The price was 112.000 in scotland and i am ex army bought when i was 19 after a tour of iraq with a good deposit.Left army and am doing between 60-70 hours perweek and the misses has a good jod so in 11 years payed off.Got a good head on my shoulders my aim in life is to be not working by the time i get to 55 hope life is still good to me.
Colin_scottish:
The price was 112.000 in scotland and i am ex army bought when i was 19 after a tour of iraq with a good deposit.Left army and am doing between 60-70 hours perweek and the misses has a good jod so in 11 years payed off.Got a good head on my shoulders my aim in life is to be not working by the time i get to 55 hope life is still good to me.
If I’ve read it right the OP is talking about the housing cost situation as it applies in the south east.In which case good luck with the same wage,deposit and mortgage payment for the same house here.As for 70 hours a week driving a truck.As I said great until someone falls asleep at the wheel of a truck bearing in mind it might be your family in the way at the time. 
Carryfast:
Colin_scottish:
The price was 112.000 in scotland and i am ex army bought when i was 19 after a tour of iraq with a good deposit.Left army and am doing between 60-70 hours perweek and the misses has a good jod so in 11 years payed off.Got a good head on my shoulders my aim in life is to be not working by the time i get to 55 hope life is still good to me.If I’ve read it right the OP is talking about the housing cost situation as it applies in the south east.In which case good luck with the same wage,deposit and mortgage payment for the same house here.As for 70 hours a week driving a truck.As I said great until someone falls asleep at the wheel of a truck bearing in mind it might be your family in the way at the time.
good god carryfast have a day off will you. a ■■■■ load of people work 60+ hours a week don’t fall asleep and haven’t killed the children. all you are doing is changing as per sodding normal the fact Colin-Scottish has made you look a knob, back into a rant about the south/think of the children/bet you needed the 60 hours to pay for it.
as I have said before you should be a politician as you cant answer a question, or wont, try or assume everyone else is thick. oh and your way I the only way. and I really didn’t want to rejoin this.
Carryfast:
James the cat:
Carryfast:
You the one making a “BS non existent link” in thinking a self sufficient trading regime would result in increased income. Did you not get the memo? What makes you think anyone in the world will pay for British goods, electronics at the prices of the pound when cheaper is available? It happened before, how do you propose it won’t happen again all over again? The whole reason Brit industry died is because of overseas options on goods. Are you saying you’d want the world to buy our stuff (sure they would over cheaper options) but deny British people the chance to buy overseas goods? They’d have none of it. You’d have to control the whole world. You probably want to. Now who’s system is starting to sound socialist? Mm? You’re arguments are as long as a short garden path and never well thought out.As I said you need to understand the meaning of the words trade deficit’.IE we’re importing more than we export in terms of manufactured goods that we could/should be making for ourselves.In that environment all of your bs assumptions above become totally meaningless.IE we stand to gain more by taking back our domestic market place than we stand to lose in our so called ‘export’ markets.Especially when doing so removes the contradiction between Chinese etc wage rates v UK living costs while also putting our own people back to work for decent wages that not only pay the bills but also contribute to the country’s taxation revenue requirement.As opposed to the totally opposite, economically illiterate and suicidal,ideas contained in your posts.
Ha ha I am getting under your skin. The mark of a frustrated self opinionated person always shows when they start talking down to people.
All this “you need to understand meaning of…”, “you’re unable to understand…” what a condescending man you are. I understand what a trade deficit is don’t you worry your self opinionated little google head.
It’s you that fails to understand basic written comprehension within a discussion. Basic communication. You’ve always done it. You don’t actually listen, read correctly or interpret what people are saying. You answer your own interpretation as you want to be so you can launch off dictating the same old points that don’t have any substance in their execution, when people disagree with you.
You’re droning on whilst missing what I’m saying. Instead of arguing with me why we SHOULD have a balance of trade and how I lack your knowledge (■■■■■■■■ by the way, I have 30 degrees and have been prime minister of 2 countries), why not answer why we don’t, and why it happened in the first place. None of your fancy little words addresses the fact that people may not choose to buy home grown products. Oh dear! What a problem! What are you going to do then??
