‘New model capitalism’ [and less societal dualism]

[Amorphos]

‘New model capitalism’ [and less societal dualism]

Most people think there is only the left/right and middle ground, that there is either capitalism or communism and that socialism is somewhere along the lines of communism. It doesn’t have to be like that! There are many capitalist models, and the one I propose simply gives people what they often think capitalism is. A capitalism where we get what we ‘earn’ and where people cannot extrapolate one’s from you unfairly or without even asking you. Remember; FAIR IS NOT EQUAL!

Societal dualism; private sector and public sector, what’s the big difference? …and why vote for governments who just want to pick on the public sector and the unemployed etc, leaving the private sector to do as it so wishes.

Both the private and public sector provide services, we live in a largely consumer society where many aspects of that provides similar services. The only difference really is in the funding, the public sector is paid for in our council tax and the private sector pays for itself.
…but no wait, we pay income tax which largely goes to paying the national debt and hence funding and centralising money to facilitate centralising capitalism, so what’s the big difference there? Equally if we did not pay for the services provided by the public sector via taxes, we would either have none of the services [schools etc] they provide, or we would pay for them by private means ~ or in other words privatise the public sector. In the latter case if we were given the choice to either pay council tax or not, many people would not pay it and many others would feel they cannot [even though they currently are doing so], so that means the bill for those who pay would get higher, and you would end up with a very unfair and impoverished society where many people would get the butt end of the bargain.

When we vote for a government in a democratic society, it should be one that governs the whole of society. Society doesn’t come in parts, it is a complete entity where every aspects affects the rest. Private sector people are not any more precious than the public sector, they should be accountable as any other, surely we have learned that society is not simply about letting people do what they want, because in most cases one persons freedom detracts from the next persons.

Secondly; you voted for the recession! Socialism has been systematically destroyed since the early 80’s, and to such a degree that terms like ‘socialism’ and ‘left wing’ are almost swearwords. When labour did get in it was a comparatively flaccid opposition to the right, and offered no attack on capitalism instead aligning itself to some degree with that. Eventually with no opposition and a lot of pressure for more ‘freedom’ from businesses and banks, capitalism was allowed to virtually play roulette with the worlds money and our lives [some derivatives caused a lot of suffering in the third world], once you take away all the checks and balances facilitated by the presence of a strong opposition, we took away the accountability and the system virtually collapsed. You wanted it and you got it!

Solution; stop believing in societal dualism, don’t accept that private businesses and banks can do what they want, and demand that future government decentralise the banks and corporate business forming them into cooperatives. It is not their right to do as they wish where that effects you negatively, by removing societal dualism wherever we find it, we will produce a far better society.

[JNS]

That will never fly with anyone, as people will complain that the goverment is infringing upon their "freedoms", and most westeners would rather have individual freedoms than have anything that benefits society as a whole. Coops seem like a nice idea, but people who don't understand how they work will quickly asosiate with the ultimate swear word, communism. Although i'm all for reducing the power of banks, as they have a disproportional amount of power in our society, when in reality they produce nothing, and their principal service is based on essentially handling money. That is basically the biggest flaw our system has.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

actually the recession was mostly caused by many banks and other financial organisations commiting illegal practices. And they didn't even benefit from most of them...I mean anyone knows a 100%+ mortgage is a sure way not get your money back

but laws concerning the financial sector are so complex that few except those supposed to be regulating it really understands what's happening, so it gets no media attention when the regulators fail.

[Amorphos]

That will never fly with anyone, as people will complain that the goverment is infringing upon their "freedoms", and most westeners would rather have individual freedoms than have anything that benefits society as a whole.

What individual freedom is that? The one where a fifth of our earned moneys are taken by the national debt investors, or where the city takes a percentage of the wealth of businesses as a permanent loan [stocks n shares], or where we pay the interest on bailing out the banks? What is individual freedom, that alone is a big question but more than that we have to find a solution to stop recession from happening, so what’s your alternative capitalism?

I agree that banks power is the first problem to solve, but as they hold all the money I don’t see how that can be averted without nationalising them all, the only alternative to that I can think of is forming coops [not workers coops!] with regional and national banks owned and run by the people and businesses.

actually the recession was mostly caused by many banks and other financial organisations commiting illegal practices. And they didn't even benefit from most of them...I mean anyone knows a 100%+ mortgage is a sure way not get your money back

but laws concerning the financial sector are so complex that few except those supposed to be regulating it really understands what's happening, so it gets no media attention when the regulators fail.

Indeed, so what it needs is to be controlled and in a democracy that means by the people, otherwise their individual freedoms are trampling all over ours. The government could make stricter laws and rules but its only a matter of the banks finding ways to exploit them, or putting pressure on oversees governments e.g. american, to give them what they want.

As it stands banks are more powerful than nations, and that is always going to be a bad thing. 

[chilon]

actually the recession was mostly caused by many banks and other financial organisations commiting illegal practices. And they didn't even benefit from most of them...I mean anyone knows a 100%+ mortgage is a sure way not get your money back

There were not really illegal practices. The laws had already been changed systematically the last Clinton years.

The problem were unrealistic and irrational mathematical models that allowed some firms to get leverage 30-1, 40-1 based on "securities" that were just repackaged mortgage debts. The mortgage debts themselves were based on a shady industry that essentially collapsed under its unsustainable model (see Countrywide for the biggest example).

There was a hell of a lot of immoral practices but not that many illegal ones (unless you count the periphery like Bernie Madoff type stuff).

[Amorphos]

^^^^ so do you think we can just put better laws into place and that alone will stop anything like this happening again? Economics are cyclic, so maybe these things are resultant of something far deeper, and that one way or another those cycles will throw up the odd large imbalance ~ which to us means recession. Equally I don’t trust that amount of power in the hands of a few individuals, people, even good people are easily corrupted and they usually still think they are doing the right thing, that ‘that’s how it is’ and such thinking.

[Denny Crane!]

Actually IrelandB that is not true most of the so called 'toxic debt' was mortgages that were up to date and getting paid.