LOCATION... Derby
SELF DESCRIPTION... 32, Male, Office clerk, the only leftie in the CH village
POLITICAL
BELIEFS... To the left of Blair but somewhat to the right of groups like
Respect, I guess I was born too late to be a real old-Labour man.
Believe (in the words of Neil Kinnock) "the free-market is a good
engine but a lousy steering wheel". Believe taxes on the rich could be
raised slightly, but wouldn't return them to 1970s levels.
I see nothing 'left wing' or 'socialist' in tolerating anti-social behaviour or drug dealing and I'm quite socially conservative on these issues. As far as I can see the majority of victims of these things are working class.
POLITICAL HERO... Benn and Bevan would be obvious starting points. Often wonder what sort of PM Neil Kinnock would have made.
FAVOURITE BLOGS... Actually don't read many. Stumbled across this one whilst doing a web search, and ended up staying. You're stuck with me now!
Sorry to break it to you, but you're *far* from the only lefty here.
Posted by: John Hustings | October 07, 2006 at 11:46 AM
The steering wheel analogy by Neil Kinnock was nothing more than a soundbite, it's a poor analogy - the fact is that the private sector should be allowed by the state to do anything it is not expressly forbidden from doing and the state should focus on a narrow range of strategically important services and industries especially in areas where there is little scope for competition or to leave it to the private sector could compromise national security, except for in matters of national security such things should be transferred as much as possible to co-operatives or private charities limited by guarantee or PPP's - infrastructure, transport, communications, if Tesco's dominance continues to grow it is possible that the state might have to step in perhaps setting up a supermarket regulator, maybe even making provision for introducing rules on ownership to prevent it focusing in a small number of people's hands, ultimately private monopolies are usually even worse than public monopolies and neither have anything to do with market economics. Inevitably though politicians miss things that a private entrepreneur might see was important and low taxation (especially income based taxation) and largely unregulated labour markets encourage inspirational thinking, private charities and churches play an important role in developing new ideas and respond better on a local level frequently than the state. The state is very poor at dealing with individuals, it can be very good at large sweeping projects to build bridges and railways and organise military forces, it can be very effective at distributing simple universal welfare schemes but when it comes to running a theatre, cultural works or trying to sort out specific people's lives at a micro level and all attempts at targeted redistribution it is useless and it should stay out of such things as much as possible.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | October 07, 2006 at 12:10 PM
The very basic difference between Labour and Tory is that Labour takes your money in numerous underhand and non cost effective ways and then flutters it away.
Many gain from the system in numerous scams. For instance call yourself unemployed and then work for yourself.
On the other hand the Tory ideal is to let you keep your money to spend as you wish and yet sill give good services; health, education, unemployment etc
In a nutshell Tory is for the Optimistic and Labour if for the Pessimistic.
Posted by: Fred Baker | October 07, 2006 at 12:22 PM
I'm glad comstock is here! It's good to talk ...
Posted by: Graeme Archer | October 07, 2006 at 06:23 PM
The steering wheel analogy by Neil Kinnock was nothing more than a soundbite
It actually comes from a documentary he made *after* leaving office. Personally I think it was a good analogy.
For me this phrase/soundbite says "what does socialism mean in the 21st century?". It clearly cannot mean "common ownership of the means of production"-things like nationalised car production were a disaster. To me the role of a Labour govt is to be a strong hand on the rudder to control the direction of the ship (the country) whilst it is powered by the engine (the free-market). I think this is the way a Kinnock goverment would have gone, although we'll never know now.
I've always been a fan of Kinnock as a good mix of old and new Labour, although others on the left (including Benn) never rated him.
Posted by: comstock | October 07, 2006 at 10:34 PM
Sorry to break it to you, but you're *far* from the only lefty here.
I know, but I think I'm the first lefty to have a profile in Community?
Anyway it was just a cr*p attempt at a "Little Britian' pun.
Posted by: comstock | October 07, 2006 at 10:39 PM
To me the role of a Labour govt is to be a strong hand on the rudder to control the direction of the ship (the country) whilst it is powered by the engine (the free-market).
