675.cc • Triumph 675 Forum

Furious with the NHS

Discussion in 'Rants & Raves' started by Edski675, Dec 30, 2011.

  1. A cartoon that I like, which is loosely related ;) :
     

    Attached Files:

  2. David

    David

    685
    2
    0
    Location: West Sussex
    D41 why not private armies? See triplex cartoon above


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  3. Do you prefer the egyptian model then?
     
  4. David

    David

    685
    2
    0
    Location: West Sussex
    No I prefer the British model. I guess the private model was useful for Gaddafi when he needed to machine gun civilians in the street and his regular soldiers wouldn't do it but I'm not sure if that's a lead we should take.
    Privatising these services doesn't address your concerns about parasites - armies and health workers utility workers etc don't create wealth under either model they still provide services at a cost do by your reasoning still "parasitic"


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  5. My concerns regarding the parasite class are not related to wealth creation. As i've repeatedly said, my concerns are around the fact that those entities exist entirely free of fair competition and are funded, regardless of performance or in many cases necessity, through violent extortion. So we have now a huge swathe of society that are dependant on the state for their livelyhood or are hooked on welfare. This group of people will fight ferociously to maintain the status quo whether it is justified or not.

    And also you should consider that private defense, and the absence of a state and it's hired thugs, would actually protect against things like Gaddafi machine gunning civillians in the street. Do you honestly believe that our own security forces would react any differently in putting down an armed insurrection?
     
  6. David

    David

    685
    2
    0
    Location: West Sussex
    Yes I believe it's likely they would as they did in Libya which is why a private army of overseas soldiers were employed to do the work. Are you suggesting there would be multiple private armies competing for business? What would happen when another nation commissioned them for more money to switch sides?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  7. Gadaffi's forces did fight, and I think it's wishful thinking to suggest that our's wouldn't. Just look at what's happening right now in the US on an almost daily basis where people are being pepper sprayed in the face, tear gassed, and choked out for sitting on the pavement.

    I believe that turned out to be a fabrication, which unfortunately led to the persecution and wholesale murder of subsaharan Africans in Libya.

    Our standing armies serve in return for pay. Armies of the state have been turning against their leadership long before Julius Ceasar crossed the Rubicon. There is no difference except that in a free society the state's monopoly on violence wouldn't be enshrined in law. Considering that maintaining an army costs money, I would imagine a system where regional communities either contribute funding to a wider army, or perhaps maintain their own regional militias.

    The need for military might would be much lower than is maintained currently because firstly there would be no corrupt state ambition to sail around the world killing foreigners. And secondly, what incentive would there be for a foreign power to invade a peaceful country where the population are armed and there is no coercive state driven agendas.

    There is alot of literature available on the web regarding research into and proposals for possible private security and defense in an anarchist, or possibly even a minarchist society.
     
  8. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    Just to interject at this point and claim the middle ground, we have over many years developed certain rules and customs in the UK that have served us well for the best part of two hundred years.

    For the best part of the last century we have had an NHS that was at times the envy of the world and is still a damn site better than nearly all other countries. We had a rail system and a judicial system that has been copied around the world and a parliamentary system that has been widely copied.

    we had public utilities that provided power and sanitation that allowed us to become a first world nation.

    None of these things are perfect and are in most cases in dire need of attention. But at one time they were the envy of the world.

    Somewhere between privatize everything and state controlled behemoths on every corner is a sensible middle ground that nationalises things like utilities, national security, infrastructure and some sort of social safety net for all (the NHS for instance). At the same time allows free enterprise to flourish.
     
  9. More like a minarchy then, although I think that would probably still be a bit too privately oriented, by most definitions, for you.
     
  10. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    Whats a minarchy?

    I am a pragamatist, if privatisation would work then why not. But many of the examples we speak of have no meaningful mechanism for introducing the competitive forces of the free market.

    We should adapt what we have, not throw the baby out with the bath water

    Most attempts to privatise these have been abject failures, in many cases the "performance culture" has had a negative impact - education, policing and healthcare for example.

