Politics Page....
- Thread starter yorkshirehornet
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Driving back up to Leeds from London last night, I listened to this radio 4 programme:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0477nry
Basically a very interesting exposition and analysis of the difference between the market forces liberal capitalism of the UK and USA and the coo-ordinated, collaborative capitalism of Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Japan.
Well worth a listen.
The collaborative, social, shared profits, focussed capitalism in which all share profits and there is less creativity vs the free market entrepreneurial approach in which there are big divides between richer and poorer, lots of creativity and less focus on co-ordinated economy.
What is the best form of capitalism? The free-market form found in countries such as the UK and the United States, or the more collaborative model which is common across Northern Europe?
Some British politicians, from both the left and right, are somewhat starry-eyed when it comes to the way other countries run their economy and have even suggested the UK could improve its lot by importing practices found across Scandinavia and Germany. But is that remotely possible?
In this edition of Analysis, Britain politics correspondent for The Economist Jeremy Cliffe investigates the different forms of capitalism defined by the Varieties of Capitalism school - most-famous for the book of the same name published in 2001.
He begins by working out what makes a 'Liberal Market Economy' and a 'Coordinated Market Economy', and then digs deeper to find out how these different models formed in the first place.
He discovers a deep web of intertwined government institutions which have been shaped over decades and centuries by each individual country's culture. It turns out that transplanting a different way of doing things from one country to another is just not that simple - but does that mean politicians should just give up trying to do something different?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0477nry
Basically a very interesting exposition and analysis of the difference between the market forces liberal capitalism of the UK and USA and the coo-ordinated, collaborative capitalism of Denmark, Sweden, Germany and Japan.
Well worth a listen.
The collaborative, social, shared profits, focussed capitalism in which all share profits and there is less creativity vs the free market entrepreneurial approach in which there are big divides between richer and poorer, lots of creativity and less focus on co-ordinated economy.
What is the best form of capitalism? The free-market form found in countries such as the UK and the United States, or the more collaborative model which is common across Northern Europe?
Some British politicians, from both the left and right, are somewhat starry-eyed when it comes to the way other countries run their economy and have even suggested the UK could improve its lot by importing practices found across Scandinavia and Germany. But is that remotely possible?
In this edition of Analysis, Britain politics correspondent for The Economist Jeremy Cliffe investigates the different forms of capitalism defined by the Varieties of Capitalism school - most-famous for the book of the same name published in 2001.
He begins by working out what makes a 'Liberal Market Economy' and a 'Coordinated Market Economy', and then digs deeper to find out how these different models formed in the first place.
He discovers a deep web of intertwined government institutions which have been shaped over decades and centuries by each individual country's culture. It turns out that transplanting a different way of doing things from one country to another is just not that simple - but does that mean politicians should just give up trying to do something different?
After all that posting re the Euro elections.... up to this point this thread has had 46 views and not one response!
Just when I was hoping for some serious close season discussion
Just when I was hoping for some serious close season discussion
It appears to me that the big difference between these two forms is that the anglo saxon form of neo liberalism believes in a trickle down theory, in which the idea is rife that if you allow those at the top to get richer that money will, somehow, circulate downwards - a theory which, in my opinion, has no evidence to back it whatsoever. The theory behind Scandinavian models of capitalism being that you need to raise the spending power of the base of the societal pyramid - this being the only way to really stimulate an entire economy.
Well put... apparently the anglo-saxon model is historical and based on the ancient beliefs about individual freedom... which does not benefit society.... ala Maggie thatcher....
Interestingly Germany still has a strong manufacturing sector and a strong economy..... we just have banks
... oh and Richard Branson
After all that posting re the Euro elections.... up to this point this thread has had 46 views and not one response!
Just when I was hoping for some serious close season discussion
I think this thread is just too wide Yorkie - with no specific target - we tend to have a "Scottish" or Euro" or whatever thread for when they are newsworthy. They serve a moment and then fade. Same would go for a "religion" thread.
