NationStates Jolt Archive

It is on Page Six, at the bottom

"Description: The need for the de-privatisation of industy is great, the government needs control of industry to restrict its massive growth. If industry is allowed to grow too much it could become more powerful than the country itself!

I propose that the control of industry is given back to the government. The government can control where industry is located and can limit growth.

This can affect citizens for the better as the government can put production ahead of profit. Then our citizens can not be short change by profit seeking conglumerates. Prices for goods can be set at a reasonable rate which would result in a spending boom that would benefit every nation in the UN"

He's dead. Let him stay that way.

http://www.aha.ru/~mausoleu/lenin_mausoleum_images/lenin_in_tomb.jpg

im not a red, ok

im referring to the defence of the realm act 1915

im not a red, ok

im referring to the defence of the realm act 1915

It was 1914, and DORA was intended to be implemented for the duration of the First World War (not all of us here in the US are ignorant of British history ;) ). You make no mention of war. You just want government control of industry (i.e., Leninism/Stalinism).

im not a communist, ok

i think that its in the best interest of everyone

you let the industries in your country get to powerful while production in my nation if nice and high

im not a communist, ok

i think that its in the best interest of everyone

you let the industries in your country get to powerful while production in my nation if nice and high

Never said you were a communist. In a true communist society, there is no government in the strict sense of the word. You are, however, advocating Leninist/Stalinist socialism.

I might not be a full fledged member of NSO anymore, but I know what falls into the national interest, and this definately does.

We want privatised companies - it lets our big Uranium companies gobble up little Uranium companies abroad.

How could control of industry be given "back" to the government in nations where they never controlled it [except by the normal course of legislation, rather than direct management] before this?

How could control of industry be given "back" to the government in nations where they never controlled it [except by the normal course of legislation, rather than direct management] before this?

Good point. I suppose a Marxist (and I am not trying to imply that anyone here who has contributed on this topic is a Marxist) would say that the workers have always been denied of their genuine rights to run industry as they see fit. The government therefore, would be a viable means of enabling them to do so.

Equally, some nationalists would argue that a nation has a right to control its industry and resources, therefore they were only being denied them by unjust means and they were entitled to them all along.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

As if the Cluichstani government could ever control CPESL...

Generally speaking, the private corporations of Kivisto are doing a fine job of running their industries. I see no reason to try and assume their roles and possibly botch the job that they are already succeeding at.

I swear I just saw this in silly proposals.


If it already made into silly proposals, your doomed.

De-privatisation of industry? Who says we privatised it in the first place?

Ooo... please, please, please pass this. It would... um... be good for UN nations... yeah... that's the ticket...

- David Stroph, Department of Foreign Investment
The Federated Technocratic Oligarchy of the Most Glorious Hack

No thanks. The memory of Dr Beeching is etched into my mind...

Bastard

Who? The railway guy?

Yes, the bugger in charge of the nationalised "British Railways" who closed down a number of lines and brought about the death of steam...

I swear I just saw this in silly proposals.


If it already made into silly proposals, your doomed.

by a facist. i'd rather be in a silly proposal thread than be a right-wing mussolini lover

Yes, the bugger in charge of the nationalised "British Railways" who closed down a number of lines and brought about the death of steam...

Steam had already been replaced by and large during the modernisation projects of the 1950's (which ironically were why Beeching was brought in, as they'd caused enormous debts). Many lines closed have subsequently been re-opened, check out these examples for instance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_Axe#Re-openings

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

:confused: I just don't get it. I really just dont' get it.

I mean you want government to take over private enterprise. Well that's fine, government can always take over private enterprise. You want every member in the UN to take over their nations private enterprise. Is that really a good thing? Is a government that doesn't want to or doesn't feel like taking over private enterprise better at running private enterprise than the private enterprise sector is? Is there really a need to force all the member states to do this? Is there some global overriding principle that needs to be applied always and everywhere? I don't see any.

On the other hand, turning over private enterprise to UN gnomes ... who are always perfect, eficient, and all knowing ... that has promise. After all if they can turn these resolutions into working laws they can easily handle the affairs of any company in the nations of the UN.

Steam had already been replaced by and large during the modernisation projects of the 1950's (which ironically were why Beeching was brought in, as they'd caused enormous debts). Many lines closed have subsequently been re-opened, check out these examples for instance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beeching_Axe#Re-openings

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

True, but they would never have been closed in the first place if we still had the big four. And are railway's wouldn't be in the mess they are in now if it wasn't for nationalisation...

True, but they would never have been closed in the first place if we still had the big four. And are railway's wouldn't be in the mess they are in now if it wasn't for nationalisation...

Nationalisation wasn't the problem. It was Mrs T who starved the network of funds and then had her successor cut it to pieces with the assistance of the lunatics of the Adam Smith Institute. There's where the real problem began.

(rant at Mrs Thatcher concluded)

Besides, the big four would have probably shut down unprofitable branch lines anyway, as it would have been illogical, operating in a market system, to shut down useless (in their view) networks that weren't earning them anything.

May the blessings of our otters be upon you.

Leonard Otterby
Ambassador for the Republic of Compadria to the U.N.

Well, I have many problems with this proposal

firstly, it does not look like a proposal, the layout is all wrong. More importantly, it doesn't work. