• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

nationalisation of industry

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,879
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Seams like a good way of makeing things fairer for the poorer people in society. It worked in the uk untill thatcher messed things up as far as i know. Yet on the other hand theres plenty of places where nationalisation has messed up the economy and sometimes left people starveing. Du think nationalisation could work in places like the U.K and U.S
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Why is everyone trying to socialize a perfectly good country?
 

Comrade Brian

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
0
Location
NE, Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What perfectly good country?:confused:

I think nationalization would work great for a short while, but ultimatly they'd probably collapse. I'm for publicization. And local planning, like in communes.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
306
Location
Geelong, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Red dave how little you know. Fact the British economy was F%*ked long before Thatcher or any of the Torries came into power. Ask my parents they lived through the Labour years of the early seventies, where there was high unemployment, crippling strikes. Yes socialist paradise!

The steel mills, coal mines, shipyards, and all else nostalgic of Great Britain were crumbling long before Thatcher and the dreaded Torries.

Oh and British Leyland, the publicly owned motor company was stuffed in the 1960's! That company could not make a profit, the British government had to constantly pour money into that enterprise each year to keep it running. Which I might add could have been spent on such things as health care, roads, education etc.

Also British public made cars were crap in build quilty compared, to their German (private company) built counter parts.

Fact phone calls in Australia, have become cheaper, since the partial privitisation of Telecom Australia, and the deregulation and subsequent set up of competition in the telecommunications market.

Why should government have a monopoly on business? You wouldn't tolerate it in the private sector, so why would you tolerate it in government sector?

Lastly, Thatcher gave the bitter medicine that Britain needed. People call her a bitch, in part because we are brought up to believe that women should be naturing, people didn't like to see a woman that was like one of the boys. That's why the male dominated unions probably hated her.

Also Britain's current economic prosperity (that kicks the crap out of sluggish Germany, and France economies), is based on the economic policies of Thatcher. People seem to think that economic policies that governments create, will instantly bear fruit. It doesn't work that way. It takes time.

Capitalism is not the enemy of the people, monopolies; government, or private are the real enemies of the people.

Competition is a beautiful thing!

Free markets, free trade, free people and prosperous people.

Libertarianism all the way!:mrgreen:
 

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,879
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Australianlibertarian said:
Red dave how little you know. Fact the British economy was F%*ked long before Thatcher or any of the Torries came into power. Ask my parents they lived through the Labour years of the early seventies, where there was high unemployment, crippling strikes. Yes socialist paradise!

The steel mills, coal mines, shipyards, and all else nostalgic of Great Britain were crumbling long before Thatcher and the dreaded Torries.

Oh and British Leyland, the publicly owned motor company was stuffed in the 1960's! That company could not make a profit, the British government had to constantly pour money into that enterprise each year to keep it running. Which I might add could have been spent on such things as health care, roads, education etc.

Also British public made cars were crap in build quilty compared, to their German (private company) built counter parts.

Fact phone calls in Australia, have become cheaper, since the partial privitisation of Telecom Australia, and the deregulation and subsequent set up of competition in the telecommunications market.

Why should government have a monopoly on business? You wouldn't tolerate it in the private sector, so why would you tolerate it in government sector?

Lastly, Thatcher gave the bitter medicine that Britain needed. People call her a bitch, in part because we are brought up to believe that women should be naturing, people didn't like to see a woman that was like one of the boys. That's why the male dominated unions probably hated her.

Also Britain's current economic prosperity (that kicks the crap out of sluggish Germany, and France economies), is based on the economic policies of Thatcher. People seem to think that economic policies that governments create, will instantly bear fruit. It doesn't work that way. It takes time.

Capitalism is not the enemy of the people, monopolies; government, or private are the real enemies of the people.

Competition is a beautiful thing!

Free markets, free trade, free people and prosperous people.

Libertarianism all the way!:mrgreen:
I dont know a great deal about that period in time but didnt the differernce between rich and poor get alot bigger as a result of Thatchers policys? [ and those of her concervative sucessors Major and Blair] In my view prosperity is pretty useless if its only the rich who prosper. A government monopoly on buissness could work well if the government worked in the peoples intrest. Free markets merely give power to the rich who work in there own intrest I.M.H.O .
 

MiamiFlorida

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
434
Reaction score
1
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Red_Dave said:
Seams like a good way of makeing things fairer for the poorer people in society. It worked in the uk untill thatcher messed things up as far as i know. Yet on the other hand theres plenty of places where nationalisation has messed up the economy and sometimes left people starveing. Du think nationalisation could work in places like the U.K and U.S
Government run industry can only result in inefficiency and bureaucracy...and in some countries....corruption.

An industry without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, nationalization is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail.
 

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,879
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Comrade Brian said:
What perfectly good country?:confused:

I think nationalization would work great for a short while, but ultimatly they'd probably collapse. I'm for publicization. And local planning, like in communes.
Didnt they try that in the U.S.S.R ? Alot of people starved in russia if i remember rightly.
 
Joined
Jul 26, 2005
Messages
1,011
Reaction score
306
Location
Geelong, Australia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Have you got any examples of how Thatcher was creating policies that just benefited the rich?

You tell me why governments should be allowed to have monoploy on business enterprise, and entrepreneurship?
 

Red_Dave

Libertarian socialist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
6,879
Reaction score
1,715
Location
Staffs, England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Australianlibertarian said:
Have you got any examples of how Thatcher was creating policies that just benefited the rich?

You tell me why governments should be allowed to have monoploy on business enterprise, and entrepreneurship?
Like i said the gap between rich and poor went up under thatcher, plus the poll tax definatly worked in the intrest of the rich as did thatchers policys on houseing by leading to the mess we are in today.

I think buissness enterprise controlled by the government could potentially be alot better than buissness controled by the rich. The rich use there control over buissness to make more money. To do this they will produce there produce or service in the cheapest way possible and at the highest possible price. Who does this benefit accept those at the top? Under an effective electoral system a government in control of buissness could make it work for the poor rather than the rich.
 

Comrade Brian

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2005
Messages
1,239
Reaction score
0
Location
NE, Minnesota
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Australianlibertarian said:
Competition is a beautiful thing!

Free markets, free trade, free people and prosperous people.
Competition, like wars.

Free markets just free people up to the exploitation of the Bourgeois.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Comrade Brian said:
Competition, like wars.

Free markets just free people up to the exploitation of the Bourgeois.

do you waste your time all day thinking about this or do you have something more productive to do?
 
Top Bottom