Well put... apparently the anglo-saxon model is historical and based on the ancient beliefs about individual freedom... which does not benefit society.... ala Maggie thatcher....
Interestingly Germany still has a strong manufacturing sector and a strong economy..... we just have banks
Interesting to see Germany placed within the same category as the Scandinavian countries here. Up until very recently Germany was one of the only countries in Europe without a minimum wage, and this is still not applied in all sectors. About 25% of all workers in Germany earn less than the French minimum wage - there is a health system which is paid for by compulsory or private health insurance (mine costs 380 Euros per month - about 300 pounds) and many Germans will have no liveable pension at the end. The School system is hierarchical and only average in comparison to the rest of Europe (well behind Scandinavia), and the public transport system is below average. Referring to the last point you have the feeling that Germany was made exclusively for car drivers. Behind the image that Germany is somehow paying for the rest of Europe lurks an unpleasant reality - namely that the country is being kept as a low wage sweat factory serving only the export economy. This phrase 'World champions in export' weighs heavily on the shoulders of not only Southern Europe but also the lower paid sector here. Germany could act as the biggest market in Europe, but doesn't because it's spending power has stagnated rapidly over the last 20 years - a trade balance which shows 30% more exports than imports is hardly balanced. or healthy for the rest of Europe. On the one hand Germany gives out the impression of bailing out failing economies in Southern Europe, but on the other hand profits from a weak Euro. Although the present gap between rich and poor is not yet as dramatic as in England, the gap is growing at a faster rate here - with more and more people moving into precarious employment - eg. forced into 'freelance' contract conditions etc. This is why I am surprised to see Germany grouped alongside countries like Denmark, Sweden etc. the average lower paid German would bite your hand off for the living conditions found in Denmark - which may be the reason why more Germans are emigrating now than at any time since 1945.
Very interesting points covered by Cologne regarding Germany and something that I have seen a couple of times recently here on the TV. There was a programme where a UK journo and his family moved to Germany to live and work for a couple of months as as "working class" family. He went to work in a pencil factory and really had to work in what Cologne describes above as "sweat factory", he was pushed continuously to work faster and harder and he really struggled. His wife had to stay at home and look after the children, she met up with similar mums at Kindergarten and "Forest Schools" and just hated it. She could not understand why these women where not pursuing their careers and...of all of the family, she struggled the most. Another programme showed workers at a Karcher factory assembly jet-washers, I was shocked at the low wages. It was a surprise that this type of simple assembly had not been off shored to somewhere much cheaper as a UK company would - a great comparison is with Dyson - but with those wages, the cost savings must be minimal and the advantages also minimal.
In my experience, the Germans and some of the Nordic countries do share one aspect that I feel is greatly missing in the UK, in that they do take a longer view on investing. This country always seems to have a very short term view with a rush to get a return and make some money as quickly as possible.
In my experience, the Germans and some of the Nordic countries do share one aspect that I feel is greatly missing in the UK, in that they do take a longer view on investing. This country always seems to have a very short term view with a rush to get a return and make some money as quickly as possible.
OK, I will start up something that may have legs. Does anyone else suspect that Cameron has a game plan that included what he did at the EU last week? I am becoming convinced that he actually wants the UK to exit the EU but does not want to go down in history as the PM that led the country out of the EU. So the game plan is to make the EU seem to be more and more anti-UK, so when there is a vote the country will decide to exit and he can put his hand on his heart and say "I am only following the wishes of the people" Or is he just not cleaver enough to do that?
Do any politicians have long term plans these days? Performance on TV and in the newspapers has become so high on their agenda that they all seem to live in the moment. Even key times like General Elections and party conferences are dominated by statements devoid of commitment and full of soundbites and general exhortations or criticisms of the opposition's performance. Cameron's attitude toEurope is a perfect example. He sounds uncommitted to the EU in its present form but I suspect whether we are in or out matters far less to him than whether he can hang on to power. Personally I would love to be able to vote for an MP who openly stated his personal principles and vowed to resign if he didn't stick to them.
