkcanary said:

Spoken like a true Cont. As always.

Exploitation is a fact not a lazy attitude you fukkin moron.

Wrong. Explotation is people not exercising their options. I read recently of complaints that prisoners in the USA were being exploited by being paid a few doors for their labour. Well how about choosing not to commit the crime that got you incarcerated?

[Bort 34]

1 hour ago, NFN FC said:

I see why you put this here but I think it's largely irrelevant. Much of this could be people that are not being cared for properly, also people who don't feed themselves the right food. Not necessarily people that can't afford to feed themselves. 

Wages in this country have been consistently falling, relative to inflation, since 2008.

I understand that it's comforting to dismiss those statistics as the result of individual circumstances and choices rather than societal issues, as it makes you feel protected from them. I urge you to consider the possibility that a lot of people suffer undeservingly in situations that could have been prevented through different government policy, and we have the right to demand change.

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

15 hours ago, Bort said:

"for the capitalists to get the return and the worker performs the the bare minimum they can get away with giving. That sounds far closer to socialism to me."

Yes, you can rewrite it to be completely inconsistent, congrats.

The rest of your post can be addressed quite succinctly by this extract from Engels' "What is a Fair Day's Wage?"

"As, according to political economists, wages and working days are fixed by competition, fairness seems to require that both sides should have the same fair start on equal terms. But that is not the case. The capitalist, if he cannot agree with the laborer, can afford to wait, and live upon his capital. The workman cannot. He has but wages to live upon, and must therefore take work when, where and at what terms he can get it. The workman has no fair start. He is fearfully handicapped by hunger. Yet, according to the political economy of the capitalist class, that is the very pink of fairness."

Well Engels is coming from the direction of supporting a particular ideology so is not a neutral observer of economic systems and it shows within his narrative where he is trying to shoe-horn one particular scenario where many possible scenarios could exist.

That is why I said in my original post that I thought we were looking at this in a low-resolution manner and why I rewrote your quote in an equally valid manner to demonstrate how easy it is to get any result when you're looking at a highly abstracted level.

I could criticse Engels attempt to bring fairness into an economic appraisal since a system that ìs based on demand and supply at its core has no morality attached to it. And that doesn't mean the system is immoral which many on the left make the mistake of believing (and hence everything that they believe following on from this is therefore wrong), it just means morality is not part of an organic capitalist system.

 

Now this isn't to say that you can't or shouldn't attempt to build morality into an advanced economic system but I argue you need a light touch as interfering can have unintended consequences as the Marxist experiments around the world has proved.

But I do agree with your description of the development of economic systems throughout the ages and how capitalism is the latest iteration, and will continue to evolve in the future. And while I believe in the importance of free markets to supply our needs in the most efficiently known way, I see dangerous and disturbing developments in capitalism evolving into globalism. There is a danger that when enterprises become global and more powerful than nation states they become unaccountable. We see this happening at the moment especially with tech companies and their power to control information. It's time for these companies to be broken up to prevent them from being an unaccountable supranational power.

Edited March 23, 2023 by Rock The Boat

[Rock The Boat 1,332]

And since it seems not to be mentioned anywhere else. Congratulations to the Dutch farmers who are currently fighting against the Dutch government who wants to remove 50% of the farmers and 20% of the livestock.

The Dutch farmers party received the largest number of seats in the latest regional elections and now form a powerful block in the Senate. People power at work

[Bort 34]

5 minutes ago, Rock The Boat said:

But I do agree with your description of the development of economic systems throughout the ages and how capitalism is the latest iteration, and will continue to evolve in the future. And while I believe in the importance of free markets to supply our needs in the most efficiently known way, I see dangerous and disturbing developments in capitalism evolving into globalism. There is a danger that when enterprises become global and more powerful than nation states they become unaccountable. We see this happening at the moment especially with tech companies and their power to control information. It's time for these companies to be broken up to prevent them from being an unaccountable supranational power.

You may be interested in Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism. It covers this theme thoroughly.

[wcorkcanary 4,342]

1 hour ago, Rock The Boat said:

Wrong. Explotation is people not exercising their options. I read recently of complaints that prisoners in the USA were being exploited by being paid a few doors for their labour. Well how about choosing not to commit the crime that got you incarcerated?

You dont think the people mining Cobalt in the Congo are being exploited...oh yeah its their fault for being poor and living where they do.... you,  Sir are a blind bigotted Cont of the highest order, a heartless shoite of a man ... scum, vile barsteward . Greedy **** with no humanity. 

[NFN FC 1,123]

1 hour ago, Bort said:

Wages in this country have been consistently falling, relative to inflation, since 2008. Yes

I understand that it's comforting to dismiss those statistics as the result of individual circumstances and choices rather than societal issues, as it makes you feel protected from them. No it doesn't. I urge you to consider the possibility that a lot of people suffer undeservingly in situations that could have been prevented through different government policy, and we have the right to demand change. I agree. 

The point I originally stated was about people being fed whether they work or not. 

