Allegations of widespread sexual exploitation of Calais migrants by British volunteers

[two sheds]

Don't be doltish.
The "sensible" thing is to not look at such things as an investment in the first place, but to see them as a right that everyone is due, and to address them as such. If you think about such things economically, then all that will ever happen in most cases is that a drip-feed of resources reach those in need, because those involved in the system that makes "investment" the prime modality will all have had their cut first.

This is just playing with words. In any system you like, you have to invest time and resources - investment. I invest time and resources to for example make my house energy efficient. I get the benefits of it later. There's no difference.

Investment isn't purely financial. Even in a capitalist society it's not purely financial. In a revolutionary society you're going to have to invest time and resources before you get the benefits.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Yes, but like I said what if it's the particular economic system that we happen to have? I agree totally with you - it's the wrong system. I'd love to see a better system. But it's what's there now.

And I agree totally that people should take back power into their own hands. And while they're doing that, we need investment. And even if people do take power back in their own hands, they'll still need they investment in the materials and labour to build homes for people to live in.

It's investment that has been lacking particularly since the 1980s and the end of the Social Contract.

WHY is it "where we are now"? It's "where we are now" because (in the UK and elsewhere) there's been an ongoing project of de-politicising people away from questioning the economic consensus.

As for your wibbling about the end of the Social Contract (The Social Contract is a book by boring bastard and wastrel JJ Rousseau), it's a "social compact", as there's no formal contractual agreement, just an understanding that in exchange for considerations, we consent to be ruled. Arguably, this compact has been repeatedly broken since it was first made. It's philosophical bollocks that distracts - and is meant to distract - from the reality that we're being robbed.

You're also confusing investment as spending on materials and products, with investment as a mode of rationing - not for preservative purposes, but as a means of social control - of resources.

 

[two sheds]

You're also confusing investment as spending on materials and products, with investment as a mode of rationing - not for preservative purposes, but as a means of social control - of resources.

I'm using it to mean spending on materials and products - I don't think I'm the one confusing it. Yes the government is using it as a means of social control of resources. That's sort of what I said, that the lack of investment is down to the government. It's their responsibility for the problems we have, rather than the people living under the system.

 

[Casually Red]

I'm "dragging" him in because you asked me who your "bestie" was, you eunuch.

You and your mates accusations against Liamo stand then I take it . Bearing in mind his identity is well known and those troll accounts were coming out with some well dodgy stuff ? you lot are a disgrace . Well out of order . The lot of you .

And you're not going to even try and back up your claims of me using alternate accounts either .

 

[bimble]

WHY is it "where we are now"? It's "where we are now" because (in the UK and elsewhere) there's been an ongoing project of de-politicising people away from questioning the economic consensus.

Right, so do not engage with the reality of where we are now, and what to do now we're here, where we live, instead lets just talk about WHY we are here.

 

[Casually Red]

Perhaps there'll be a fifth banning

If you're looking forward to it that badlyyou should sacrifice a goat, cast a spell or something . Might help .

 

[Pickman's model]

Right, so do not engage with the reality of where we are now, and what to do now we're here, where we live, instead lets just talk about WHY we are here.

Yeh let's not talk about where we want to go

 

[Pickman's model]

If you're looking forward to it that badlyyou should sacrifice a goat, cast a spell or something . Might help .

Oh I have

 

[ViolentPanda]

If you think that everyone on the planet has an equal right to a certain minimum amount of something, like say for instance clean water, access to healthcare, protection from violence, access to education etc, whatever, then how is that not connected with economics ie the distribution of resources?
The only way that what you've just written makes sense is if you imagine a whole new world in which there is no such thing as inequality, the way things are clearly there is, so 'investment' is another word for redistribution, moving wealth from one place to another isn't it?

How do we get from here to there? We don't get there through neoliberal modalities of "investment", which allocate resources on the basis of accumulating further surplus value. We only get there by allocating on the basis of a right to those resources. Yes, that's an ideal-type proposition, but unless and until we act on it as a concrete proposition, then "investment" will be meaningless. We've seen this for 20 years in the UK with regard to housing - a right under the UNHRC - where investment in housing has almost entirely been on housing that profits the developers, not on social housing, and where when our politicians speak of social housing, they mean "for non-market rent", even if that non=market rent is 70/80/90% of the market rate.

