Labour still want to tax and spend the country into bankruptcy

[Rupert_Baehr]

It also assumes a production only economy, what about the service sector? When we go to the cinema, does the spotty kid checking my ticket own the cinema? Only own part of it? And which part of it? Do they "sell" "their share" to the next spotty kid when they leave?

 

He's not a shareholder, but he is a stakeholder. He has an interest in ensuring that the cinema is successful - because if there are no audiences he will be out of a job. When he leaves, his stake transfers to the next spotty kid.

 

The audience are also stakeholders. - They have in interest in the cinema because if they don't bother to show up, the cinema is likely to close.

[dell12]

Maybe if the last government had made a success of things instead of such an abysmal mess,I am sure you would have been glad to have called it a socialist government!.............but it was never going to happen and now we have to pay for 13 years of misguided/misdirected policies as we always have to under labour rule.

 

This is exactly my point. Calling something socialist doesn't make it socialist.

[dell12]

He's not a shareholder, but he is a stakeholder. He has an interest in ensuring that the cinema is successful - because if there are no audiences he will be out of a job. When he leaves, his stake transfers to the next spotty kid.

 

The audience are also stakeholders. - They have in interest in the cinema because if they don't bother to show up, the cinema is likely to close.

 

Indeed.

 

As long as individuals needed a cinema, and there was a proven demand for it, it would be free to the user.

[Rupert_Baehr]

Why would it be free to the user? - In the People's Democratic Republic of South Yorkshire, perhaps.

 

Elsewhere, the punters would show up and show their appreciation by digging deeply into their pockets to pay for seats, the spotty youf would check your ticket and smile sweetly and the cinema owner would open a cinema in the next town as well. - Thus providing employment for another spotty youth.

[dell12]

Why would it be free to the user? - In the People's Democratic Republic of South Yorkshire, perhaps.

 

Elsewhere, the punters would show up and show their appreciation by digging deeply into their pockets to pay for seats, the spotty youf would check your ticket and smile sweetly and the cinema owner would open a cinema in the next town as well. - Thus providing employment for another spotty youth.

 

Well there's plenty of different models of socialism, some of which would do away with money altogether.

 

Those going to see the film would be contributing to society, as those who run the cinema are, but in a different way. Similar in a way to how the Kibbutz works (or used to) in Israel.

[Mr Prime]

It also assumes a production only economy, what about the service sector? When we go to the cinema, does the spotty kid checking my ticket own the cinema? Only own part of it? And which part of it? Do they "sell" "their share" to the next spotty kid when they leave?

 

How about I own a snooker table today and in ten years I own some balls for it?

[mj.scuba]

How about I own a snooker table today and in ten years I own some balls for it?

 

So the snooker table is useless for ten years. That sounds about right.

[Mecky]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism

 

See the end of the first paragraph

 

 

Wikipedia runs on entries submitted by the general public and is largely inaccurate.

[Longcol]

It also assumes a production only economy, what about the service sector? When we go to the cinema, does the spotty kid checking my ticket own the cinema? Only own part of it? And which part of it? Do they "sell" "their share" to the next spotty kid when they leave?

 

Same thing in the service sector - the kid who checks your ticket is as much a wage slave as a factory worker.

[Rupert_Baehr]

Well there's plenty of different models of socialism, some of which would do away with money altogether.

 

Those going to see the film would be contributing to society, as those who run the cinema are, but in a different way. Similar in a way to how the Kibbutz works (or used to) in Israel.

 

A Society without money? That could have advantages. Nobody would have to pay any tax - you want something, you work for it or go without.

 

Landowners (we could call them 'feudal lords') could hire workers ('serfs and villeins') to work on their land and in return those serfs and villeins would be allowed to cultivate enough land to feed their families. Life might be a bit hard for those who lived in the cities - but I suppose they could spend all day in the cinema.

 

How about I own a snooker table today and in ten years I own some balls for it?

 

You might think that was a silly thing to do, but what if somebody else ordered the snooker table in your name, committed you to paying for it and then went away leaving you with the bill? - If you couldn't cancel the snooker table, couldn't afford to buy the balls and couldn't really afford to pay for it you'd have to buy it anyway and put it into storage. Even if you had to pay interest on the purchase and had to pay somebody to store it for you.