peterms Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 Land tax. Replaces lots of other taxes, hard to evade, drives productivity (land set aside for rich guys to shoot pheasants on would do very badly and pay a lot, a small site used for active production of food or goods would do better). This is an interesting idea, but (as I'm sure you know) lots of farmers are far from being wealthy people so what about real agricultural land - as opposed to shooting estates? National Trust/National Parks? Yes, many farmers are not well off. Hill farmers and tenant farmers, mostly. A bit like tenant publicans, working hard to pay unearned profits to rentier scum. Subsidies need drastically reforming, to give money to working farmers producing useful food in a way that doesn't poison the land or cause floods downstream. That would require a change of government, as the current lot either get the subsidies for harmful activity, or are mates with or corruptly paid by those who do rake off these payments. Don't see where NT and parks come in, though... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 I don't think that's true Pete, either directly or indirectly, about 80% of grants come from CAP. So whoever is in government in the uk makes very little difference Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 I don't think that's true Pete, either directly or indirectly, about 80% of grants come from CAP. So whoever is in government in the uk makes very little difference The UK does influence how CAP works (which of course is why the NFU spends so much time and money influencing politicians). See Monbiot for example (whole article is worth a read) Is there any organisation as selfish, grasping and antisocial as the National Farmers' Union? Is there any organisation, except the banks, that secures so much public money for its members while offering so little in return?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 our influence on CAP is miniscule compared to the French. We have Banking, the Germans have Manufacturing and the French Have Agriculture. That's the way the EU works 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 (edited) Land tax. Replaces lots of other taxes, hard to evade, drives productivity (land set aside for rich guys to shoot pheasants on would do very badly and pay a lot, a small site used for active production of food or goods would do better).This is an interesting idea, but (as I'm sure you know) lots of farmers are far from being wealthy people so what about real agricultural land - as opposed to shooting estates? National Trust/National Parks?Yes, many farmers are not well off. Hill farmers and tenant farmers, mostly. A bit like tenant publicans, working hard to pay unearned profits to rentier scum. Subsidies need drastically reforming, to give money to working farmers producing useful food in a way that doesn't poison the land or cause floods downstream. That would require a change of government, as the current lot either get the subsidies for harmful activity, or are mates with or corruptly paid by those who do rake off these payments. Don't see where NT and parks come in, though... Peter, I know quite a few farmers in Staffordshire who are on the breadline and own good arable land. It's not correct to say that poor farmers are in a hole because they are being ripped off by the man. On the CAP being unreformable (another poster) because of the French, agreed and that's another reason why we need to exit the EU. Globalisation, a world with no borders etc. is an ideological wet dream that doesn't survive first contact with reality - unless the proponent is fine with domestic industries being decimated or earning potential falling to match that of SE Asia. That's why Labour/leftist support for the EU is so contradictory and unfathomable. Edited November 3, 2014 by Awol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 3, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 3, 2014 ..Globalisation, a world with no borders etc. is an ideological wet dream that doesn't survive first contact with reality...I think globalisation is a very bad thing, on balance. I see it as a kind of right wing, free market, ideal. Reason I commented is because it's your last couple of words I don't agree with - I think "reality" is being and has been shaped, now, to such an extent that Globalisation is taking greater and greater hold, despite what us little people might (or might not) wish. It's not only surviving, it's sadly flourishing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Globalisation is generally great for corporations and the mega wealthy that reap the benefits, it's generally bad for the other 99% of real living persons. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Awol Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 ..Globalisation, a world with no borders etc. is an ideological wet dream that doesn't survive first contact with reality... I think globalisation is a very bad thing, on balance. I see it as a kind of right wing, free market, ideal. Reason I commented is because it's your last couple of (quoted) words I don't agree with - I think "reality" is being and has been shaped, now, to such an extent that Globalisation is taking greater and greater hold, despite what us little people might (or might not) wish. It's not only surviving, it's sadly flourishing. Yep, I meant globalisation is neither credible or sustainable as a force for good in UK while we're part of the EU. It's like our resident lefties have Stockholm Syndrome, they know it's wrong but think that opposing it would make them *horrors*, "right wing". That's not true, it just demonstrates their lack of ability to conduct critical analysis. Ergo, EU loving lefties are the useful idiots of global capitalist animals. Hilarious when you think about it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted November 3, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 3, 2014 Globalisation, a world with no borders etc. is an ideological wet dream that doesn't survive first contact with reality...I think globalisation is a very bad thing, on balance. I see it as a kind of right wing, free market, ideal. Reason I commented is because it's your last couple of words I don't agree with - I think "reality" is being and has been shaped, now, to such an extent that Globalisation is taking greater and greater hold, despite what us little people might (or might not) wish. It's not only surviving, it's sadly flourishing. Yep, I meant globalisation is neither credible or sustainable as a force for good in UK while we're part of the EU. It's like our resident lefties have Stockholm Syndrome, they know it's wrong but think that opposing it would make them *horrors*, "right wing". That's not true, it just demonstrates their lack of ability to conduct critical analysis. Ergo, EU loving lefties are the useful idiots of global capitalist animals. Hilarious when you think about it. I think there's a feeling that the EU might be able to act as a resistance to globalism in its current form (US imperialism), sort of like all the small kids gathering together against a bully. There needs to be some sort of viable alternative to a world working for a single US economy, and this the straw with the squeeze on it. I don't think it works, and I think that's demonstrated by TTIP, but there really isn't any hope of the UK on its own being able to resist becoming a service industry for globalisation. Ultimately, we're a banking centre and not much else - the pity of that is that it benefits about 200 people. Little Englanders working for their feudal landlords again. I actually, think a more formal EU might be a solution - a world with three distinct powers, each able to moderate the other, the