What’s that you say old man? It’ll help the economy and I need to understand?? Ha ha, you plum, I get that in an ideal world we’d have a balance of trade. I’d like to ride to work on a unicorn and mow my solid gold grass on a weekend. But what you don’t get (because you’re not very good at comprehension) is that I’m saying you can blab on all you like that we need to do this, we need to do that, but the fact is, you can’t control what people buy to the extent your home grown industrial idea will work in balancing trade. Those products would need to compete in price and quality and desirability. In your 1960s world, people bought British because that’s all there was. Then options came along. It happened before. Hey, this is one you’re fond of throwing at people!:- a point you’ve ignored.
As for your little pearler where you misquoted and misunderstood me (unusual):- regarding not allowing people access to foreign market goods. Your response was “which part of trade barrier” do I not understand. Well, thats just it, I understand what a trade barrier is condescending-fast and couldn’t quite believe what you’re proposing. You want to artificially replicate a period that existed decades ago. It was nice while it lasted in retrospect and can see the attraction, but you intend using artificial methods to reinstate this period. A period that naturally existed by its time. You now want to force a return to this state by using, effectively trade barriers. Sanctions.
Ah but! I hear you cry! People will choose naturally when the balance of market forces created by your system dissolves any financial incentive to by foreign. Wanna bet money on that? It didn’t happen last time in the UK did it?
How do you propose to start fledging industries that will replace the foreign goods people enjoy? What will you do first. Create controlled trade barriers before these brands are to appear? Good luck with that. Lots of really ■■■■■■ off people in the population who now find it harder and more expensive to buy the things overseas they’re used to, whilst waiting for a UK alternative to crop up.
But then, if you have trade controls, good luck encouraging business creation to start the enterprises with trade restrictions in place. Maybe you could control trade later, after British industry has been reinvigorated. Mm, bit of a problem there. They’ve been trying to do that for years and it’s not happened. Pesky people will buy from overseas. What to do! Screw it, cut off Chinese imports, Euro car imports and tell folk they’ll love it when their wages one day go up when industry gets going. Right.
So. You’re going to effectively put measures in place to restrict people in the UK from buying goods for certain foreign markets, whilst other countries have access to those markets. USSR anyone? The world outside of the UK has not and will not change inline with your wishes. Markets don’t react well to countries who have trade restrictions. The countries that spring to mind that do have trade restrictions in place, shall we say are not exactly known for prosperity. In fact there existed a well known example of just the ideal you’re proposing. An example of what happens when the limited life span of Fordist idea was overtaken by the natural inevitable movement of capitalism and a movement to attempt to stem the tide. An example of trading restrictions in place. An example of an attempt to stem this capitalist world grapple for the lowest and cheapest denominator. An example of a product produced by the people and sold at a price the people could afford. The next model above priced so the powers that be could afford… the Trabant.
When you’re PM people will love you. You’ve not really thought this through have you.
Have a bash at answering my points using plain language. I bet you can’t get 5 steps without mentioning, “thatcher”, “socialism”, “Callaghan” or “Fordist” . Have a go. Here’s a clue, the greats of the world who lead well didn’t bleat on about history, lecturing people about the past did they? Your Henry Ford just told people, plain and simple what he was going to do for the future. Try it. I bet my bottom dollar you can’t because stripped of the history lessons and fancy hi brow missives, your ideas are not well thought out and would be naked to criticism. Emperors new clothes.
Edited multiple times - because I want to trump CF for the longest post. It’s my aim to have CF tell me my post was too long.
No your bs post is just another example of the type of thought process which says that replacing well paid jobs with cheap imports and applying socialist solutions to fix the results will work.
[/quote]
And there sir, I rest my case. That’s all you could come up with.You’ve managed to completely make up a point I didn’t make to try and sound superior.
Not once have I said replacing well paid jobs with cheap imports “will work”. Where did I say that? It’s already happened. I’m saying your proposed method to regain UK production status as it were pre 1970 is flawed doesn’t have any valid scrutiny in execution despite having SAID in actual letters “I CAN SEE THE ATTRACTION”. So much time spent lecturing on why Fordism is good, not such time spent in the details of what you’re proposing.
A hallmark of your debating is when someone knocks the legs from under you, I’ve noticed you attempt to challenge them on a point they didn’t make. If you can’t communicate with people on a basic level and listen, no one will listen to you… Total emperors new clothes
Carryfast you are a knob and again how many hours do you do per week.What job do you do or do nothing and live on benefits■■?.Or will i start a thread to find out what hours you do and what your job is.Answer the qusetion or are youa wee bit shy or scared.
Colin_scottish:
Carryfast you are a knob and again how many hours do you do per week.What job do you do or do nothing and live on benefits■■?.Or will i start a thread to find out what hours you do and what your job is.Answer the qusetion or are youa wee bit shy or scared.
You can start a topic as to my situation if you think that makes your bs issues any more justifiable.Although there’s not much point being that my previous posts elsewhere provide all the info required if it’s that important to your case.IE early retirment on health grounds involving no claim whatsoever for state benefits being that I already knew that the socialist system wouldn’t help in that eventuality.
Now why don’t you answer the question as to how you expect to pay for that house in the South East without ripping off the taxpayer and/or those like me getting zb interest rates on the money,which I made private provision for to support myself,all to subsidise their zb wages and guvnor’s profit margins.As for resorting to insults to justify my argument I could call you something far worse than a zb knob but I’m more intelligent and have more confidence in my argument than to need to do that. 
James the cat:
And there sir, I rest my case. That’s all you could come up with.You’ve managed to completely make up a point I didn’t make to try and sound superior.Not once have I said replacing well paid jobs with cheap imports “will work”. Where did I say that? It’s already happened. I’m saying your proposed method to regain UK production status as it were pre 1970 is flawed doesn’t have any valid scrutiny in execution despite having SAID in actual letters “I CAN SEE THE ATTRACTION”. So much time spent lecturing on why Fordism is good, not such time spent in the details of what you’re proposing.
A hallmark of your debating is when someone knocks the legs from under you, I’ve noticed you attempt to challenge them on a point they didn’t make. If you can’t communicate with people on a basic level and listen, no one will listen to you… Total emperors new clothes
You seemed to be clear enough in making the point concerning the so called superiority of the bs economics of cheap imports,as opposed to trade barriers that protect domestic industry to allow it to provide civilised wages and maintain a situation of at least trade balance in regards to anything which we can provide for ourselves.
As for Fordism is good that is the statement which contains all the ‘details’ needed when compared to post Fordist global free market economics.It isn’t my fault if you aren’t bright enough understand the difference and I’m not here as your teacher.If you want to find out what those ‘details’ are that differentiate the two systems and why global free market economics won’t work and isn’t working then find out for yourself.If you’re able to understand it that is ( doubtful )
Well i would live with in my means.I maybe young but if you get 30+grand a year you can no bother its all down to the deposit you have.Now why would i want to live in the south east when i earn 30+ a year in scotland with no debt.The south east does have high living cost but the wages are better down there than in scotland and thats fact.
war1974:
war1974:
in life you have to adapt, something people with your stance seem very unwilling to do. like I have said irrespective of who is/was/might be in power and no matter what idealism you want to follow, the basic way of the world at present is if you want to buy something you will have people who want quality and will pay for it (on this you can demand higher wages) or people want stuff as cheap as possible (cars/trucks/fuel/food etc.) where you cant pay top notch wages.you keep banging on about these ‘great’ companies and idealisms yet all of them have gone to the wall, why? most didn’t change most sat back on a comfy chair believing they were the best and people would always buy ‘british’ or the likes. you stand still too long and life will overtake you am afraid. go back 20 years when all the call centres were in England - people started trying to demand more money to answer phone calls, end result some indian is now doing it for a fraction of the price
While obviously people like you think that the answer to that isn’t to close the doors and start making stuff for ourselves again at decent wage rates.No let’s turn to socialism and turn the place into another version of zb Socialist China instead.In which case the OP is obviously way ahead of the agenda in calling for less wages to maintain his housing benefit dependency.
I want quality goods at a price I can afford without making myself obsolete like so many of your era did, I don’t want to follow an ideal or outdated way of the world if no one else is doing it.
the reason the UK manufacturing industry took such a hammering was because we turned out dross for years expecting good old British folks to do their duty.
I have had a mg rover which needed a head gasket about once a month then I went to a Subaru which as long as I changed the oil and belts was bullet proof.
I have seen shipbuilder strike over water / dockers walk out because the guys son didn’t get the job and they had the nerve to give it to someone better qualified, same at royal mail.yes your way was brilliant carryfast :roll
where as your way has us doing what ?
from what i see most people are to scared to stand up for themselves anymore as they will be out of a job, that is paying less and less as the years go by
what can they do about it ? nothing but accept whatever pay they can get as the going rate and of course put the hours in to make sure they can keep there roof over there heads
times have changed because the people have let it happen. drivers are the worse case as they have always been that way when it comes to making a stand, there to busy hoping somoene else will make a stand for them and if they lose there job they will be first in line to try to get the job
all drivers are any good at is moaning about poor pay, moaning about long hours, the answer is stop moaning and do something about it
i wonder if there will ever come a time where drivers would unite and say enough is really enough ?
maybe in 5 years time when 9 quid an hour is the going rate it might just make a difference drivers might stand up for themselves,but i dont think it will to be honest as 9 quid an hour is a huge pay for the people who come from poorer country’s
so all i can see happening in the future is the same that has happened to the nhs
you will be lucky to find an English speaking dr or nurse these days and it will be the same for trucking. that’s the Britain of the future
thanks to people like you who just dont have back bone to stand up and be counted. instead you let it all drift by in some sort of hope that it will never get that bad
have you not got a carrier bag to go and [zb] in pete?
I went and learned new skills which in turn made me more employable, I earn a decent wage so does my wife who has also studied and improved from what she was doing.
you don’t have to accept [zb] wages if you have belief or as others have said on here are good at your job etc. the difference is you seem to think if people don’t earn what you think is a good wage its wrong, personally I don’t give a flying [zb] what people earn as long as they are happy with it.
your a relic old boring repeat the same crap on every thread yet no longer do what you were doing.
[/quote]
[/quote]
you my friend will be one of the first to complain in life should you or your wife lose your jobs or being undercut by the people coming over here from other lands, for the moment you seem to be in a good position in life and well done
if you honestly believe you are to good to be replaced by the cheap workers coming over here then your in for a shock, like so many others have found out when it starts to affect them, but until such time as it does affect them directly well there going to be sitting in a good place, but for how long ?
you seem to have a good knowledge of carrier bags or people who carry them i wonder do you also have a limp ? as there is nothing worse than a carrier bag limping know all in my book, there almost as bad as a cpc sat nav moron who drives automatics and gets paid the same rate as someone who can do the job and is good at there job without such aids, or even worse than that a class 2 driver, now that is the bottom of the pile
No point to my post, which wouldn’t be the first in this thread! 
Just trying to break the 12 page barrier! 
Edit: ■■■■ it, I failed!
When this idea of charging council tennants who work more for their rent I was faced with a choice. Be punished for working by the council or pay extortionate rent to a private landlord. I then realised there was a third option. I am now about to buy the council flat I have lived in for nearly twenty years, for a 70% discount! Using the meagre savings I have aquired whilst paying off debts accrued trying to better myself, I will soon be rent/morgage free. Not to mention the fact that in five years time I could sell my asset for nearly ten times what I paid (probably won’t though, I like it here).
I don’t give a ■■■■ about twenty year old politics, I just give a ■■■■ about the here and now.
Carryfast:
James the cat:
And there sir, I rest my case. That’s all you could come up with.You’ve managed to completely make up a point I didn’t make to try and sound superior.Not once have I said replacing well paid jobs with cheap imports “will work”. Where did I say that? It’s already happened. I’m saying your proposed method to regain UK production status as it were pre 1970 is flawed doesn’t have any valid scrutiny in execution despite having SAID in actual letters “I CAN SEE THE ATTRACTION”. So much time spent lecturing on why Fordism is good, not such time spent in the details of what you’re proposing.
A hallmark of your debating is when someone knocks the legs from under you, I’ve noticed you attempt to challenge them on a point they didn’t make. If you can’t communicate with people on a basic level and listen, no one will listen to you… Total emperors new clothes
You seemed to be clear enough in making the point concerning the so called superiority of the bs economics of cheap imports,as opposed to trade barriers that protect domestic industry to allow it to provide civilised wages and maintain a situation of at least trade balance in regards to anything which we can provide for ourselves.
As for Fordism is good that is the statement which contains all the ‘details’ needed when compared to post Fordist global free market economics.It isn’t my fault if you aren’t bright enough understand the difference and I’m not here as your teacher.If you want to find out what those ‘details’ are that differentiate the two systems and why global free market economics won’t work and isn’t working then find out for yourself.If you’re able to understand it that is ( doubtful )
Since the gloves are off. Are you actually stupid or just pretending to be stupid? Which bit did you not understand regarding how you plan to execute you idea of taking the UK successfully back to a pre post Fordist system? You seem beligenrantly hung up and clinging onto the idea I’m disagreeing with you re Fordism. I have NOT for the thousandth time simple boy said that Fordist Capiltalism in not a desirable situation. I also have NOT said anything to suggest there is superiority in “BS” imports. It’s this basic lack of communication that makes you so imbecilic.
