• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh come on, it's like being asked whether you want to be blinded, castrated or tickled by feathers for a few minutes.

For Enewald, eternity in the company of Beelzebub and all his hellish instruments of death would be a picnic compared to five minutes with Grimond and his policies. :D
 
Excellent update! I'm quite impressed with what we could do after only five years in government. I know that defense cuts may worry some - but without the economic boom that we helped to create, how could we have possibly maintained the defense budget as it was? Further military provisioning may not be a wholly negative idea, but it can afford to wait a little longer. The fact that we've managed to pass the most reforms of any government since 1945 and turned the economy around is, in my opinion, quite impressive. I am glad I threw my lot in with this party in 1945 and am still glad to be part of it today.

This leadership contest will be a difficult one, though. While I am naturally inclined to support the old guard "yellow" liberals - being one myself almost by definition, having run under their banner since 1945 - the social democrats certainly have my sympathies. I do believe that it's worth acknowledging our support in the unions, but at the same time that alone does not define the Liberal Party - that's what makes it different than Labor and in a better position to deliver wealth and prosperity. I'll have to think this one over quite a bit.

Any thoughts from my fellow Liberals which way they're planning to vote?
 
Because short-term profit isn't everything.

That is why short run losses are common on the market, starting enterprises are bound to operate at a loss before their can claim their market share. You purchase land, you build factory, you hire people, you pay for logistics, you pay for maybe advertising; the profits only start rolling after 1-5 years, depending on good produce and size of industry. This is all taken into account when starting new industries, and banks or citizens that provide the loans do not expect to be paid the very next year the loan is given.
Or those who buy the shares of a new company do not expect big dividends to flow for many years. They know this, yet still provide their money by buying stocks.

Old companies also might sell new dividends or take loans if they face a few bad years, or undergo a big reform. That is why companies keep some money saved for bad years.
If the bad years continue to flow by, it might be time to end the business.

Where do subsidies come into calculation?
 
Any thoughts from my fellow Liberals which way they're planning to vote?

I'm witholding judgement until I see the respective manifestos.
 
For Enewald, eternity in the company of Beelzebub and all his hellish instruments of death would be a picnic compared to five minutes with Grimond and his policies. :D

:rofl:

Where do subsidies come into calculation?

Industries whose needs cannot be met by the free market and yet for reasons of prime importance cannot be allowed to go to the wall. For instance, the British Nuclear Programme.
 
I'm witholding judgement until I see the respective manifestos.

I want to hear more about Gaitskell and this revamped Labour Party! This Liberal bias in the media is sickening! :p
 
Competition is always in the best interest of the customer. Minimum wages prohibit free competition, and the higher wages are paid by consumers, who have to restrict their consumption, or switch to consuming other cheaper products. That is why more and more people switch away from domestic goods to buying cheaper exports.
Every acting human being can participate in the market and earn as much wage as they supply the market with their labour is worth for.
Minimum wages also hurt people who are unemployed because the worth of their labour is under the minimum wage. Employers cannot hire them, pay some arbitrary minimum wage and stay on the markets without going bankrupt.
Therefore open immigration and competitive wages with no discrimination allowed, no monopolies and no monopsonies should be allowed to cause mischief for the common man.

Unrestricted wage competition when the supply of labour exceeds the demand for positions is patently not good for consumers as a whole. Under such a system, a number will be unemployed and therefore unable to benefit from any theoretical access to the markets, while those that do take a job will be unable to demand a fair price for their labour.

A labourer should not he able to say how much his or her time is worth, as they would undoubtedly overvalue themselves. Equally, however, employers would undervalue them as their desire is to secure the lowest possible cost base, and thereby increase margin. Large scale immigration would ensure that if person A refuses the terms offered, persons B through Z would be available.

This is why is some matters we need an independent arbitrator to set a floor on this batter between employer and employee. Neither company nor worker is qualified to declare what a basic unit of human labour is worth, and this is why the state must legislate a minimum wage.
 
:rofl:



Industries whose needs cannot be met by the free market and yet for reasons of prime importance cannot be allowed to go to the wall. For instance, the British Nuclear Programme.

Nuclear military program, or the production of energy?
There is no reason why private enterprises could not have invented nuclear energy, nor handle the production of nuclear energy, nor the storage of the waste.
If certain X owns the land, he can sell the right for the energy producers to lease the land for the disposal of the waste.
Once the right of the ownership is clear, there is very little that the private sector cannot manage.