I have known more than one or two MP s from my days in the UK, and without fail they all worked very hard to do their best for their constituents. One was a very senior cabinet minister, two were members of the government, and the others plain MP s. Due to the terrible behaviour of some members, we have become cynical about all of them and their motives, which going from my personal experience is not fair and a very distorted picture of what is happening.
Today in the EU we had a display of poor manners from UKIP MEPs. Happy enough to take the money, but cannot show common standards of decency. While there are people happy enough to take the salary and expenses, but do not wish to contribute, then everyday man and woman will believe that they are only in it for their own gain.
Today in the EU we had a display of poor manners from UKIP MEPs. Happy enough to take the money, but cannot show common standards of decency. While there are people happy enough to take the salary and expenses, but do not wish to contribute, then everyday man and woman will believe that they are only in it for their own gain.
I think it is a good idea to have a politics page 
But please can we have no comments from Tory Labour or Liberal voters
But please can we have no comments from Tory Labour or Liberal voters
I wouldn't argue with that, Frenchie, except to say that all MPs should be working hard in the interests of their constituents. I think there's an extra dimension though which used to be more recognisable than it is now. Whether I liked or disliked Benn, I knew what his guiding principles were and that he had some sort of vision. I can't say I recognise that in many MPs now. They all seem to adopt a kind of ad-hocism (if there is such a word) which make distinguishing one from another much harder.
I think you could be spot on WY. I think he's calculated enough to think up such a plan but whether or not he will be able to pull it off is another matter entirely. I donlt really see any other reason for the fuss about Juncker to be honest - he doesn't really have that much power and i was a bit surpruised to see so much negotiating capital spent on what, compared to other EU issues, seems to me to be pretty low down the list.
Interestingly I read it somewhat differently...... I think he is not in the anti-EC wing of the Tory party...... therefore this is posturing to show his party, and UKIP, that he is "serious" about the Europe issue..... and has to be seen to making a stand etc etc.
I still, naively maybe, believe that all the serious parties understand the importance of our role in Europe re the banking, trading and investment sectors and our relationship with the US. I believe it is a "given". Therefore we make posturing sounds etc etc for the masses to believe what they wish.
It is much more likely that we, along with other EU countries will move for reform, which, all agree is much needed.
Good points gents and thanks for this info. Shocking..... I am interested to read more on this....
I think that one of the main differences between the Scandinavian countries, Austria and Switzerland on the one hand and Germany, the U.K. and U.S.A. on the other is that these smaller countries cannot accept the idea of human wastage ie. they need the abilities of their entire populations. It is no surprise that these countries score highly on all aspects of their school systems and the idea of being 'inclusive' also has an influence on their politics; namely that a much higher percentage of their electorates are 'active' in politics - the highest level being in Austria where 17% of the population are members of political parties. In contrast the figure for Britain is just over 1% and for Germany 2%. My worry is that the politics of neo liberalism (the blind acceptance of free market forces) has become a threat to democracy. Free competition leads inevitably to monopolies which, also inevitably, amass such turnovers that they are, in effect, richer than the nations which gave birth to them. Thus we have the idea that German politics are controlled by Bayer, Siemens or Daimler, and British politics from the banking sector. The difference between now and the situation of the 60s or 70s is that the 'State' has become more impoverished ie. it has sold off nearly all of it's assets and simply does not have the same resources as in earlier times - thus meaning less democracy and less real power for the voter.
German lawmakers approve minimum wage of 8.50 euros an hour is some breaking news here. Well below the French one, but then more is needed here as the working week is shorter I guess.
The figures suggest that the average French worker produces more in 35 hours than his British counterpart in 39 hours. Somehow I think that the balance has been lost in some countries between working and family time.
The figures suggest that the average French worker produces more in 35 hours than his British counterpart in 39 hours. Somehow I think that the balance has been lost in some countries between working and family time.
Forgive me but weren't UKIP voted in on the anti European ticket so wouldn't it be a tad hypocritical of them to stand and salute the EU anthem and flag?