I’ll try again since you’re so thick. I AM SAYING (NOTHING TO DO WITH FOREGN IMPORTS BEING SUPERIOR, OR NOTHING TO DO WITH FORDIAM CAPITALISM NOT BEING A NICE IDEA) THAT YOUR PROPOSED METHODS TO ATTEMPT TO BRING THIS BACK WON’T WORK.
There is a vast difference in someone disagreeing with method and then insinuating they must be against the principles. Thats like a building company who’s building your house. They wants to build it on a flood plain. You disagree citing the obvious pitfalls. The response?! “oh you clearly want to live in a tent then do you? Are you anti house?”. Er no. I want a house thank you, but built using correct methods and well planned by a sensible individual.
The are many reasons why the Fordist model hit a rock in the west and moved to post Fordist. The globalisation of production was the effective downfall of the Fordist idea. The growth potential in the market place for mass produced consumer goods reached a saturation point in the 70s. Disaffection from the workforce in seeing degraded conditions compared with the aspirational achievement of those above. The widened gap between prices of products outstripping the regulated and degrading wage structure. The populus enlightenment of higher achievement moving towards more white collar aspirations. The financial crisis dug deep. Internationalisation watered down the effectiveness of state economic management and the emerging available options to the western consumer from Far Eastern and European options further added to the saturation of the market place.
Attempts to use economic controls and trade sanctions to sustain an internal pre post fordist model within local manufacturing can be seen in the likes of the former USSR and GDR. Trade sanctions and sanction controls in a post Fordist west don’t work well.
As the well known phrase went in the early 1970s Britain “you pretend to pay me, and I’ll pretend to work”
Evil8Beezle:
No point to my post, which wouldn’t be the first in this thread!Just trying to break the 12 page barrier!
Edit: ■■■■ it, I failed!
you make a dam good point
James the cat:
Since the gloves are off. Are you actually stupid or just pretending to be stupid? Which bit did you not understand regarding how you plan to execute you idea of taking the UK successfully back to a pre post Fordist system? You seem beligenrantly hung up and clinging onto the idea I’m disagreeing with you re Fordism. I have NOT for the thousandth time simple boy said that Fordist Capiltalism in not a desirable situation. I also have NOT said anything to suggest there is superiority in “BS” imports. It’s this basic lack of communication that makes you so imbecilic.I’ll try again since you’re so thick. I AM SAYING (NOTHING TO DO WITH FOREGN IMPORTS BEING SUPERIOR, OR NOTHING TO DO WITH FORDIAM CAPITALISM NOT BEING A NICE IDEA) THAT YOUR PROPOSED METHODS TO ATTEMPT TO BRING THIS BACK WON’T WORK.
There is a vast difference in someone disagreeing with method and then insinuating they must be against the principles. Thats like a building company who’s building your house. They wants to build it on a flood plain. You disagree citing the obvious pitfalls. The response?! “oh you clearly want to live in a tent then do you? Are you anti house?”. Er no. I want a house thank you, but built using correct methods and well planned by a sensible individual.
The are many reasons why the Fordist model hit a rock in the west and moved to post Fordist. The globalisation of production was the effective downfall of the Fordist idea. The growth potential in the market place for mass produced consumer goods reached a saturation point in the 70s. Disaffection from the workforce in seeing degraded conditions compared with the aspirational achievement of those above. The widened gap between prices of products outstripping the regulated and degrading wage structure. The populus enlightenment of higher achievement moving towards more white collar aspirations. The financial crisis dug deep. Internationalisation watered down the effectiveness of state economic management and the emerging available options to the western consumer from Far Eastern and European options further added to the saturation of the market place.
Attempts to use economic controls and trade sanctions to sustain an internal pre post fordist model within local manufacturing can be seen in the likes of the former USSR and GDR. Trade sanctions and sanction controls in a post Fordist west don’t work well.
As the well known phrase went in the early 1970s Britain “you pretend to pay me, and I’ll pretend to work”
Your continuing use of insults to make your bs point shows who isn’t the brightest in this case.
