tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4169740113013066976.post1716183119229986537..comments2024-02-10T12:12:06.028+00:00Comments on The Real Blog: How the radical centre could win David Boylehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11410159311875228620noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4169740113013066976.post-70536892550537194002015-09-28T21:08:18.765+01:002015-09-28T21:08:18.765+01:00As Karin pointed out, the author hasn't listed...As Karin pointed out, the author hasn't listed novel or untried solutions, and I must say, competition seems to work against us most of the time insofar as each company that 'loses' pumps more gasoline on the fire. Could I say, why don't we try re-establishing the older economy that capitalism overthrew, one based on the broadest distribution of ownership rather than income? This can be a gradual transfer, not revolutionary but based on the break-up of monopolies combined with regulation to keep ownership distributed. For example, steeply escalating taxes with the fourth pizza franchise, and so forth. New wealth could be owned by the individual taxpayers of the nation (not by the government). We could also support the distribution of unused arable land to interested parties. South Korea is actually doing this with success in a new initiative (google South Korea Back to the Land), insofar as ten thousand persons since January have taken advantage of the program, which includes, land, tools, and technical support, according to one report I read. We must also do everything possible to boost our own native birthrate, and there are so many possibilities that cost little or nothing, just a matter of access. I refer you to Jonathan Last's What to Do When No One's Expecting, which is a little party platform all of its own. This is the key to our economic recovery, and sustained health. There won't be an economic recovery without it. None of these suggestions are socialist, but are people-oriented the way the old economy used to be, when both health care and education were free and open to all who wanted it, which was a greater proportion of the population than presently enrolled, and included women (from The Thirteenth Greatest of Centuries).Janethttps://malapertpress.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4169740113013066976.post-4360327130932291802015-09-28T19:28:03.284+01:002015-09-28T19:28:03.284+01:00Thanks for food for thought David.
The idea of co...<br />Thanks for food for thought David.<br /><br />The idea of co-production and unleashing the creative energy at the grass roots is very fine and probably the best hope for getting out of the depressing mess society is in. It's not anything new though - it's something people do naturally if we are not prevented by too many rules and authoritarianism. We get together with whoever we can find and solve problems. I suggest though the language you use is a problem - reducing people to commodities. Is co-production in real speak a natural outcome of being friendly and humane? words often ignored by academics, perhaps because they cannot be controlled or measured.<br /><br />I am a sentient being not a human resource and I don't want anyone tapping my assets. I would like though a genuine opportunity to share and participate. A friendly and humane atmosphere. It's a whole new kind of relationship and may be difficult for professionals who are used to being the decision makers. If ordinary folk are to gain in power someone will have to relinquish it. And speak in language that has warmth and creativity to show we are in it together. Who's going to go first?<br /><br />Karin Kennedy<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05090926313762772366noreply@blogger.com