5 ms·

Is nationalisation of the entire economy to state ownership really "progressive"? That clause has some pretty nasty overtones IMHO.

billyjobob 14y ago
You may not be familiar with the history of nationalization in Britain. (Apologies if you are.) We used to have many nationalized industries. They didn't work very well, but their prices were cheap. The Tory party and the New Labour party privatized these industries, and now they work even less well, and also charge very high prices and make massive profits for the prime minister's friends while still relying on massive taxpayer subsidies. So for us in Britain a return to nationalization would indeed be progressive.
- mibbitier 14y ago
  If we hadn't privatised industries like British Leyland, British Steel, etc etc etc, we would be bankrupt and in the grips of unions. Maybe you weren't born when this was going on, but "prices were cheap" is idiotic. British leyland, British steel, etc etc were some of the most loss making, unproductive industries. If by "prices were cheap" you mean "were massively subsidized by the government so we were paying through the nose for them anyway", then agreed. Look at the 1970s. Strikes. Union action. Rubbish piling up on the streets, and power cuts. That is what nationalization means. Since privatization, how many times has your water supply or energy supply failed? Even the worst privatization (British Rail) is arguably far better than it was before privatization. One of Thatchers biggest achievements was to take on the millitant socialist unions, and she won. Overwhelmingly. She set us free from their grip. "Profit" shouldn't be a dirty word. I love companies to make profits when they provide a good service. What I dislike are millitant unions striking for endless pay and pension increases, whilst at the same time providing a horrible service. I hate to descend into politics, but you are presenting as "fact" what is actually a very biased and extreme left wing view, which thankfully is pretty outdated in the UK now.
  - toyg 14y ago
    >> If by "prices were cheap" you mean "were massively subsidized by the government so we were paying through the nose for them anyway" Correction: higher-band taxpayers might have been paying through the nose. People paying less tax (i.e. the less well-off) were paying less. >> Even the worst privatization (British Rail) is arguably far better than it was before privatization. {{POV}} Besides, the privatized UK rail network is shambolic when compared to (officially or de-facto) nationalized companies on the Continent. >> One of Thatchers biggest achievements was to take on the millitant socialist unions, and she won. Overwhelmingly. She set us free from their grip. {{POV}} I hate to descend into politics, but you are presenting as "fact" what is actually a very biased and extreme right-wing view, which thankfully is getting less and less popular in the UK now.
    - mibbitier 14y ago
      > Correction: higher-band taxpayers might have been paying through the nose. People paying less tax (i.e. the less well-off) were paying less. Ah yes, because as long as it's those nasty greedy rich people overpaying for inefficient state monopolies, that's fine?!! If it's considered "extremely right-wing" to believe in the freedom for individuals to own property, free enterprise free market, and smaller government without state monopolies locking out competition, then I guess I'm a right wing extremist.
      - icelancer 14y ago
        In Europe, it is.
      - SideburnsOfDoom 14y ago
        > "extremely right-wing" to believe in the freedom for individuals to own property You are conflating removing "the freedom for individuals to own property" with state-run railways and healthcare? Seriously? You just lost all credibility with me.
        mibbitier 14y ago
- tonyedgecombe 14y ago
  You have a poor memory if you think they work less well. Fancy going back to a six month wait for a telephone? Or seeing your garbage pile up in the street for months on end? Or buying a card with 33 faults on delivery (my dad had this)? There are some things it doesn't make sense to privatise (NHS and the police come to mind) but general industry doesn't work when it is under the control of government.
  - AJ007 14y ago
    British politics aside, its bothersome how quickly people forget the past.
    - mibbitier 14y ago
      And how history is often decided based on who shouts the loudest, rather than the actual facts.
JonnieCache 14y ago
>Is nationalisation of the entire economy to state ownership really "progressive"? >pro·gres·sive /prəˈgresiv/ Noun: A person advocating or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas. Ok, that doesn't completely line up, but you get the idea. Progressive != "progress"
- mibbitier 14y ago
  How is the state owning monopolies and locking out competition considered "liberal"?
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - codeulike 14y ago
    There was an 'or' clause in the preceding definition.