US, China and the EU. Sadly though, that very much is the pipe dream you describe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 3, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 3, 2014 Yep, I meant globalisation is neither credible or sustainable as a force for good in UK while we're part of the EU. It's like our resident lefties have Stockholm Syndrome, they know it's wrong but think that opposing it would make them *horrors*, "right wing". That's not true, it just demonstrates their lack of ability to conduct critical analysis. Ergo, EU loving lefties are the useful idiots of global capitalist animals. Hilarious when you think about it. I'm not sure I agree, Jon. It's multi - faceted. It's not just "if you're anti globalisation you must therefore be anti EU" IMO. "Lefties" I suppose (real ones, I mean) are generally against globalisation (as are many from the not-left). There are pro EU people across the spectrum too. It's not really a left-right thing, basically, so I think People can be for globalisation and against the EU, or vice versa, or for both, or for neither. It's too simplistic to me, to make the conclusion you have, about their not opposing the EU - though it may be me who's actually simple . Your very last comment is probably proof that you're clearly astute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xann Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 UKIP Mistake Cathedral For Mosque - South Thanet UKIP branch have been left with egg on their face after making a huge mistake on the social network Twitter. Dimwits... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted November 27, 2014 Share Posted November 27, 2014 Globalisation is generally great for corporations and the mega wealthy that reap the benefits, it's generally bad for the other 99% of real living persons. Not sure that is 100% true. It gives benefits to almost everyone in that standards of living have been on the increase on virtually all measurables since the war. I agree however that the proceeds of globalisation does lead to an immense inequality between the rich and the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted November 27, 2014 Author Moderator Share Posted November 27, 2014 Globalisation is generally great for corporations and the mega wealthy that reap the benefits, it's generally bad for the other 99% of real living persons. Not sure that is 100% true. It gives benefits to almost everyone in that standards of living have been on the increase on virtually all measurables since the war. I agree however that the proceeds of globalisation does lead to an immense inequality between the rich and the rest.Nah, even those that worship at the alter of market forces need competition. If things are taken to its logical conclusion, there will be no stock markets as companies continue to eat each other. All globalisation does is streamline profits for mega corporations and their shareholders, the lack of competition gives increased profits and unfair pricing. Its bad for EVERYONE no matter what political hue you think you are.Which given this topic and the outrageous proposed TTIP thang between the EU and the USA it is highly shocking that the only UKIP MEP to actually bother to vote on said issue, Roger Helmer/t voted in favour of the TTIP, something which UKIP have murmered that they are against (without actually saying it, because their paymasters are actually for it) 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post mockingbird_franklin Posted November 27, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted November 27, 2014 Globalisation is generally great for corporations and the mega wealthy that reap the benefits, it's generally bad for the other 99% of real living persons. Not sure that is 100% true. It gives benefits to almost everyone in that standards of living have been on the increase on virtually all measurables since the war. I think you are confusing globalisation with capitalism within a mixed economy, it is the latter that increased living standards post WWII, Globalisation is bad economically and socially for the vast majority of living people. Globalisation, like banking, generally has nothing to do with creating real wealth, and everything to do with accumulating it and concentrating it amongst a very few at almost everyone else's expense 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 I do get the point your making but I'm pretty sure I wasnt confused and that it is reasonable to accept that there is a fair degree of overlap between the two concepts so my point still stands. To be honest I agree with the sentiment of your statements. I don't agree though that these things are ever as one sided as you make out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 I do get the point your making but I'm pretty sure I wasnt confused and that it is reasonable to accept that there is a fair degree of overlap between the two concepts so my point still stands. To be honest I agree with the sentiment of your statements. I don't agree though that these things are ever as one sided as you make out. My apologies for insinuating you were confused over this, I now see my possible error, maybe it's just you haven't reached the level of understanding required to see that any alleged (and debateabe) increases in living standards and wealth of the general population is despite globalisation, not because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 Globalisation, a world with no borders etc. is an ideological wet dream that doesn't survive first contact with reality...I think globalisation is a very bad thing, on balance. I see it as a kind of right wing, free market, ideal. Reason I commented is because it's your last couple of words I don't agree with - I think "reality" is being and has been shaped, now, to such an extent that Globalisation is taking greater and greater hold, despite what us little people might (or might not) wish. It's not only surviving, it's sadly flourishing. Yep, I meant globalisation is neither credible or sustainable as a force for good in UK while we're part of the EU. It's like our resident lefties have Stockholm Syndrome, they know it's wrong but think that opposing it would make them *horrors*, "right wing". That's not true, it just demonstrates their lack of ability to conduct critical analysis. Ergo, EU loving lefties are the useful idiots of global capitalist animals. Hilarious when you think about it. I think there's a feeling that the EU might be able to act as a resistance to globalism in its current form (US imperialism), Surely this should read Corporate Imperialism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaglint Posted November 28, 2014 Share Posted November 28, 2014 I do get the point your making but I'm pretty sure I wasnt confused and that it is reasonable to accept that there is a fair degree of overlap between the two concepts so my point still stands. To be honest I agree with the sentiment of your statements. I don't agree though that these things are ever as one sided as you make out. My apologies for insinuating you were confused over this, I now see my possible error, maybe it's just you haven't reached the level of understanding required to see that any alleged (and debateabe) increases in living standards and wealth of the general population is despite globalisation, not because of it. Ha..OK then 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 28, 2014 Popular Post Share Posted November 28, 2014 imma just post this (probably again) 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted November 28, 2014 Moderator Share Posted November 28, 2014 Yeah, I posted that yonks ago somewhere on here. It's ace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts