- Capitalism and Alternatives -

Sounds good.

Posted by: Red Deathy ( Socialist Party, UK ) on August 24, 1999 at 01:02:21:

In Reply to: Knightrider and the classical liberal culture posted by Gee on August 23, 1999 at 18:20:19:

: Having a broad back seems something of a liability then, a disadvantage. The stronger one is the more reigned in. Shame to let a strong ox go free I guess when you can tie it to such a large plough.

Strangely not, you still getting way more than any bugger else.

: If something 'comes out of the pockets of the producers' then guess who the producers are.....youve said it often enough.

i.e. out of the pockets of teh capitalists. Workers don't pay tax.

: been hanging around with the mayfair set again?

I've been in a car roughly three times this year, IIRC.

: There is a preference difference, but the V6 with all the bits here still costs as much to buy and run as an average ford does there.

Oh, yeah, our car prices are through the roof, but thats above the value in Europe, looks like the old right hand side steering wheel's been providing some excuses for a little cartelery- they've all just been seriously knacked for it, Volvo promise not to do it again...

: I meant to say dont fund 'public broadcasting' for the same reasons as religions and operas should *not* be funded with tax money. Its no the business of government to support or supress any kind of cultural expression which is not 'illegal' (ie explicitly and demonstrably involved in using force/fraud upon others). the ;aw of central tendency' sounds dubious. 200 channels here gets plenty of diversity, that you have to look for it yourself rather than be fed govt 'diversity' via a national TV system is good.

1:The argument used is that its not teh government, its society as a whole supporting such arts as would not get commercial funding.
2:Central tendancy is similar to businesses trying to get teh best premises on the high street, further, people suppliment their viewing needs via books, magazines, viedos, or other media.
3:Of those 200 channels, the vast majority will tend towards light entertainment- the apparent US phenomena of being able to watch the simpsons all day on a different channel each time (so i've been told), etc.
4:The broadcasters are quasi independant (originally the commercial company ITV was effectively a public service broadcaster- because it didn't have to compete for advretising revenue), so its not government diversity, its real diversity, wherein mainstream supports marginal voices that would be silenced by the market.
5:TV has gone downhill badly since its been comercialised.

: One thing Ive noticed about the US and the UK is they tend to take eachothers best work and proceed to make incredibly inept 'home' versions of it. The US did a crappy version of Cracker and some UK comedies, I think the UK tried a couple of 'mystery' series to rival x files and got no where. Its a bit like someone looking at a wonderful landscape painting and saying "yes thats good, lets paint a 'home' one but this time use creosote instead of fine watercolors."

Oooh, US cracker was soooooo bad- it was just like every other us cop series (admittedly, I reckon British Cracker was just like every Yank cop series, just tranfered to britain, that made it different.

: The anti authoritarian joining the mob? Are your libraries 'gifts' (eg Carnegie trusts etc), private or state?

Depends, we have publically funded Libraries (theres a big public service element in Library work- liekwise local authority work), but there's private and university libraries out there...

Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup