High unemployment is necessary.

[Ivanhoe]

Since the 80's the goal of right wing Government's has been to keep inflation low, and this has been through the continued creation of mass unemployment, remember in the 80's Norman Lamont saying it was a price worth paying.

Well since 1997 New Labour have adopted the same right wing policies to
continue the creation of unemployment for the same reasons, only nobody in the media is saing this, well they wouldnt, would they.

We dont invest like the countries of Europe, we are sole market/profit.

We can go back to the days of the 70's and the winter of discontent when inflation was high and strikes were on mass.

Well this and successive right wing governent's are doing their bit by allowing the system to continue creating unemployent, bcause unemployed people are unable to consolidate and strike on mass as they did in the past.

So any Tory supporters on here, you are supporting a political regime that want the British on the dole so basically they can be easily controlled, and inflation does not hit the high of the 70's.

[movrae]

Since the 80's the goal of right wing Government's has been to keep inflation low, and this has been through the continued creation of mass unemployment, remember in the 80's Norman Lamont saying it was a price worth paying.

Well since 1997 New Labour have adopted the same right wing policies to
continue the creation of unemployment for the same reasons, only nobody in the media is saing this, well they wouldnt, would they.

We dont invest like the countries of Europe, we are sole market/profit.

We can go back to the days of the 70's and the winter of discontent when inflation was high and strikes were on mass.

Well this and successive right wing governent's are doing their bit by allowing the system to continue creating unemployent, bcause unemployed people are unable to consolidate and strike on mass as they did in the past.

So any Tory supporters on here, you are supporting a political regime that want the British on the dole so basically they can be easily controlled, and inflation does not hit the high of the 70's.

http://forums.wanadoo.co.uk/n/pfx/forum.aspx?tsn=1&nav=messages&webtag=fs_curraffairs&tid=75737

?

[Ivanhoe]

Is this really movrae ?.

[Wrinkles]

Or is plagiarism the real source of Ivanhoe's input ?
He could certainly do with a change of script writer 

[Ivanhoe]

And you could'nt I suppose ?

[Wrinkles]

Nope, the difference being I write my own, It's all my own work and I don't have to look on the web to find out what my(?) opinion is. Unlike, allegedly, some people on this site 

[Ivanhoe]

Everything I write is also my own.

[Wrinkles]

That I can believe, I can't imagine anyone else writing That stuff, in fact it's hard to imagine anyone writing it, However it takes all sorts, so they say.

[Ivanhoe]

It sure does wrinkles, and you should know that.

[Papaumau]

Boys, boys, boys...give it a break will ya ?

Let's just look at Ivanhoe's speculation shall we.....

While there is NO DOUBT that Thacher and Lamont and others felt that it was OK to have three million unemployed rotting on the streets I disagree that even a rightist New-Labour government might think that way.

After the Tories were booted out more than twelve years ago official unemployment figures stared to shrink and eventually, at the best time, we were down to well under a million unemployed right across the country.

NOW, it has taken a severe recession to start these figures to climb up once again and even under these very difficult times we are now just sitting at slightly over two million unemployed.

There is a risk that that three million barrier might be reached again but even if it does at least there will be good reason for it, not just a government that are willing to accept such job losses as a fiscal or manufacturing stimulous.

[Ivanhoe]

Papaumau, But they do, why else continue with privatisation ?

Plus we remain with a low waged, short term, insecure workforce, and these insecurities help to curb strikes and keep inflation low as far as the government are c oncerned.

[Papaumau]

I agree that New-Labour HAS followed on the "privatise everything" dogma of the Tories but that policy does not in itself create unemployment.

Lamont thought that it was right to keep unemployment high as those that were on unemployment benefit were getting paid the absolute lowest income to survive on and every lost job was a plus for the bottom line of every company.

This is an accepted theory by many rightists but often it is not realised that there is bound to come a time when employee loss also contributes to loss of production and eventual loss of profits too.

Here is one right wing American view of this policy:

http://www.thedisciplinedinvestor.com/blog/2009/10/16/why-high-unemployment-is-a-good-thing/comment-page-1/

[Ivanhoe]

Papaumau, since the 80's we have become market lead, just like like the USA has always been.

We are not like Social Democrat Europe, the leading players in the world when it comes to manufacturing, investment and subsidy.

This and successive British government's use much less of our GNP for these purposes than we do.

[Papaumau]

It is true that all modern Capitalist countries are "market led" as that is the way of Capitalism, but as we all know that Communism simply does not work then we have to find ways of integrating the Capitalist dogma into centre-left politics.

Only the New-Socialist movement does this even although many of the right-wing politicos would have us believe that they think this way too.

As the only centre-left parties that are available to us in Britain are the SNP and the Liberal Democrats and the New-Socialism followers like me are still too small in numbers we have to choose where we want our wishes and plans for the future to lie.

On balance, and while the fascist movements are still very strong in the main European states we cannot even depend on Europe to follow this ideal path.

Using unemployment as a rightist tool is now well known and even our own New-labour government are still too close to this right wing value to trust them to do right by the unemployed in Britain over the long term.

Being "market-led" is OK in many ways but this maxim can not be allowed to destroy employment relations. The only way that this can be avoided is to protect the unemployed with legislation that takes them out of the uncontrolled hands of the privateers.

[Ivanhoe]

Papaumau, Europe's Social Democracies have state intervention into Capitalists markets, which is what the Tories have always been against, because it's socialism to them.

And this is why Britain is lagging behind Europe, because we are market lead.