    At best we can only rely on the dedication and commitment of the few good people left in those jobs.
     
  11. D41

    D41

    13,919
    139
    63
    Location: Orange, CA
    Large public sector + Greece = EPIC GIGANTIC FAIL!!!
     
  12. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    Too true, its all a question of balance.
     
  13. D41

    D41

    13,919
    139
    63
    Location: Orange, CA
    Don't worry....California won't be far behind!!

    The number of State Government employees has doubled since 2001 (or sommit like that...I'll have a look for the stats.)

    38% of all welfare recipients in the entire USA reside in California.

    Move over Greece...there's a new kid in town!
     
  14. A minarchy is essentially a form of minimal government. Generally it's job would be defense (not preemptive attack), perhaps utilities, etc., and nothing more. Minimal power equals minimal taxation equals minimal waste, greater liberty and prosperity.

    Well interestingly (or not?), this is how I felt up until fairly recently. I decided that while I might be an anarchist at heart, pragmatically I was a minarchist as anarchy is a hard sell to people who don't understand it, and any evolution towards anarchy would have to go through an intermediate state of minarchy.

    The trouble is, that while i firmly believe that anarchy would be beneficial to the wellbeing and economic prosperity of the public, I *try* as best I can to reason from first principles. And as nice as it sounds, a minarchy still exists as an immoral use of coercion. It's like saying "we will no longer tolerate people to own as many slaves as they like. From now on you are only allowed 1 slave".

    While it's a step in the right direction, and I'd love to see Ron Paul (a constitutional minarchist libertarian) become president in the US, it still would violate the philosphic principles of liberty in that it would ligitimize the initiation of coercion by the state.

    Now I could put my principles aside for the sake of spreading the idea of liberty to millions of people who are indoctrinated not to qustion the status quo, and the big step it would make in moving society towards freedom, but i've since been convinced of, firstly, the reasons why Ron Paul could never achieve the things he promises, and secondly that even if he did (which would be my hopeful reason to support him - he's a clever guy) it would result in mayhem (due to the parasitie class fighting to resist) and set back the cause of libertarianism by 100 years at least, as well as resulting in mass bloodshed on the streets.

    So now the best approach I can see is to live a libertarian life, free from the initiation of coercion against others, to reject the state and the idea of the state in all forms possible, to ostracise and reject those who, given consideration, still choose to suport the use of state initiated violence, and to raise any children similarly to embrace the non-aggression principle, as free-thinking, soverign, beings, as early as possible. Then the meme will spread, and perhaps my grandchildren might enjoy life as free men and women, rather than as cattle.
     
  15. D41

    D41

    13,919
    139
    63
    Location: Orange, CA
    You need to go for a ride!! :lol: :lol:
     
  16. I do! I can't wait for some warm sunshine!
     
  17. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist ... or is it the other way round?

    Evolution over Revolution is my philosophy.

    We live in a what was a democracy, I say was because the unelected Eurocrats in Brussels seem intent on controlling us all now, just ask the Greeks.

    Its hard to imagine how future generations will change things, what lessons will they take from History? Is history even taught in school nowadays.
     
  18. dino

    dino

    1,774
    3
    38
    Location: Bromley Kent
    Got to do something to exercise the grey cells while not on a bike :D :D :D
     
  19. David

    David

    685
    2
    0
    Location: West Sussex
    I rode to work this morning there were fallen trees in the road, gusts of wind all over the place totally dark and pouring with rain, but bloody good fun! Looking forward to riding home before reading up on minarchism tonight!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     

  20. :p It's a bit of a minefield with people hijacking terms like 'libertarian' and twisting it's meaning. I was a bit dissappointed to read an article on Noam Chomsky's views of libertarianism the other week. His views of what it's all about are completely skewed from the views of any real libertarian i've spoken to.
     

Share This Page

Loading...
  1. By using this website you agree to our Cookies usage. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, ads and Newsletters:
    Dismiss Notice