I agree with you that relative income has dropped over 15 years and people have suffered for it. I don't agree that that has caused malnutrition though. 

Not much will change with the cretins in charge. You can demand change all you like but there is no way the government will change the system. 

The world is not sustainable, viva la robot revolution! 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,602]

On 23/03/2023 at 16:15, wcorkcanary said:

You dont think the people mining Cobalt in the Congo are being exploited...oh yeah its their fault for being poor and living where they do.... you,  Sir are a blind bigotted Cont of the highest order, a heartless shoite of a man ... scum, vile barsteward . Greedy **** with no humanity. 

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/congo-sees-deal-6-bln-china-mining-contract-overhaul-this-year-finmin-2023-01-18/

They're producing the Cobalt for Communist China though, so it's probably 'to each according to his need' for the Congo workers in true Communist spirit; it's just considered that they don't need very much.

[Bort 34]

12 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/congo-sees-deal-6-bln-china-mining-contract-overhaul-this-year-finmin-2023-01-18/

They're producing the Cobalt for Communist China though, so it's probably 'to each according to his need' for the Congo workers in true Communist spirit; it's just considered that they don't need very much.

Do you think the DRC-China economic arrangement is less beneficial to the DRC than an equivalent agreement with the IMF or World Bank? If so, why? 

Since they signed this particular deal with China in 2007, the GDP of the DRC has increased by 52%. Life expectancy is up 5 years. Do you think Chinese investment might be a contributing factor?

How do you propose the development of a country like the DRC should be funded?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,602]

8 hours ago, Bort said:

Do you think the DRC-China economic arrangement is less beneficial to the DRC than an equivalent agreement with the IMF or World Bank? If so, why? 

Since they signed this particular deal with China in 2007, the GDP of the DRC has increased by 52%. Life expectancy is up 5 years. Do you think Chinese investment might be a contributing factor?

How do you propose the development of a country like the DRC should be funded?

So Communism has gone from a utopian ideal in your view, giving workers the power, to being possibly not quite as bad as the West? That growth in GDP is largely not making it into the pockets of the miners.

Life expectancy in the Congo is about 60. In China, an economic and military superpower that calls itself Communist, it's 78. Even with our health service falling to bits, ours is 80. Communism is an authoritarian confidence trick; confidence tricksters with noble rhetoric using the resentment of those who have nothing to take power for themselves from those who have it.

Edited March 28, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

5 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

So Communism has gone from a utopian ideal in your view, giving workers the power, to being possibly not quite as bad as the West? That growth in GDP is largely not making it into the pockets of the miners.

Life expectancy in the Congo is about 60. In China, an economic and military superpower that calls itself Communist, it's 78. Even with our health service falling to bits, ours is 80. Communism is an authoritarian confidence trick; confidence tricksters with noble rhetoric using the resentment of those who have nothing to take power for themselves from those who have it.

Do you shop at Primark ever?

[littleyellowbirdie 2,602]

9 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Do you shop at Primark ever?

They've been caught with child Labour in their supply chain haven't they? They're dropping suppliers because of the damage to the brand and potential loss of consumer confidence. That's the power of the right to individual choice in a society, which is not a feature of Communism.

In contrast, everybody knows about the Congo miners, but what difference does that make?

[Bort 34]

43 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

So Communism has gone from a utopian ideal in your view, giving workers the power, to being possibly not quite as bad as the West? That growth in GDP is largely not making it into the pockets of the miners.

Life expectancy in the Congo is about 60. In China, an economic and military superpower that calls itself Communist, it's 78. Even with our health service falling to bits, ours is 80. Communism is an authoritarian confidence trick; confidence tricksters with noble rhetoric using the resentment of those who have nothing to take power for themselves from those who have it.

I recommend reading Engels' Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.

What was the life expectancy in China in 1950? What was it in the UK? (Hint: the gap was quite a lot bigger than today).

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

36 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

They've been caught with child Labour in their supply chain haven't they? They're dropping suppliers because of the damage to the brand and potential loss of consumer confidence. That's the power of the right to individual choice in a society, which is not a feature of Communism.

In contrast, everybody knows about the Congo miners, but what difference does that make?

Do you really believe some of these banana republics are any different to China? That they have a choice?

We had friends who wouldn't shop at Primark because of child labour but always asked us to buy their kids pyjamas for them if we ever went in. Give me strength and an alternative high moral ground.

[How I Wrote Elastic Man 1,198]

@littleyellowbirdie

Humans to achieve immortality in 8 years

Forget about a few people on boats,  this is gonna cause some serious overcrowding 🤣

On the bright side, we will all be able to agrue about Brexit, PR, immigrants, dodgy politicians etc until the end of time! 

[littleyellowbirdie 2,602]

On 28/03/2023 at 22:30, keelansgrandad said:

Do you really believe some of these banana republics are any different to China? That they have a choice?