billyjobob 14y ago

You may not be familiar with the history of nationalization in Britain. (Apologies if you are.) We used to have many nationalized industries. They didn't work very well, but their prices were cheap. The Tory party and the New Labour party privatized these industries, and now they work even less well, and also charge very high prices and make massive profits for the prime minister's friends while still relying on massive taxpayer subsidies. So for us in Britain a return to nationalization would indeed be progressive.

mibbitier 14y ago
If we hadn't privatised industries like British Leyland, British Steel, etc etc etc, we would be bankrupt and in the grips of unions. Maybe you weren't born when this was going on, but "prices were cheap" is idiotic. British leyland, British steel, etc etc were some of the most loss making, unproductive industries. If by "prices were cheap" you mean "were massively subsidized by the government so we were paying through the nose for them anyway", then agreed. Look at the 1970s. Strikes. Union action. Rubbish piling up on the streets, and power cuts. That is what nationalization means. Since privatization, how many times has your water supply or energy supply failed? Even the worst privatization (British Rail) is arguably far better than it was before privatization. One of Thatchers biggest achievements was to take on the millitant socialist unions, and she won. Overwhelmingly. She set us free from their grip. "Profit" shouldn't be a dirty word. I love companies to make profits when they provide a good service. What I dislike are millitant unions striking for endless pay and pension increases, whilst at the same time providing a horrible service. I hate to descend into politics, but you are presenting as "fact" what is actually a very biased and extreme left wing view, which thankfully is pretty outdated in the UK now.
- toyg 14y ago
  >> If by "prices were cheap" you mean "were massively subsidized by the government so we were paying through the nose for them anyway" Correction: higher-band taxpayers might have been paying through the nose. People paying less tax (i.e. the less well-off) were paying less. >> Even the worst privatization (British Rail) is arguably far better than it was before privatization. {{POV}} Besides, the privatized UK rail network is shambolic when compared to (officially or de-facto) nationalized companies on the Continent. >> One of Thatchers biggest achievements was to take on the millitant socialist unions, and she won. Overwhelmingly. She set us free from their grip. {{POV}} I hate to descend into politics, but you are presenting as "fact" what is actually a very biased and extreme right-wing view, which thankfully is getting less and less popular in the UK now.
  - mibbitier 14y ago
    > Correction: higher-band taxpayers might have been paying through the nose. People paying less tax (i.e. the less well-off) were paying less. Ah yes, because as long as it's those nasty greedy rich people overpaying for inefficient state monopolies, that's fine?!! If it's considered "extremely right-wing" to believe in the freedom for individuals to own property, free enterprise free market, and smaller government without state monopolies locking out competition, then I guess I'm a right wing extremist.
    - icelancer 14y ago
      In Europe, it is.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 14y ago
      > "extremely right-wing" to believe in the freedom for individuals to own property You are conflating removing "the freedom for individuals to own property" with state-run railways and healthcare? Seriously? You just lost all credibility with me.
      - mibbitier 14y ago
tonyedgecombe 14y ago
You have a poor memory if you think they work less well. Fancy going back to a six month wait for a telephone? Or seeing your garbage pile up in the street for months on end? Or buying a card with 33 faults on delivery (my dad had this)? There are some things it doesn't make sense to privatise (NHS and the police come to mind) but general industry doesn't work when it is under the control of government.
- AJ007 14y ago
  British politics aside, its bothersome how quickly people forget the past.
  - mibbitier 14y ago
    And how history is often decided based on who shouts the loudest, rather than the actual facts.

JonnieCache 14y ago

>Is nationalisation of the entire economy to state ownership really "progressive"? >pro·gres·sive /prəˈgresiv/ Noun: A person advocating or implementing social reform or new, liberal ideas. Ok, that doesn't completely line up, but you get the idea. Progressive != "progress"

mibbitier 14y ago
How is the state owning monopolies and locking out competition considered "liberal"?
- deleted 14y ago
  [deleted]
- codeulike 14y ago
  There was an 'or' clause in the preceding definition.