Comments by "J Drake1994" (@JDrakeify) on "In whose interest is this country run? | Owen Jones talks..." video.

  1. There are a whole load of complex reasons behind the housing crisis, eg people living longer in homes that are too big for them, lack of new homes being built, and those that have being aimed at wealthy foreign investors who often don't use them the whole year round, rather than ones that can be afforded by ordinary people, and of course, council homes becoming more scarce due to the ones being sold under right to buy not being replaced. But that all should be ignored if it means you get to have a go at johnny foreigner. The thing that is infuriating about the likes of UKIP is when you dig down beneath the surface and go beyond there stock answer of 'its the foreigners' they have literally nothing to say.
    2
  2. Less regulation would mean more power to pay workers whatever their boss see's fit to offer. It would also mean less restrictions on the ability to offer money to politicians and influence politicians. Smaller government would mean a smaller HMRC, less means to stop tax evasion, it would also mean more control in areas that the public sector currently does most work in, which means more power to exploit patients, our criminal justice system, education, etc for their own profits, which will end up far worse for the average person. We have already tried this system before. Take a look at the industrial revolution if you want a prime example of what happens when you let the private sector fill in the gaps where the government should be.
    2
  3. And where did I say that the elderly should be forced to give up their homes? I didn't. I was just pointing to a reason why the housing crisis exists where it did not before, to demonstrate the point that the answer is not simply 'immigrants' all the time.
    1
  4. The problems that Owen identifies are mainly to do with the government giving too much of a rein to the wealthy and big business. Less government means more power for them.
    1
  5. But there are many things that people need, and so do not have any power to refuse. If private businesses sell food at astronomically high prices then the consumer has no choice but to buy it or starve. If they offer poverty wages they have no choice but to accept it because they need to be paid. If government didn't do things to prevent this, then that is what would happen. Take a look at the times of the industrial revolution if you want proof of that.
    1
  6. And what happens when one supermarket does so well it develops a monopoly? Or they all get together and decide to raise prices? In that case, they don't need to bother making their customers happy, because they have nowhere else to go. Who else is going to prevent that happening if not the government?
    1
  7. Santa Clause​ workers can only take what the market offers them. If one person is willing to work for less to get a job, then companies will make more money, and can offer lower salaries because they know that many people have no choice but to take them. The only way to stop that is through laws that set minimum standards for employers, and allow their workforce to organise to excercise their collective power to keep them from being exploited, both of which you need government for. If you think politicians are more influenced by money now than in the past, again, examine the late 19th to early 20th century. So who is going to pay for everything if the rich are allowed to avoid however much tax they like? Unless your an anarchist, you must believe the government has some role to play, however minimal, and if the wealthy are allowed to get away with paying however little they like, then the burden will fall on those who don't have the money to pay for a tax adviser. Nothing fair about that. The private sector isn't incentivised to provide the best services, it is incentivised to make money. That is why, in America and other places, people have to pay far higher amounts for life saving medicine. A products value is determined by how much the consumer needs it, and if it is literally a matter of life and death, then ordinary people can be charged vast sums. That is also why you end up with situations where patients are given expensive treatments and prescriptions that aren't needed. Your point about the criminal justice system isnt all that relevant. What do you do with those who murder and steal, who should be there? Leave it up to the private sector and they can be used as slave labour. Obviously private schools perform better, because those brought up in an affluent background generally tend to have higher IQs. If you allow the best students to be skimmed off the top, then of course those schools are going to do better than others. Once you adjust their performance scores to take that into account, there isn't any evidence to say they are better educators.
    1