A controlled Free Market would be a contradiction in terms - you can have substantial state involvement in some areas and with those exceptions allow a totally free market for other things in which beyond stopping theft and fraud the state has no involvement, of course it does depend on what you define as a Free Market - Milton Friedman and Neil Kinnock would no doubt come out with very big differences in what they mean't by it, trully there has been no such thing as a true Free Market - such a thing would allow small children to go up the chimneys and have no restrictions on ages of responsibility such as for purchasing alcohol.
As for Neil Kinnock and Tony Benn it shows the pointlessness of the terms left, right and centre; Tony Benn favours far higher public spending and redistribution and nationalisation than Neil Kinnock does, but in terms of constitution Tony Benn actually is in many ways more supportive of the status quo - he is a strong supporter of First Past the Post, he is very obsessive about things going through their parliamentary procedures and being scrutinised by parliament and is quite capable of endorsing Conservative governments as having a mandate because they have won under FPTP whereas Neil Kinnock is the sort who goes on arguing that the other side if they won don't have the right to win , I don't get the impression that Tony Benn is much of a fan of the sort of political correctness that many go for whereas Neil Kinnock is much more. Some people change their mind in office such as Tony Banks deciding that far from being able to solve people's problems actually government was a never ending struggle to deal with new problems - there are no solutions to the problems of the world, only things which at least deal with problems in the shorter term and then more problems spring up and have to be dealt with, Neil Kinnock as many did perhaps realised that to some extent too, permanent solutions for the world's problems are only achievable by God.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | October 07, 2006 at 11:02 PM
So far as social problems goes, what is needed is more policing, more CCTV cameras and a national Biometric ID system and stricter punishments - more prisons, reintroduction of capital punishment and no mercy for offenders. Other than that avoiding complex attempts at social engineering that will do more damage than it solves, but strict justice will improve the stability of communities - imposition of strict moral laws and an end to the permissive society, some kind of minimal universal residency based benefit that requires strict proof of identity, something that would just enable provision of enough food for someone to survive, then there would be no need of minimum wages or regulation of employment conditions. Other than that focusing on transport, communications, defence, security and water quality and R&D and leave the rest in the main to sort itself out.
Posted by: Yet Another Anon | October 07, 2006 at 11:27 PM
some kind of minimal universal residency based benefit that requires strict proof of identity,
This is something I keep hearing about, and interests me. A basic citzens income for all. AFAIK only the Green party supports this, so it's interesting to see a Conservative (I presume?) putting the idea forward.
then there would be no need of minimum wages or regulation of employment conditions
I think we need to be careful here though. Otherwise we could end up with a situation where the state subsides employers to pay rubbish wages.
I like the idea of workers who are being treated badly being able to leave their jobs without fear of starving because they don't qualify for benefits though.
And another advantage is the removal of the current 'black' or 'cash-in-hand' economy.
Posted by: comstock | October 08, 2006 at 06:44 PM
Ernest Bevin was the more interesting man - who went from nothing to Westminster Abbey with major impact along the way.
Kinnock was a henpecked fool who could not escape his past and would have had even worse relations with his Scottish Chancellor John Smith than Blair has with Gollum
Posted by: TomTom | December 27, 2006 at 08:07 AM
Cube U9GT2 Android 4.0 9.7 inch LG IPS Dual Camera 8GB Samsung Dual Screen Tablet.
Eken, the Chinese manufacturer known against its innovative high-tech by-product has launched it’s another fashionable 10.1 inch Android tablet at a unequivocally cheap cost.
Eken T10 offers the built-in retention, which is double than the recent iPad 2. So, it is definitely smashing spot of the gravestone that may attract more and more consumers.
Are the days of single screen tablets are numbered? This is not the first time that we have seen a dual-screen design for Android. [url=http://www.ramos-sale.com/ramos-w22-android-4-0-tablet-pc-9-7-inch-ips-capacitive-cortex-a8-1ghz-ramos-w22-tablet-pc.html]Ramos W22 Fancy 10[/url]
Posted by: natteevafeWax | May 02, 2012 at 02:41 PM
Ah, this section brings back memories......
Posted by: Comstock | July 25, 2013 at 10:05 PM