Jump to content

BBC Worldwide Poll: Capitalism Losing Favor


Vancouver King

Recommended Posts

It's a socialists' wet dream. Vast majorities in 27 countries express disapproval of the capitalist status quo.

"Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, a new BBC poll has found widespread dissatisfaction with free-market capitalism. In the global poll for BBC World Service, only 11% of those questioned across 27 countries said that it was working well".

In Canada that figure is shockingly low at 15% and might, belatedly, actually justify Harper's big govt record. This poll gives new credence to the NDP's interventionist policies.

http://globescan.com/news_archives/bbc2009_berlin_wall/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty predictable given the events of the past year......and a wake-up call for sensible regulation around the world. Canada - which still has some work to do - is a good model for regulation, especially in the Financial/Banking arena. It's not surprising that some of the old-bloc soviet countries would still be uncomfortable outside the welfare state that was communism. That will change as a new generation raises families in a freer environment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I believe is that it's time for us to reduce the work week again across the board.

The 5 day work week is something like 80 years old. We have obviously seen productivity increases grow exponentially during that time. Relative wage growth doesn't reflect the increases in profit or productivity, but a 4 day week would do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding is that free market capitalism is no longer so free. The expense (include tax for too many unnecessary social services, too many management rules, too many inspectors, police, jail, court, lawyer, legal systems, military system, health system, insurance system, union) has been increased too much so that lots of business can only be run by large groups, small business becomes harder and harder, and lots of such small business even earn less than find a job and work for others. Even large groups found expense is too high. So that when globalization become possible, jobs turn to move to places that have lower cost.

Therefor, it is not the free market itself has very large problem, it is the politicians who makes too many laws so that the free market is no longer so free as before. Those laws make huge business groups earn easier and makes protectionism easier to work and make life of ordinary people become harder and harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I believe is that it's time for us to reduce the work week again across the board.

The 5 day work week is something like 80 years old. We have obviously seen productivity increases grow exponentially during that time. Relative wage growth doesn't reflect the increases in profit or productivity, but a 4 day week would do that.

Isn't that just going to encourage even more employers to move to a country where people work like slaves?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't that just going to encourage even more employers to move to a country where people work like slaves?

eb,

Actually, there is a limit as to how much work can be done in that way. And there's no reason to think that they won't follow our lead. Maybe a better approach is to start encouraging different work weeks. I would like to eventually work 4 days instead of 5 and would accept a salary adjustment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe a better approach is to start encouraging different work weeks. I would like to eventually work 4 days instead of 5 and would accept a salary adjustment.

What about people who can't afford a salary adjustment?

Maybe a better way would be to institute a maximum wage. This would encourage people who can afford time off to take it and leave the door open to those who can't to work more.

As I see it, its a widening income gap that is the real problem with capitalism. The result is the same when the power gap that exists in communist dictatorships becomes too great. Everything eventually goes all to hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eb,

What about people who can't afford a salary adjustment?

Maybe a better way would be to institute a maximum wage. This would encourage people who can afford time off to take it and leave the door open to those who can't to work more.

As I see it, its a widening income gap that is the real problem with capitalism. The result is the same when the power gap that exists in communist dictatorships becomes too great. Everything eventually goes all to hell.

The salary adjustment is my own choice. I would like to see a lower work week, but there should be some give and take.

How would a Maximum wage work ? There's no maximum wage for capitalists.

The income gap is a problem, but not enough of a problem yet to destroy the system. Instead, it adopts socialistic attributes, but mostly if forced to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eb,

The salary adjustment is my own choice. I would like to see a lower work week, but there should be some give and take.

How would a Maximum wage work ? There's no maximum wage for capitalists.

A more progressive income tax for the highest wage earners I suppose.

The income gap is a problem, but not enough of a problem yet to destroy the system. Instead, it adopts socialistic attributes, but mostly if forced to do so.

How will we know when it is too big of a problem? If power gaps are anything to go by it seems we'll have to wait until the system destroys itself on its own to know for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty predictable given the events of the past year......and a wake-up call for sensible regulation around the world. Canada - which still has some work to do - is a good model for regulation, especially in the Financial/Banking arena. It's not surprising that some of the old-bloc soviet countries would still be uncomfortable outside the welfare state that was communism. That will change as a new generation raises families in a freer environment.

What sensible regulation can be brought to bear against "too big to fail"? America stressed having no interest in day to day decisions of bailed out firms but this hands off approach has resulted in banks using the taxpayer's dime to respeculate in financial markets leading to current asset bubbles and the shameless bonuses that grate against any sense of fair play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

eb

A more progressive income tax for the highest wage earners I suppose.

Capitalists are not wage earners they are investors. A salary cap on all people is something that they might even love. Imagine the NBA team owner being told "You can't pay any of your players over 100K.". Do you think he would mind ?

How will we know when it is too big of a problem? If power gaps are anything to go by it seems we'll have to wait until the system destroys itself on its own to know for sure.

If you have to ask, then it's not a big enough problem. The system may not destroy itself, but rather it may continue to change as it has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I did only say maybe a maximum wage would help. Its not like I was pounding a podium with my shoe and insisting we do this. In any case the income gap is not the main problem here, the power gap is. The distance between those who are close to or in power and those who are not is vast.

Surely a real crypto-totalitarian wouldn't be caught dead suggesting we close that particular gap or worse actually redistribute it by decreasing official opacity or increasing people's ability to directly participate in our nation's decision making processes.

Only your run-of-the-mill below-average C-suite toady or shoe pounding demagogue would think there was something wrong with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The salary adjustment is my own choice. I would like to see a lower work week, but there should be some give and take.
Nothing stopping you from negotiating that deal with your employer, however, why do you think other people should be denied the opportunity to work longer hours for more pay?

Frankly, work week reductions are an extremely expensive form of social program because they increase the cost of employing people in a country. Once one excludes government and heavily regulated sectors you would likely find that the lowering the work week reduces the number of jobs because it costs a lot more to employ 5 full time people at 8/hr than 4 full time people at 10/hr - even if the total number of hours is the same.

Edited by Riverwind
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Surely a real crypto-totalitarian wouldn't be caught dead suggesting we close that particular gap or worse actually redistribute it by decreasing official opacity or increasing people's ability to directly participate in our nation's decision making processes.

Your ignorance of history is painful. Hitler campaigned on redistributing power...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing stopping you from negotiating that deal with your employer, however, why do you think other people should be denied the opportunity to work longer hours for more pay?

Frankly, work week reductions are an extremely expensive form of social program because they increase the cost of employing people in a country. Once one excludes government and heavily regulated sectors you would likely find that the lowering the work week reduces the number of jobs because it costs a lot more to employ 5 people at 8/hr than 4 people at 10/hr - even if the total number of hours is the same.

The standard work week in Belgium is Monday through Friday, 37.5 hours, and cannot exceed 40 hours. Overtime must be compensated by overtime pay and an ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, to people like you.

You don't hear me making dictatorial statements ....like infringing on private property or assiune suggestions like placing limits on wealth...lets face it, your contempt for the freedoms of other is almost palpable. There is very little you wouldn't squash to achieve your peculiar utopian hell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't hear me making dictatorial statements ....like infringing on private property or assiune suggestions like placing limits on wealth...lets face it, your contempt for the freedoms of other is almost palpable. There is very little you wouldn't squash to achieve your peculiar utopian hell

No, just suggestions that police investigate the crap out of anyone with the temerity to ask for a search warrant.

lets face it, your contempt for the freedoms of other is almost palpable

You must be mistaking me for the reflection in your mirror.

There's a lot of that going around these days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You don't hear me making dictatorial statements ....like infringing on private property or assiune suggestions like placing limits on wealth...lets face it, your contempt for the freedoms of other is almost palpable. There is very little you wouldn't squash to achieve your peculiar utopian hell

Weren't you the one ready to give up your and everyone else Charter rights like an hour ago in another thread? It seems to me it was max and eye fighting for them. Weird you love freedom in theory and not practice?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding is that free market capitalism is no longer so free. The expense (include tax for too many unnecessary social services, too many management rules, too many inspectors, police, jail, court, lawyer, legal systems, military system, health system, insurance system, union) has been increased too much so that lots of business can only be run by large groups, small business becomes harder and harder, and lots of such small business even earn less than find a job and work for others. Even large groups found expense is too high. So that when globalization become possible, jobs turn to move to places that have lower cost.

Therefor, it is not the free market itself has very large problem, it is the politicians who makes too many laws so that the free market is no longer so free as before. Those laws make huge business groups earn easier and makes protectionism easier to work and make life of ordinary people become harder and harder.

Yeah, lets go back to the good old days, where mill owner was lord and the worker knowing his place tugged his forelock when the lord passed by.

Come on, you really want to go back to the days, which in all honestly aren't that long ago, where labour was treated as disgusting but required "asset unit" which could easily be disposed off at no expense to mill owner and replaced when it got sick or injured? May as well do away with the child labour laws while you are at it. After all if peak oil is a reality, wood furnaces and stove will be making a come back and we will need chimney sweeps right? And anyone who has seen the musically Oliver know that urchins love nothing better then to scurry up and down the insides of sooty chimneys, hell they are so happy, they sing and dance about it all day long.

The fact of the matter is, it is small to mid-sized business's and business people who really drive our economy and they seem to be doing fairly well. They may not become Rockefeller's, but they for the most part are not hurting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, lets go back to the good old days, where mill owner was lord and the worker knowing his place tugged his forelock when the lord passed by.

Come on, you really want to go back to the days, which in all honestly aren't that long ago, where labour was treated as disgusting but required "asset unit" which could easily be disposed off at no expense to mill owner and replaced when it got sick or injured? May as well do away with the child labour laws while you are at it. After all if peak oil is a reality, wood furnaces and stove will be making a come back and we will need chimney sweeps right? And anyone who has seen the musically Oliver know that urchins love nothing better then to scurry up and down the insides of sooty chimneys, hell they are so happy, they sing and dance about it all day long.

The fact of the matter is, it is small to mid-sized business's and business people who really drive our economy and they seem to be doing fairly well. They may not become Rockefeller's, but they for the most part are not hurting.

When a new law defines a higher minimum salary, it makes lots of small business unable to hire, the result is more people will have no job.

If people who have different level skills and different life condition are allowed to have different choice either have their own small business or work in relative worse work condition, much less people will rely on social benefit such as EI, less people will have time to crime. When hard time passed or they have better skills though their own effort (such as learning), they can move to better job. the salary can be adjusted by market when they found short of labour, that means free. instead of define a labour hour price artificially by government. and encourage laziness by government. (big business will have more competitors, maybe this is the real reason they want this new law)

This is just one of the examples.

Now politicians are experts in spent, so that they always find money shortage, they always try to raise more tax, they don't think about how to solve social problems, they just busy in finding more ways to take money. Actually, I don't think they can solve any problem, what they can do is they tell people, they have already spent money on the problems and please pay bills.

Edited by bjre
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...