Then again it gets a bit complicated when you start calculating how long the storage has to be manned, and who keeps paying the cost once everyone eventually abandons nuclear energy for some new alternative in the future.
 
I assume you'll be recrossing the floor?

The way I see it, I'm still a nominal Labour MP, because votes on election day are not necessarily the same as votes in the house. (i.e. most people who vote for a party other than that which they were elected for are still members of their original party, they just like to rebel in the House a lot, as backbenchers often do.) Publicly advocating a vote for Eden as I did would have probably led to my expulsion from the Labour Party, meaning that for the past decade or so I've sat as an "Independent Labour" MP, albeit an "Independent Labour" member who has an alarming tendency to vote with parties other than the Labour Party.
 
Nuclear military program, or the production of energy?

Technically in DH both are the same thing, but I specifically refer to it's military use: bombs, missiles and submarine propellants. :)
 
Unrestricted wage competition when the supply of labour exceeds the demand for positions is patently not good for consumers as a whole. Under such a system, a number will be unemployed and therefore unable to benefit from any theoretical access to the markets, while those that do take a job will be unable to demand a fair price for their labour.

A labourer should not he able to say how much his or her time is worth, as they would undoubtedly overvalue themselves. Equally, however, employers would undervalue them as their desire is to secure the lowest possible cost base, and thereby increase margin. Large scale immigration would ensure that if person A refuses the terms offered, persons B through Z would be available.

This is why is some matters we need an independent arbitrator to set a floor on this batter between employer and employee. Neither company nor worker is qualified to declare what a basic unit of human labour is worth, and this is why the state must legislate a minimum wage.

I let a wiser man speak against minimum wages;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJb6xApapis&feature=player_detailpage#t=3578

At 59.30. You need to listen only 2-3 mins. :)

If A refuses the terms, B to Z will benefit from the situation as they otherwise would be in a poorer situation with no job.

But companies to define how much the human labour of different individuals is worth, that is the whole concept behind paying people wages!
The state cannot know, nor does acquire enough information about how different individuals should be paid different 'minimum' wages, which will lead to inefficiencies.
 
I let a wiser man speak against minimum wages;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJb6xApapis&feature=player_detailpage#t=3578

At 59.30. You need to listen only 2-3 mins. :)

If A refuses the terms, B to Z will benefit from the situation as they otherwise would be in a poorer situation with no job.

But companies to define how much the human labour of different individuals is worth, that is the whole concept behind paying people wages!
The state cannot know, nor does acquire enough information about how different individuals should be paid different 'minimum' wages, which will lead to inefficiencies.

But I am not advocating different minimum wages - there is no link to sector or employment specifics.

I'm arguing there ought to be a floor price on human labour of any sort - below which lies the realm of exploitation of slavery.

And YouTube videos are a few decades ahead of this AAR's timeframe, no matter how well Tommy's research has been going ;)
 
I wonder if this "YouTube" is in anyway related to the U-tube we use in Rutland. It is a U-shaped tube just wide enough for a man to fit in and buried underground with only the two entrances to the tube being above ground. It is located on the border with Leicestershire and we find it a great way to rapidly deport Tory/National Liberal and CPGB troublemakers as well as the occasional Orange visitor.
 
But I am not advocating different minimum wages - there is no link to sector or employment specifics.

I'm arguing there ought to be a floor price on human labour of any sort - below which lies the realm of exploitation of slavery.

And YouTube videos are a few decades ahead of this AAR's timeframe, no matter how well Tommy's research has been going ;)

Just listen to the 1-2 minutes. A great man, Jewish, born in Austrian Galicia, survived WW1, never got a professorship because fellow intellectuals said he was too radical and not a socialist, and had to flee Europe due to the Nazis swallowing Austria, arriving penniless refugee in USA. But unbroken and unbent in his belief for freedom of the individual and free society.

The floor price of human labour is >0. Otherwise the labour would not be worth doing. If it is valued, a wage will be paid for providing the service or good. The value is formed on the markets, depending on the demand of the good/service. A nurses services might be valued less, whilst a professional doctor more.
The markets define the wages. Not the state, not the boss, not the capitalist, not the bureaucrat, not the god, not the party. Slaver is imprisonment and subjugation against ones own wishes, and there is no more slavery in the Great Britain.
 
This..."Youtube" is obviously Communist. It must be censored.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.