Comments by "Steve Parker" (@steveparker8065) on "Just Mick Lynch making journalists look very silly from the picket line" video.

The idea that striking is detrimental to a business is absurd, without workers there is no business. Wages are compensation for labour, if that compensation isn't enough to live on then people will look to redress the balance. Corporations have all the power and treat their workforce with disdain and then expect loyalty for peanuts...
231
Funny how one working wage could support a mortgage and a family before anti-union and strike legislation...
104
@TheBigears1 Cheers, It's funny how one working wage could support a mortgage and a family before anti-union and anti-strike legislation. Materials and labour get cheaper due to mass production and industrial methods, product prices go up yet wages decline in relation to inflation. The only positive I can think of is that Thatcher is still pushing up daisies...
31
@annenunney9907 Thanks Anne. It was so cold last week I saw a Tory MP with his hands in his own pockets.
18
@GreenMorningDragonProductions Yea, that's partly my point. But the main factor was the sale of 2 million council houses and the lack of any new social housing. Over 40% of that housing ending up in the hands of private landlords within a decade. Not to mention new legislation that prioritizes landlords over tenants. They're squeezing the market through a lack of investment, increasing the price of existing stock considerably.
18
@moshedayan6698 It only affects people who use trains and they can't choose to work from home or they would have. So not sure of your logic or reasoning. As for how much Lynch has cost his members, it's 0. The industry and the government blocking deals is costing the members and they choose to strike. Thanks for your time, but I'm afraid your comment isn't going to be of much use on this occasion.
10
@yournan6546 Agreed, Stamp-duty only applies to houses over £250,000 not many people in low waged work can afford that. Buy to let means paying higher fees and interest rates. We need more social housing to reduce competition in the market as well as incentives for people to buy their own home. Rent is dead money, I've paid enough in rent over the past 2 decades to own my flat and have nothing to show for it.
2
@muzzmurgatroyd In addition I'm not sure If I posted this on this thread or another recently. But it is relevant to central banks, Petro-dollar hegemony etc. Thankfully the petro-dollar is now in retreat. "Libya was a socialist-style country they used 'The Green System'. Gaddafi was essentially just a figurehead because he'd fought US imperialism all his life and was respected. Libya had no IMF debt, and no international debt. Libya had $150 billion in reserves, 143 tons of gold and a similar amount of silver. Libya also created the world's largest irrigation project. Having a house was a human right, each Libyan had a share in the country's 50 billion barrels of oil and petrol was $0.14 per litre. Then Libya decided to create an African currency 'The Dinar' to challenge the petrodollar for oil sales in Africa and the Middle East. Many countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria all dropped the petrodollar for oil sales. America's reaction wasn't to legitimately compete in a capitalist system, they chose to invade to enforce regime change and to loot Libya's gold, precious metals and oil. US Capitalism brought human trafficking and slavery to Libya and caused the death and migration of millions." Thanks for reading this far :)
2
@muzzmurgatroyd lol a small factor. What you're suggesting is a by-product of the housing shortage. The term that is relevant here is supply and demand. The housing shortage causes demand and rising rents and housing costs. If you want to talk about debt, global debt is around $300 trillion which is over 3.5 times global GDP. Debt is simply a means of resource acquisition. Central banks began in 1913 with the creation of the Fed then quickly spread to Europe and since then has spread globally by force. The loss of the gold standard means that money is no longer tied to a physical resource. Since then FIAT currency and Fractional Reserve Banking were introduced as methods of financial monopoly. The fact that many countries have a debt-to-GDP ratio of around or over 100% is conclusive proof of the fiscal farce. Before neoliberalism and privatisation, our debt to GDP was around 40%. Simply methods of syphoning money from the public sector to the private sector, giving corporations more of our taxes, while they pay less themselves.
1
@muzzmurgatroyd PS money is simply a construct that allows a tiny minority to own and control the vast majority of the World's actual resources (Land, Water and Human Labour). I'd prefer a resource-based economy where goods are communally owned by humanity and have a standardized price based on labour intensity, transport, availability, sustainability and necessity. Eco-friendly and sustainable using the best tools for the job and the best technologies available. Making goods without thought of consumerism and resale from built-in obsolescence. Using all available technologies rather than corporations buying up their competitor's designs and inventions to be buried as they are anathema to consumerism or profit margins because they are robust or more energy efficient/sustainable. Specifically in a framework of devolved power. I realise for a capitalist this sounds like a pipe dream but so did flying, space travel, modern medicine and most of the inventions of the last two centuries. It's time we worked towards personal development and ditched this competitive, short-sighted race to acquire wealth.
1
@muzzmurgatroyd I'm glad you agree with much of what I've said. Regarding the debt, global debts are increasing and those who own that get a higher percentage of the world's 'actual' resources the more debt they own. Essentially the higher the debt, the higher the majority of our global resources is bought up by the super-wealthy (0.01%). That is its purpose though this is rarely discussed. The poverty gap extends and more of our resources end up in the hands of this financial and corporate elite. We all know sanctions, embargoes, monopolies, shorting, tax cuts, subsidies, corporate welfare, grants, lobbying etc prove that market-based economics is a myth. Lobbying governments also proves democracy to be a myth. I agree with the sentiments expressed by Nick and I'm glad to see you share much of the same understanding regarding the system and its inherent flaws. As well as a historical understanding of how socialism has been subject to regime change and sabotage predominantly by the US and also much of which has happened in S.America in past few decades.
1