Because we and the Yanks bombed the shit out of all their Industry,and then,(because the Allies didn't want a repeat of what happened after WW1,when the Tedeski went broke paying reparations/ Hitler popped up and says stuff you we're not paying-yadadadayada),gave them money to build state of the art factories and technology. While we were left with old,outdated industrial infrastructure,rationing,and massive War debts owed to the good old boys in the USA.(Which we only fairly recently finished paying off btw).Not the only reason of course,the Squareheads got their arses in gear and said fook that World War nonsense/never again,and have never forgotten what it's like for a population to go hungry.... UK Won the War,lost the Peace....
Let's face it, both the Germans and the Japanese are well-organised hardworking people. They lost the war and they were determined to do better. Contrast that with the UK where, as winners, we felt we deserved a bit of a break. It was pointed out in the film on the German car industry on the TV recently that the management in the UK just wasn't interested in what the Germans were doing. We had won the war; we and our products had to be superior. The other thing that programme pointed out was that relations between management and workforce weren't constantly conflictual in Germany. Both sides realised that they needed to work with the other for the good of their companies and jobs. Britain still has a problem with that attitude, to this very day. There is them, and there is us. Ironically, during the war, everyone was in the same boat in the UK and worked towards a common goal (survival). After the war, the Germans and Japanese (it might be innate in the Japanese - probably) still felt they were in the same boat as they needed to rebuild their countries. More than anything, this probably contributed to their economic success (although you wouldn't want to live in Japan at the moment).
You need to remove those rose goggles, the Germans had loads of help financially with rebuilding their industries, Japan closed its borders to everyone for years to become self sufficient and the Brits had what was left.
I'm all for a bit of historical analysis (or nostalgia) but this is getting ridiculous. The post-WW2 reconstruction era of 1945-1963 ended 50 years ago. The present day economies of Germany and Japan (and for that matter UK) bear very little resemblance to those of 1963 which was in our grandfathers' time, and a lot of water has passed under the bridge since then. And by the way, the Japanese economy has been stagnating and growing debts for the past 20 years - problems a good deal worse than the UK equivalents.
Heres my 2p, I feel that at the moment British politics neither reflects Capitalisim or Socialisim, yet all the parties without exception promote Consumerism. The extreme opposites of politics that were present in the post war 40's 50's 60's and 70's have long departed. the notion for example, that Labour supports the working man whereas the Conservatives support business is now non existant. All the political parties of today are interested solely in making popular policies and telling porkies in order to remain in power and make a few bob while we are at it. This is why the UK is now a predominantly service and leisure based economy with very little in the way of manufacturing left. I can remember a time when something Made in britain was something to be proud of (except Austin Allegros, Maestros and Marinas! )
Poor old Pete,blinded by his positive visions of Europe again.....makes me chuckle...:biggrin:. WINNER "In the aftermath of World War II, the Allies, remembering the disastrous consequences of German reparations after the First World War, did not insist on their pound of flesh. The entire Nazi public debt, amounting to over 600 percent of German GDP, was written off.The pre-existing unpaid debt from the Weimar period was written down to a fraction of its original cost. Claims on old debt were strictly segregated from German reconstruction funds. The German Federal Republic finally paid off the last bit only in 2010. Germany surely lived well beyond its means during the Nazi era, plundering the rest of Europe as well. The allies would have been within their rights to demand that Germany pay for its sins by reducing its consumption, but this time wiser heads prevailed. The Americans not only agreed to write off old debts, but gave the Germans billions of dollars in Marshall Aid." LOSER "Britain will settle its World War II debts to the US and Canada when it pays two final instalments before the close of 2006, the Treasury has said. The payments of $83.25m (£42.5m) to the US and US$22.7m (£11.6m) to Canada are the last of 50 instalments since 1950. The amount paid back is nearly double that loaned in 1945 and 1946. "This week we finally honour in full our commitments to the US and Canada for the support they gave us 60 years ago," said Treasury Minister Ed Balls. "It was vital support which helped Britain defeat Nazi Germany and secure peace and prosperity in the post-war period. We honour our commitments to them now as they honoured their commitments to us all those years ago," he added." 1963 was my Fathers time,Pete...
There seems to be very little between us. Your description of the post-1945 economic arrangements is reasonable and clear; I would not disagree with it, and it is an interesting historic period. My point is that from 1945 to 2013 is a long time, and if we are trying to discuss present-day and future economic prospects it is not all that helpful to keep looking at them through a 1945 prism. It is really quite funny that you characterise trying to look clearly at today's economies as being "blinded".
Pete, the only constant is change. Big government, large federated collections of nations has passed it's sell by date. We need a state which can provide infrastructure to help us in our lives. For some, that's help to work, or financial help. For others, that's just leaving us to get on and make money for us and for our families.
Between 1963 and 2013 isn't that long Pete,which is when the Reconstruction era ended.... Imagine a German and a Brit racing on their Bantams The German cheats and so the Brit knocks him off Then the Yanks buy the German a Fireblade to bribe him not to cheat again.... How long does it take the Brit to design/test/build a Fireblade in order to be competitive? (and yes,I know a Bantam is a DKW rip-off) And Pete old bean,have a sense of humour,I know you're too smart to be taken in by all that EU nonsense...just joshing ya .:biggrin:
Socialism - I'll have a bit of that (only the bits that benefit me though) Capitalism - And once again, the bits that benefit me directly. Also things that benefit my friends and family. Rant bit - fucking BUSES I detect the things, they should only be allowed to move with a minimum of 50% occupancy. Clogging up the roads with diesel fumes, slowing traffic etc. I also detest poverty, so I strive to no poverty stricken. Unions - scamming bastards. Union officials can be equated to professional politicians, they live in a world of falseness.