There’s enough evidence in your posts to show that you can’t be anything other than absolutely opposed to the principles of a Fordist economic model as opposed to the post Fordist global free markets lowest common denominator zb system which we are now living under.On that note what you’re describing and trying ( without success ) to justify is the difference between today’s China v the 1960’s American economic model that I’m describing.Good luck with making the former idea work as opposed to the proven fact that the latter system did and still would.A system,in which of course,there was no place or no need for the level of state economic involvement which characterises the former,because it was/is based on the idea of paying people enough wages to look after themselves.
Carryfast:
James the cat:
Since the gloves are off. Are you actually stupid or just pretending to be stupid? Which bit did you not understand regarding how you plan to execute you idea of taking the UK successfully back to a pre post Fordist system? You seem beligenrantly hung up and clinging onto the idea I’m disagreeing with you re Fordism. I have NOT for the thousandth time simple boy said that Fordist Capiltalism in not a desirable situation. I also have NOT said anything to suggest there is superiority in “BS” imports. It’s this basic lack of communication that makes you so imbecilic.I’ll try again since you’re so thick. I AM SAYING (NOTHING TO DO WITH FOREGN IMPORTS BEING SUPERIOR, OR NOTHING TO DO WITH FORDIAM CAPITALISM NOT BEING A NICE IDEA) THAT YOUR PROPOSED METHODS TO ATTEMPT TO BRING THIS BACK WON’T WORK.
There is a vast difference in someone disagreeing with method and then insinuating they must be against the principles. Thats like a building company who’s building your house. They wants to build it on a flood plain. You disagree citing the obvious pitfalls. The response?! “oh you clearly want to live in a tent then do you? Are you anti house?”. Er no. I want a house thank you, but built using correct methods and well planned by a sensible individual.
The are many reasons why the Fordist model hit a rock in the west and moved to post Fordist. The globalisation of production was the effective downfall of the Fordist idea. The growth potential in the market place for mass produced consumer goods reached a saturation point in the 70s. Disaffection from the workforce in seeing degraded conditions compared with the aspirational achievement of those above. The widened gap between prices of products outstripping the regulated and degrading wage structure. The populus enlightenment of higher achievement moving towards more white collar aspirations. The financial crisis dug deep. Internationalisation watered down the effectiveness of state economic management and the emerging available options to the western consumer from Far Eastern and European options further added to the saturation of the market place.
Attempts to use economic controls and trade sanctions to sustain an internal pre post fordist model within local manufacturing can be seen in the likes of the former USSR and GDR. Trade sanctions and sanction controls in a post Fordist west don’t work well.
As the well known phrase went in the early 1970s Britain “you pretend to pay me, and I’ll pretend to work”
Your continuing use of insults to make your bs point shows who isn’t the brightest in this case.
There’s enough evidence in your posts to show that you can’t be anything other than absolutely opposed to the principles of a Fordist economic model as opposed to the post Fordist global free markets lowest common denominator zb system which we are now living under.On that note what you’re describing and trying ( without success ) to justify is the difference between today’s China v the 1960’s American economic model that I’m describing.Good luck with making the former idea work as opposed to the proven fact that the latter system did and still would.A system,in which of course,there was no place or no need for the level of state economic involvement which characterises the former.
I’ll think your find Carryfast I was perfectly reasonable albeit as equally energetic in my points as you right up until the point you started coming out with phrases like “people like you” “you need to understand” and generally placing assertions on my intelligence because I disagreed with you. It was only then I pointed out that people who start being condescending and talking down to people are usually on the hind foot.
You carried it on, keeping on insulting my intelligence and you got a response. Talking down to someone has the habit of illiciting a response. And by the way it’s insulting. It doesn’t bother me but it clearly bothers you but I will give it back. If you can’t deal with it don’t dish it out.
Now the gloves are off my points stands. You lack the ability to communicate or interpret views correctly. By the way, you still seem hell bent to destruction on telling me what I think. You must be actually very slow minded. How many times do I have to TELL you!!! I don’t disagree with Fordism. I AM CHALLENGING YOUR PROPOSED METHODS I AM NOT PROPOSING ANY ALTERNATIVES, NEVER ONCE DID I SAY I FEEL WE SHOULD DO THIS. I know what I think and you will not tell me otherwise. It’s a case of “my way or the highway, lest I call you a dissenter” with you. Brick wall.
I’d say given you resort to attempting to acknowledge challenges and set upon spurious interpretations and insistances on anthers viewpoint. It’s all very good dodging tactics if used sparingly. You don’t use sparingly.
