FT: The cost of burgeoning national debt

kennyboy66_2

Generali wrote: »

I see the current problems as be directly the result of the sort of economy that is forced to be created by the sort of socialism lite that is now the norm across the western world.

It's surely a bit difficult to argue that the USA has had "socialism lite" between 1980 - 2008. If you are going to stretch the definition of socialism to include the everything from the USA to North Korea then it becomes a little meaningless

AIG, Ford, General Motors all "too big too fail", all products of American capitalism.

I can't honestly see any alternative to a mixed market economy, its just getting the mix right. Certainly the balance of government spending / interference has gone too far in the UK.

I tend to agree about the corporatism bit, but monopoly's can be just as prevalent in a free market economy (Standard Oil, AT Bell Telecom in the US). The appropriate response is for Government to force them to split them up.

Generali

kennyboy66 wrote: »

It's surely a bit difficult to argue that the USA has had "socialism lite" between 1980 - 2008. If you are going to stretch the definition of socialism to include the everything from the USA to North Korea then it becomes a little meaningless

AIG, Ford, General Motors all "too big too fail", all products of American capitalism.

I can't honestly see any alternative to a mixed market economy, its just getting the mix right. Certainly the balance of government spending / interference has gone too far in the UK.

I tend to agree about the corporatism bit, but monopoly's can be just as prevalent in a free market economy (Standard Oil, AT Bell Telecom in the US). The appropriate response is for Government to force them to split them up.

The problem is all the incremental changes that come along.

If you make a set of rules and say, right the game is this:

1. xxx
2. yyy

and leave it at that then it's not so bad. The trouble is, Governments are spewing out rules at the rate of 100s of pages each quarter. There's no way a small business can keep up with it as they can't afford the specialists required. These rules are all required for socialism - to ensure that things get ever fairer. The US hasn't been as bad as Europe at producing all these rules but they aren't so far behind - Senators and Presidents want the blue collar unionised voters so pander to them.

Where are Alan_M and fc123 when you need them to back you up?

kennyboy66_2

Generali wrote: »

PS Which countries or industries have unfettered Capitalism do you think?

None, but then which countries have unfetterred Socialism ?

Both are impractical idealistic ends of a spectrum.
Any socialist countries you would name would be better described as dictatorships.

The closest business models to socialism were co-opertives - some of which were highly sucessful and long lasting.

UK safe water supply arose from a mix of private companies, Acts of parliament, allowed mergers to form local monopolies and Nationalisation (1903).

I seriously doubt if unfettered capitalism would have done this on its own.

vivatifosi

Generali wrote: »

That's a fair point, however if you look at countries in Asia or Australia then you seem to see many more small firms doing small scale manufacture very successfully.

Sadly, when I look at Asia in particular, I see companies of all sizes carrying out manufacturing more successfully. Thankfully we are still good at very specialised, technical manufacture in the UK, though if we fail to get people through our education system with scientific/technical qualifications, I don't know how much longer that will be for either.

kennyboy66_2

Generali wrote: »

The problem is all the incremental changes that come along.

If you make a set of rules and say, right the game is this:

1. xxx
2. yyy

and leave it at that then it's not so bad. The trouble is, Governments are spewing out rules at the rate of 100s of pages each quarter. There's no way a small business can keep up with it as they can't afford the specialists required. These rules are all required for socialism - to ensure that things get ever fairer. The US hasn't been as bad as Europe at producing all these rules but they aren't so far behind - Senators and Presidents want the blue collar unionised voters so pander to them.

Where are Alan_M and fc123 when you need them to back you up?

I'd agree - I'd love to see a government that implemented no new legislation / directives over a 5 year term, but just looked at reducing the burden on business.

I'd find it difficult to argue againts government interference on things like

1) Abolition of Slavery 1807 (while many free marketeers were against Slavery, the companies involved were all private.
2) Various Factory Acts that abolished child labour and introduced H & S.

Unfettered capitalism would surely mean no compulsory employers liabilty insurance & no effective employment law other than common law.

vivatifosi

Generali wrote: »

The trouble is, Governments are spewing out rules at the rate of 100s of pages each quarter. There's no way a small business can keep up with it as they can't afford the specialists required.....

Where are Alan_M and fc123 when you need them to back you up?

That's true. In the past five years that I've been running my own business, I've seen:

* A new Companies Act (2006) which has changed the way in which I run my business.
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2007/05/08/40470/duties-of-directors-in-new-companies-act-2006-legal-q.html
* Several incidences of tinkering with how much tax there is on dividends which makes the threshold for which it is worth setting up a small business move every year.
* A changing VAT regime.

Thankfully I've got a good accountant who keeps me up to date with changes but there's a heck of a lot to do.

Incidentally, its worth reading the link to Personnel Today's take on the rules of the new Companies Act as they impact on directors and asking how good a job the board of RBS did in sticking to it.

Generali

I've never argued for anarcho-capitalism. The argument was thrown at me that unfettered capitalism was to blame for the current woes of the world. I responded by asking where such a Libertarian Nirvana existed. It's not reasonable to then ask where unfettered socialism exists as I've never made that claim.

I've also never said that all Government is bad. Fundamentally I believe in freedom: I don't believe in slavery nor in child labour (except in the very poorest of places for pragmatic reasons when the alternative to child labour is starvation).

You guys are making a cartoon of me and then lambasting that. If you want to get into the minutiae of my beliefs then fine but don't just slate me for what you think I think. It's unfair and boring and I'm not interested in being a part of it.

Debate is part of a learning process not a way to bully someone you don't agree with.

kennyboy66_2

vivatifosi wrote: »

That's true. In the past five years that I've been running my own business, I've seen:

* A new Companies Act (2006) which has changed the way in which I run my business.
http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2007/05/08/40470/duties-of-directors-in-new-companies-act-2006-legal-q.html
* Several incidences of tinkering with how much tax there is on dividends which makes the threshold for which it is worth setting up a small business move every year.
* A changing VAT regime.

Thankfully I've got a good accountant who keeps me up to date with changes but there's a heck of a lot to do.

Incidentally, its worth reading the link to Personnel Today's take on the rules of the new Companies Act as they impact on directors and asking how good a job the board of RBS did in sticking to it.

To be fair, VAT & Dividend changes are pretty minor. Much more onerous depending on which industry you work on are;

Working at height directive.
Working hours legislation
Stakeholder & upcoming pension legislation
Flexible working legislation

I could go on.

kennyboy66_2

Generali wrote: »

You guys are making a cartoon of me and then lambasting that. If you want to get into the minutiae of my beliefs then fine but don't just slate me for what you think I think. It's unfair and boring and I'm not interested in being a part of it.

Debate is part of a learning process not a way to bully someone you don't agree with.

Sorry G, didn't wish this to get personal.

Perhaps friday evenings should be spent watching the Aussies Rules with a cold one.

Generali

kennyboy66 wrote: »

Sorry G, didn't wish this to get personal.

Perhaps friday evenings should be spent watching the Aussies Rules with a cold one.

's ok kennyboy66 - it's not you so much as a lot of posters getting on my case.

It's more Footie round here (West Sydney) than AFL although TBH I'm not really a fan of either. We did go to the local Leagues club for a cold one though. Mrs G is a lifetime member of Parramatta Leagues - Westie-tastic!