We had friends who wouldn't shop at Primark because of child labour but always asked us to buy their kids pyjamas for them if we ever went in. Give me strength and an alternative high moral ground.

Banana republics are massively different to China. China is a massive military and economic superpower that calls itself Communist; tinpot dictatorships a completely different kettle of fish. China exploits the greed and corruption of the rulers of these tinpot countries for their own gain, the very antithesis of what the Communist fanboys claim it's all about. You can point to the GDP growth of DRC, but you can't point to the workers getting any benefit out of it, which should matter to China if it was as invested in Communism as some pretend.

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Banana republics are massively different to China. China is a massive military and economic superpower that calls itself Communist; tinpot dictatorships a completely different kettle of fish. China exploits the greed and corruption of the rulers of these tinpot countries for their own gain, the very antithesis of what the Communist fanboys claim it's all about. You can point to the GDP growth of DRC, but you can't point to the workers getting any benefit out of it, which should matter to China if it was as invested in Communism as some pretend.

Exploitation is not just the province of the Chinese. China has lifted the living standards of its people and they now can understand why we in the west prefer our way. 

But of course our living standards were lifted on the back of the East India Company for example. Military, particularly, NAval power gave us the might is right ability to forge ahead. And as recently as KArzai, we have been happy to put someone in control who is as odious in terms of corruption as any other. There are no degrees of corruption. You either are or are not.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,602]

35 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

Exploitation is not just the province of the Chinese. China has lifted the living standards of its people and they now can understand why we in the west prefer our way. 

But of course our living standards were lifted on the back of the East India Company for example. Military, particularly, NAval power gave us the might is right ability to forge ahead. And as recently as KArzai, we have been happy to put someone in control who is as odious in terms of corruption as any other. There are no degrees of corruption. You either are or are not.

It did, and it gave us the might to make big inroads into dismantling slavery in empires other than our own when the democratic consensus in the UK favoured that sentiment in our society.

Justice itself depends on somebody having the might to enforce it. The difference is over the extent to which they favour self-enrichment over justice.

Completely disagree with your binary view of corruption. A train conductor who lets friends travel for free isn't comparable to someone who gets someone imprisoned on false charges for political motives.

Edited March 30, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Bort 34]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Banana republics are massively different to China. China is a massive military and economic superpower that calls itself Communist; tinpot dictatorships a completely different kettle of fish. China exploits the greed and corruption of the rulers of these tinpot countries for their own gain, the very antithesis of what the Communist fanboys claim it's all about. You can point to the GDP growth of DRC, but you can't point to the workers getting any benefit out of it, which should matter to China if it was as invested in Communism as some pretend.

As I've already mentioned the five-year increase in DRC life expectancy since 2007, let's look at some other figures:

Infant mortality rate has decreased by 32%

Literacy rate has increased from 61% to 80%

Their Human Development Index score has increased from 0.406 to 0.479

Sounds like maybe... the workers are benefiting? But if you have any stats to the contrary, feel free to share.

[littleyellowbirdie 2,602]

6 minutes ago, Bort said:

As I've already mentioned the five-year increase in DRC life expectancy since 2007, let's look at some other figures:

Infant mortality rate has decreased by 32%

Literacy rate has increased from 61% to 80%

Their Human Development Index score has increased from 0.406 to 0.479

Sounds like maybe... the workers are benefiting? But if you have any stats to the contrary, feel free to share.

So it's improved a bit. Compared to us,  it's **** poor, and that's a lot of wealth coming out of those mines. Compared to China, the ones exploiting the resources, it's **** poor as well.

Not exactly your fantasy vision of an empowered workforce is it?

Edited March 30, 2023 by littleyellowbirdie

[Bort 34]

4 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

So it's improved a bit. Compared to us,  it's **** poor, and that's a lot of wealth coming out of those mines. Compared to China, the ones exploiting the resources, it's **** poor as well.

Not exactly your fantasy vision of an empowered workforce is it?

Hahaaa, nice moving of the goalposts.

"The Congolese public aren't benefiting from this arrangement!" 

"Okay maybe they are, but they're not magically as developed as China or the UK within the space of 15 years!"

If you have any knowledge of what Marxism actually is, you'll understand that Marxists place far more emphasis on analysing the direction and rate of human development than looking at a snapshot of the current circumstances in isolation. You keep attacking a supposed "utopia" or "fantasy vision" - that's idealism, not Marxism.

As Marx himself said:

"Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence."

If international exploitation of resources is genuinely a concern of yours, you should be cheering on the abolition of unipolar global capitalism. 

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

2 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

It did, and it gave us the might to make big inroads into dismantling slavery in empires other than our own when the democratic consensus in the UK favoured that sentiment in our society.

Justice itself depends on somebody having the might to enforce it. The difference is over the extent to which they favour self-enrichment over justice.

Completely disagree with your binary view of corruption. A train conductor who lets friends travel for free isn't comparable to someone who gets someone imprisoned on false charges for political motives.

We are all blessed with hypocrisy and victimless crime is seen as acceptable.