If intelligence is measured by clarity of observation and rational adoption of differing views being welcomed to any robust, and easily defended proposal without resorting to insulting the challenger’s intelligence, then you are a star grade, dyed in the wool dullard.
Carryfast:
James the cat:
Since the gloves are off. Are you actually stupid or just pretending to be stupid? Which bit did you not understand regarding how you plan to execute you idea of taking the UK successfully back to a pre post Fordist system? You seem beligenrantly hung up and clinging onto the idea I’m disagreeing with you re Fordism. I have NOT for the thousandth time simple boy said that Fordist Capiltalism in not a desirable situation. I also have NOT said anything to suggest there is superiority in “BS” imports. It’s this basic lack of communication that makes you so imbecilic.I’ll try again since you’re so thick. I AM SAYING (NOTHING TO DO WITH FOREGN IMPORTS BEING SUPERIOR, OR NOTHING TO DO WITH FORDIAM CAPITALISM NOT BEING A NICE IDEA) THAT YOUR PROPOSED METHODS TO ATTEMPT TO BRING THIS BACK WON’T WORK.
There is a vast difference in someone disagreeing with method and then insinuating they must be against the principles. Thats like a building company who’s building your house. They wants to build it on a flood plain. You disagree citing the obvious pitfalls. The response?! “oh you clearly want to live in a tent then do you? Are you anti house?”. Er no. I want a house thank you, but built using correct methods and well planned by a sensible individual.
The are many reasons why the Fordist model hit a rock in the west and moved to post Fordist. The globalisation of production was the effective downfall of the Fordist idea. The growth potential in the market place for mass produced consumer goods reached a saturation point in the 70s. Disaffection from the workforce in seeing degraded conditions compared with the aspirational achievement of those above. The widened gap between prices of products outstripping the regulated and degrading wage structure. The populus enlightenment of higher achievement moving towards more white collar aspirations. The financial crisis dug deep. Internationalisation watered down the effectiveness of state economic management and the emerging available options to the western consumer from Far Eastern and European options further added to the saturation of the market place.
Attempts to use economic controls and trade sanctions to sustain an internal pre post fordist model within local manufacturing can be seen in the likes of the former USSR and GDR. Trade sanctions and sanction controls in a post Fordist west don’t work well.
As the well known phrase went in the early 1970s Britain “you pretend to pay me, and I’ll pretend to work”
Your continuing use of insults to make your bs point shows who isn’t the brightest in this case.
There’s enough evidence in your posts to show that you can’t be anything other than absolutely opposed to the principles of a Fordist economic model as opposed to the post Fordist global free markets lowest common denominator zb system which we are now living under.On that note what you’re describing and trying ( without success ) to justify is the difference between today’s China v the 1960’s American economic model that I’m describing.Good luck with making the former idea work as opposed to the proven fact that the latter system did and still would.A system,in which of course,there was no place or no need for the level of state economic involvement which characterises the former,because it was/is based on the idea of paying people enough wages to look after themselves.
It didn’t work beyind the inevitable globalised conculsion did it? And for reasons you clearly do not understand yourself. Oh wait, I must be saying globalisation and saturation of market potential using socialist backwater employment strategies is a good idea because I’m pointing out what actually happened!
Carryfast:
justify is the difference between today’s China v the 1960’s American economic model that I’m describing.:
The 1960s economic model that failed for the points listed?
The points you still haven’t addressed as to how would be fixed using trade sanctions
I was talking about the GDR and USSR. Not China, not unsuccessfully. You feel unsuccessfully because you can’t grasp it and I was talking about something you don’t like, attempting to steer my point to another country that sets you up for a rebuttal. A rebuttal that yet again, has no substance as to it’s execution!! A rebuttal that ignores literature from far brighter people who cite the very trade sanctions you are proposing failed to work and only were seen during the transition to post fordism with “sub fordist” entities set up behind tightly controlled trading conditions within Socialist countries that cut out capitalism and globalisation. The model stopped working.
The best bit is jumping from A to Z and then accusing me (a massive leap) using tenuous phrases like “enough evidence” (er, where?) to suggest I support globalisation of the market place. Er no. I’m just saying for all your words you haven’t suggested how trae embargoes will effectively reverse the UK’s reliance on global trade, aspirational white collar achievement and place people in a contented way back into a blue collar situation where the mass production of consumer goods takes place using false trading conditions that will not support the on going productivity of those companies or prevent what happened before,from happening again.
