Ian1779
Well-Known Member
The universally accepted way by capitalists.
The universally accepted way by capitalists.The universally accepted way to measure inequality: the Gini coefficient.
Don’t over complicate it. ?
Never heard of it. Sounds like an online computer game. What is it?
The universally accepted way by capitalists.
The universally accepted way by capitalists.
Alt right news and conspiracy theory site.
Claimed that the Sandy Hook massacre wasn't real and that the pictures of dead children were faked using actors.
Infowars followers started harassing bereaved parents, one father took his own life. There's more but you get the picture.
I didn’t Ian I asked a definition and I receive back a lot of lazy cliches of labour bullshit bingo - I need an answer to my questions please and then I will respond accordingly but the crucial one is if the Blair government was the perfect model for you as I suspect it isn’t - I suspect it’s Corbynomics
Can you at least address this one crucial point in the debate please?
economists. If you disagree with the way it is calculated, let us know what it is that you think is flawed - because as a mathematician it seems perfectly logical to me.
You don’t need my definition to answer the question - you are just deflecting as per usual.
There’s a reason they have high taxation, it’s to provide a good standard of living through socialism, they have good health care, good education system, good welfare system etc. They have a good work life balance ethic etc etc. The Nordic Model is a socialist movement, one that strikes a balance with capitalism and one that works very very well. Seriously, read up on the Nordic Model, look at the country’s that operate it, look how those countries fair in any measurement compared to pure capitalist countries. The model of capitalism we follow along with many other countries is as bust a flush as the communism of the Cold War. Our country needs to wake up to itself, unfortunately the media, certain politicians and the people who back them don’t want that so feed us bullshit like Brexit.In which Nordic countries do the people own the means of production, Tony?
Capitalist countries (with free markets and private enterprise) with high taxation is not socialism.
The universally accepted way to measure inequality: the Gini coefficient.
Ian you haven’t answered a single point raised by myself or Mr Trench all day
Still you can I guess believe the majority are deflecting you time and time again and I suspect this will be your stock answer for every defeat of your political ideology
Not that we know what the ideology is Ian as oddly you’ve been deflecting that question all day long
I have - I don’t agree with trench’s assertion that communism and socialism are the same thing. He won’t change his opinion and neither will I.
Nor do I agree with with assertion on the measure of inequality - but again neither of us will be changing our opinions anytime soon.
There is no such thing as Corbynomics - just a nonsense phrase made up by people like you to discredit a different way of financial thinking without having to do any critical analysis.I was more interested in your view of Blairite labour versus corbynimics
There is no such thing as Corbynomics - just a nonsense phrase made up by people like you to discredit a different way of financial thinking without having to do any critical analysis.
As a mathematician I’m well aware of the manipulation of statistics to say pretty much anything you want it to.
I have - I don’t agree with trench’s assertion that communism and socialism are the same thing. He won’t change his opinion and neither will I.
Nor do I agree with his assertion on the measure of inequality - but again neither of us will be changing our opinions anytime soon.
It's a calculation. The definition of the calculation is clear. This is not about manipulating statistics, it's about making a calculation using a formula and then publishing the result. There is no manipulation because the formula is defined up front.
I repeat, what is it about the formula that you believe is flawed?
And whilst we are here, if you believe only capitalists would use Gini to measure inequality, how would socialists calculate it? Point me to the definition of the formula that you ne'er-do-wells prefer.
Richard Murphy claims there is Ian
He’s liking hard.... maybe me Brighton and Tony are going to have to step our game up.Nice to see Grendels got a mate anyway. Made up for the pair of you.
Nice to see Grendels got a mate anyway. Made up for the pair of you.
Firstly it’s one dimensional - and I don’t believe it should be used as a single measure to decide on inequality.
Secondly, as Dreamer said - it can be skewed by extremes at either end - even during the Cov-ID crisis we are hearing about the vast increase in personal wealth for some people - no doubt off set by the increase in destitution at the other end.
Richard Murphy is, IMHO, a low-brow Marxist activist. However the one thing I do admire about him is that he doesn't even pretend that he's a qualified economist. He uses the term 'political economist' to describe himself - which is basically a made-up title to avoid admitting that he has nothing to back up his opinions. So much better than Ramesh Patel, who claims he has a Phd in Economics but doesn't bear even the slightest scrutiny to know he knows fuck all.
He’s liking hard.... maybe me Brighton and Tony are going to have to step our game up.
lol. I can't believe I'm having a conversation on a football forum with some random bloke criticising a universally accepted economic formula.
So which multi-dimensional model (which pays extra attention to the extremes) would you anti-capitalists use? Because I think the answer is 'The Anecdotal Model', which is preferred because it cannot be calculated and you can use it to make any case you want without the tiresome burden of evidence.
It’s not really a debate though is it? You believe the model you are referring to is without flaw. Your dismissal of ‘anecdotal data’ means that you won’t change your mind either.
Some countries have moved beyond assessing a countries ‘success’ based on financial metrics alone. I believe this is a better way to move forward in the future.
lol. I can't believe I'm having a conversation on a football forum with some random bloke criticising a universally accepted economic formula.
So which multi-dimensional model (which pays extra attention to the extremes) would you anti-capitalists use? Because I think the answer is 'The Anecdotal Model', which is preferred because it cannot be calculated and you can use it to make any case you want without the tiresome burden of evidence.
It’s a bit like the time I listened to the Education Secretary talk about how the government are investing record levels of funding in schools.
Now I know as an absolute measure he is right. That amount of money is the largest - what he fails to mention is that is because the numbers of people in the education system has increased hugely which has driven that. And what he most certainly never mentions is that the average investment per pupil has gone down.
lol. I can't believe I'm having a conversation on a football forum with some random bloke criticising a universally accepted economic formula.
So which multi-dimensional model (which pays extra attention to the extremes) would you anti-capitalists use? Because I think the answer is 'The Anecdotal Model', which is preferred because it cannot be calculated and you can use it to make any case you want without the tiresome burden of evidence.
Why is the Nordic Model unworthy of a response? It’s the most successful political model in the world by any measurement you wish to throw at it. It’s the only political model worth discussing.However the difference is that I've quoted the oracle as source in both cases and you've just written 'No'. It hasn't really been a compelling argument on your side.
Thanks for your contribution Tony. I'm not muting you because you're not unpleasant but I am ignoring it because I don't think responding is of any value.
His economic theories were around long before Corbyn was ever leader of the Labour Party. Labour adopting parts of his economic theories doesn’t mean he invented Corbynomics, he advised over the course of two meetings IIRC and then everyone went their separate ways, I don’t think he’s even a member of the Labour Party, I would think that you would even struggle to find a quote from him that he’s a labour voter, I suspect that Corbynomics wasn’t radical enough for him if you read his views. You’re doing a typical Grendull and twisting to fit an argument.Ian can you please confirm you refuse to believe Richard Murphy defined an economic theorem termed Corbynomics which the Labour Party adopted and set itself apart from the Blair and brown economic strategy?
Another thread hijacked.
Supposed to be a thread about George Floyd, but has now descended into party politics yet again and the difference between communism, Marxism and socialism.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?