Indeed it is the lounge, soz for bringing bikes in to it lol. Pete 1950 said HTML: * Capitalism as a system lays special claim to being an effective way of creating wealth, but has no claim to being fair or equitable. * Socialism aims to enhance fairness, social justice and equality, but has no special claim to maximising wealth overall. * Stalinism is an effective system for securing absolute control over everyone and everything in a society, but has nothing to do with wealth or justice (let alone socialism). Proponents of each type of political opinion mainly prefer to argue against straw men of their own creation, which is a lot easier than taking your opponents as they actually are. Each type of system has severe drawbacks and shortcomings, but nobody has yet come close to devising anything better. So we muddle on, we compromise, we try first this way then that. This is the nature of human affairs. A good point But even Adam smith who invented the theory couldn’t make it make sense without including divine intervention, his “invisible hand of the market” that he reckoned god had built in to the system to ensure that its universally beneficial. Then Marx tried to invent a completely new religion, although one without a god in it… unless Marx saw himself as god ? Like I said before “banging on like its religion” and it’s all a load of waffle. We all know what’s right and fair, even if some of us only perceive such a thing if it applies directly to oneself.
Foreign holidays, cars, tv etc are largely private purchases paid for by what the government of the day kindly doesn't take from us various taxes. Free education is not free but largely paid for in those taxes, maybe the reason there is less "free" education than before is because our money taken in taxes is being spent less wisely than before ? More welfare, expensive wars, interest on national debt etc . No idea why there are more in higher education now than before. Could it be that there are more courses available ? We are still the 6th or 7th largest manufacturer in the world but I feel that we in Europe are making ourselves less and less able to compete with the Far East as we impose legislation to give workers more rights for example or insist that all factories have fluffy bunnies running around their gardens. I don't know enough about German industry but the impression I get is that they have focussed on quality and precision, producing prestige products and demand for these has stayed high. I go to a trade show in Frankfurt every year, have been doing so for about 15 years. It is interesting listening to buyers from different countries on the stands. German buyers will see a product and ask how to improve it, British buyers see the same thing and ask if it can be made a bit smaller and lighter to make it cheaper. I`m generalising of course. Yes we are missing a trick and have a nation more interested than style than substance, governments that boast about how much they have spent without thinking could they afford it and could they have spent it better. Still, at least we can always look to our footballers as role models, got to be better at that than religious leaders or politicians !
But healthcare is effctively free f you: - Haven't ever worked (most under 18s for a start) - Came into the country from abroad, and haven't worked for long, or never worked - Have only ever earned a small amount in which case your income tax and NI contributions will have been minimal, and even allowing for VAT and excise duty etc, you have paid in far less that you took out... the NHS costs £2,000 per annum for every person in the country. I don't have a problem with the idea of some form of state-funded medical care, but our current system was designed in a completely different era, and it can't go on the way it is.... charging absolutely nothing for visit to a GP, even for foreigners, is bonkers.
Indeed. However back in the real world, the "invisible hand of the market" is by no means universally beneficial, and "god" has nothing to do with it. The workings of markets create and destroy wealth, amplify trade cycles, lead to the construction of monopolies and their collapse, and do many other things. Some of those things happen to be beneficial to us, some of them do not, but markets do not have "purposes" any more than evolution does.
There are reciprocal arrangements between the UK and many countries, including all the EU countries, so that UK citizens living, working or travelling in those countries can access the health services there in the same way as the locals. You seem pretty keen to scrap access to UK health services for "foreigners" - so the question is, do you expect Brits abroad to lose their access to local healthcare in return? How would this be an improvement?
The myth is peddled that those in work pay for the benefits of the previous generation and the next generation will, in turn, pay for them. The reality is that since the inception of the welfare state each generation has taken out more than it has put in, for a number of reasons. In that sense it is unsustainable and can justifiably be called a Ponzie scheme.
There's no problem with properly managed reciprocal arrangements, but when one country (ours) has a system which almost religiously avoids charges and detailed accounting for use of medical services, the system has problems, because it is not a level playing field. If you have to use medical services in other EU countries you are very likely to have to pay a small charge at least, even if it can be reclaimed later - you also have to provide some evidence as to who you are and where you are from. Those other countries have systems which are quite efficient at re-billing (so the NHS can end up picking uip the tab, correctly, if a UK citizen receives treatment abroad). Because the NHS uses its "free at the point of demand" approach, it is not as efficient at passing back the costs of treatment of other EU nationals, and it's not good at picking up cases of exploitation by non-EU citizens. Solving "health tourism" aspects (which are a symptom, not a primary cause, of problems with financial management) would not transform the NHS, but sooner or later a reality check is needed about the way in whcih costs are managed. I expect we can struggle on as we are for a few more years, but there are a lot of storm-clouds building, and things will only get more difficult, whichever political party runs the show. In my view we should at least consider how other European countries (definitely not the USA!) manage healthcare funding and charging (and I know that by some measures the NHS appears to be more cost-effective, but if it were genuinely that much better, we'd see the same sort of system elsewhere in Europe). One example of the way in which the system can be abused is that EHIC cards can easily be obtained fraudently by non-EU residents in the UK, and then used throughout Europe to "Purchase" services which may be billed back to the NHS. Of course, there are the extremes too: How NHS health tourism is costing us billions: a surgeon's story » The Spectator But coming back to the point about GP visits costing nothing, I very much doubt that in other EU countries GPs are plagued with patients who make appointments and simpy don't turn up. I for one would be happy to pay £5 to make an appointment (especially if I missed it without bothering to call to cancel).