James the cat:
Carryfast:
justify is the difference between today’s China v the 1960’s American economic model that I’m describing.:The 1960s economic model that failed for the points listed?
The points you still haven’t addressed as to how would be fixed using trade sanctions
I was talking about the GDR and USSR. Not China, not unsuccessfully. You feel unsuccessfully because you can’t grasp it and I was talking about something you don’t like, attempting to steer my point to another country that sets you up for a rebuttal. A rebuttal that yet again, has no substance as to it’s execution!! A rebuttal that ignores literature from far brighter people who cite the very trade sanctions you are proposing failed to work and only were seen during the transition to post fordism with “sub fordist” entities set up behind tightly controlled trading conditions within Socialist countries that cut out capitalism and globalisation. The model stopped working.
The best bit is jumping from A to Z and then accusing me (a massive leap) using tenuous phrases like “enough evidence” (er, where?) to suggest I support globalisation of the market place. Er no. I’m just saying for all your words you haven’t suggested how trae embargoes will effectively reverse the UK’s reliance on global trade, aspirational white collar achievement and place people in a contented way back into a blue collar situation where the mass production of consumer goods takes place using false trading conditions that will not support the on going productivity of those companies or prevent what happened before,from happening again.
Is that total load of bollox the best that you can manage.
Firstly since when was the GDR or USSR run along Fordist Capitalist lines.
Exactly when did the 1960’s US Fordist Capitalist model ‘fail’.As opposed to it being dismantled and destroyed in the rush to follow the globalist model which is actually closer to that Communist model in terms of it’s exploitative race to the bottom wage regime.
Feel free to show any evidence that this is a reflection of the GDR or USSR.
youtube.com/watch?v=02eULOTP6CA
Feel free to explain how a system,that’s based on the artificial minimisation of wage levels by use of cheap labour in Communist countries like China.Or by immigration by a foreign low wage expectation workforce to oversupply the labour market.To the point where it requires widespread state intervention,either in the form of localised over supply/over development,and/or state housing benefits,in a doomed attempt to make housing costs affordable.Supposedly ‘helps’ so called ‘white collar aspirations’ or in fact anyone’s aspirations.Also how any of that doesn’t fit the definition of ‘false trading conditions’.
Feel free to show exactly where the GDP of the USA per capita was worse during the 1960’s than it is now.Or in fact any of the normally accepted economic signs which would show that the US economy is in better shape and performing better now than it was during the 1960’s.
Finally is your name zb Blair or Cameron or are you at least a full on believer in their bs idea of economics.
Carryfast:
Firstly since when was the GDR or USSR run along Fordist Capitalist lines.
Okedok (whispers- by the way, countries aren’t ‘run’ according to Fordist lines, that’s a model of production operating within a given country, but you knew that right? I’ll keep that blunder a secret don’t worry.)
From Harunito Shiomi, "Fordism transformed:the development of production methods in the automobile industry (lets see what “■■■■■■■■” he has to say about Fordism not existing with the GDR. And trade restrictions within the GDR):-
"The GDR did try to utilize the advantages of mass production, where the possibilities of standardization and the adoption of large scale production could be used extensively. This was the case for instance, in ship building and later in the serial style construction of apartment blocks. In principle the GDR’s automobile industry was also organized on Fordist lines…(oh dear on the first point CF 
)
…The ‘Trabant’, a 500cc two cylinder two-stoke car, began production at the end of 1957…
…with annual production runs of 100,000 and 50,000 cars, respectively (Waryburg -sic) there was no shortage of incentive for the adoption of Ford methods of mass production. Nor can the relevance of another Ford paradigm, the limited availability of a qualified workforce, be denied for East Germany in the 1950s,…
…Precisely the effort to practice ‘Fordism in one country’ (see Vobkamp and Wittke 1990) makes clear that the innovative power of the new production methods, as instanced above all in the car industry in West Germany, did not lie primarily in the utilization of ‘economics of scale’. Rather, the deepening integration into the world market in the 1950s offered the precondition for a high degree of division of labour, which bought considerable cost advantages, eased the transfer of technologies across borders, and hastened the adoption of innovations under pressure of competition. In contrast, the GDR had to develop and produce special machines and other high-tech inputs on her own, whereas the West German automobile industry was able to import such sophisticated devices from the USA…"
Oh dear, oh deary me. Not looking good for those trade sanctions of yours.