Quote: Aaron @ November 1 2013, 2:32 PM GMTInteresting choice of example: most of the people I know in the media - in fact, all of the people I know particularly well - are from working class backgrounds.
Oh, actually - all but one.
Yes, but that's anecdotal. As I said above, anecdotal evidence is worth nothing (which is why my emotional response to the subject is worth nothing). The evidence I was providing on the media was statistical....if I could only remember what report it was in...
Well quite. Just a remark.
Quote: Aaron @ November 1 2013, 2:44 PM GMTWell quite. Just a remark.
Difficult to gauge tone online, innit 
I would be quite interested to hear how well-developed the accessible arguments are for why someone should vote. There is no edge here. It isn't to prove any particular point. After all, I have always voted.
But I would say that originally I believed that my individual vote could be influential. That hasn't turned out to be the case as there's never been a Government I wanted.
I also thought that I had a moral duty on account of the fact that people had fought in the war for it but I know that those of my relatives who did, if alive, would now abstain on principle.
There's the point about people in countries who don't have the vote being desperate for democracy but I get the distinct impression that many would be more satisfied by the ability to purchase consumer goods.
We live in quite an amoral society. Why such moral principle on this? And what is it precisely?
Quote: Horseradish @ November 1 2013, 3:23 PM GMTWe live in quite an amoral society. Why such moral principle on this?
Living in shit is no excuse for remaining living in shit.
Can someone summarise this thread for me into a few soundbites?
Quote: Marc P @ 1st November 2013, 10:34 PM GMTCan someone summarise this thread for me into a few soundbites?
Two celebs trigger a serious political discussion:
My opinion on things is better than your opinion.
Oh no it isn't.
It probably is.
Quote: Marc P @ 1st November 2013, 10:54 PM GMTIt probably is.
Btw, I had exactly the same thought as you on Campbell.
Great minds!
Quote: Marc P @ 31st October 2013, 9:46 PM GMTHow's that career in card writing gags going for you?
Quote: Tursiops @ 31st October 2013, 10:56 PM GMTThe 'don't vote it only encourages them' argument only really works in relation to Britain's Got Talent.
Quote: Aaron @ 1st November 2013, 1:49 PM GMTIt's a very simple mix. The German trade unions have learnt the lessons of their own history and know that they cannot reasonably demand ever-higher wages and working conditions: they have seen the horrors that the former produces.
The hyperinflation of 1923 had nothing to do with the demand for higher wages.
Germany had experienced high rates of inflation for the preceding 5 years, but the French invasion of the Ruhr and subsequent strike - instigated by the government rather than trade unionists - led to a shortfall of government income which they tried to fill by printing money which through a process I'm not entirely sure I understand caused the hyperinflation.
Quote: sglen @ 1st November 2013, 9:46 AM GMTJust want to say yes to this. In Germany, collective bargaining between trade unions and employers is the foundation to labour law. They don't even have a minimum wage, but their wages are generally higher and income inequality lower (and thus the economy stronger) because wages are negotiated in a way that is fair for both business and workers.
German wages are generally lower than here I believe. Significantly, so is the cost of living and as you rightly point out, the income inequality.
Quote: Rob H @ 2nd November 2013, 11:42 AM GMTGerman wages are generally lower than here I believe. Significantly, so is the cost of living and as you rightly point out, the income inequality.
I think that's more what I meant, really. How much you earn means nothing unless it's compared with the cost of living. Wages tend to look high in the UK compared with other countries, but so does rent etc.
Quote: Rob H @ 2nd November 2013, 11:42 AM GMTThe hyperinflation of 1923 had nothing to do with the demand for higher wages.
You seem to misunderstand the argument. I never said it did. The point is that the experience of the horrors of hyperinflation and all the factors surrounding it are (a large part of, but not exclusively) why German trade unions are more measured and less militant now, both in demand and operation, than ours.
And why their industry is, broadly, more successful as a result.
Quote: Rob H @ 2nd November 2013, 11:42 AM GMTGerman wages are generally lower than here I believe. Significantly, so is the cost of living and as you rightly point out, the income inequality.
You've inadvertently hit bang-on why the argument over fuel prices that currently engulfs British politics is such a load of bollocks.
But:
- We had the Great Depression so the German experience wasn't unique
- Unemployment has rocketed here although Brown kept inflation down
- Unemployment can often be linked to mechanisation/new technology
- It is also linked to absence of war/the lack of need for armaments
In Germany currently, footballers are paid much less than in Britain. The price of tickets is also much lower. The standard is not lower. The "industry" has no present reason to be different there. There is the same potential for television rights and income from spectators. And there is no identifiable link between, say, inflation in the 1920s and decisions made there.
But as the chairman of Bayern Munich said, the culture is just different. They don't see supporters as cash cows. Rather, they are purchasing a service. Consequently membership is higher than in other countries and it's a glorious "private sector" success. I imagine they don't believe that trickle down economics is anything more than a magic trick. A con in other words.