 

[two sheds]

WHY is it "where we are now"? It's "where we are now" because (in the UK and elsewhere) there's been an ongoing project of de-politicising people away from questioning the economic consensus.

Where have I said that it isn't?

As for your wibbling about the end of the Social Contract (The Social Contract is a book by boring bastard and wastrel JJ Rousseau), it's a "social compact", as there's no formal contractual agreement, just an understanding that in exchange for considerations, we consent to be ruled. Arguably, this compact has been repeatedly broken since it was first made. It's philosophical bollocks that distracts - and is meant to distract - from the reality that we're being robbed.

I was referring to the Post War Social Contract, as it's generally called. And yes I agree with the reality being that we're being robbed, but at least they were building some fucking houses. Which is what I was referring to.[/QUOTE]

 

[ViolentPanda]

Right, so do not engage with the reality of where we are now, and what to do now we're here, where we live, instead lets just talk about WHY we are here.

I'm forced to engage with the reality of where we are now every day. I live on an estate under the threat of demolition, with my income mostly drawn from benefits that can be withdrawn on a whim, willingly spending dozens of hours a week helping people in my community deal with the same slings and arrows. Excuse me for wanting to look beyond the interminable grind toward what might be possible if liberal whiners grew a spine.

 

[Pickman's model]

Where have I said that it isn't?



I was referring to the Post War Social Contract, as it's generally called. And yes I agree with the reality being that we're being robbed, but at least they were building some fucking houses. Which is what I was referring to.

You mean the postwar settlement

 

[ViolentPanda]

Where have I said that it isn't?



I was referring to the Post War Social Contract, as it's generally called. And yes I agree with the reality being that we're being robbed, but at least they were building some fucking houses. Which is what I was referring to.

[/QUOTE]

By North Americans, mostly. Here it's mostly been referred to by historians - left and right - as "post-war social democracy".

 

[bimble]

How do we get from here to there? We don't get there through neoliberal modalities of "investment", which allocate resources on the basis of accumulating further surplus value. We only get there by allocating on the basis of a right to those resources. Yes, that's an ideal-type proposition, but unless and until we act on it as a concrete proposition, then "investment" will be meaningless. We've seen this for 20 years in the UK with regard to housing - a right under the UNHRC - where investment in housing has almost entirely been on housing that profits the developers, not on social housing, and where when our politicians speak of social housing, they mean "for non-market rent", even if that non=market rent is 70/80/90% of the market rate.

You're talking about a world in which every human being has equal access to what they need in life. Great. "that's an ideal-type proposition" you say? Yes, it really is. I am totally aligned with your ideal type proposition.
So now what?
Let us commune online, revelling in our our platonic vision of a world remade and take the piss out of anyone who is trying to bridge the gap between that beautific vision and the world of horrific inequality which we actually live in.
In my job I get paid for stuff I do in the profitable industry that's called charity/ aid work, I'm a cog in the machine of deeply flawed redistribution / 'investment in developing nations', it's a total mess but its arguably better than just spitting from a great height at anyone interested in making things a bit better in the world we currently inhabit.

 

[two sheds]

Fucking hell lads, four pages because I used the word "investment" and asked that the government do it?

 

[Casually Red]

Fucking hell lads, four pages because I used the word "investment" and asked that the government do it?

There were also ladies . And don't forget the intersex ones either.

Leaving that out is a dead give away .

 

[TruXta]

Are you still at it you freakshow?

 

[Pickman's model]

Are you still at it you freakshow?

 

[Pickman's model]

Fucking hell lads, four pages because I used the word "investment" and asked that the government do it?

No

 

[two sheds]

Don't you start

 

[Casually Red]

Are you still at it you freakshow?

What's it to you flock of seagulls ?

 

[Treacle Toes]

 

[bimble]

ladies .

 

[Treacle Toes]

Fucking hilarious.

 

[Casually Red]

 

[TruXta]

What's it to you flock of seagulls ?

Mildly entertaining, I guess. Like watching a dog eat sick.

 

[Pickman's model]

Don't you start

You stop then

 

[Pickman's model]

Mildly entertaining, I guess. Like watching a dog eat sick.

You should get out more

 

[two sheds]

have done

 

[TruXta]

You should get out more

I really should. Wanna come and do some baby-sitting sometime soon?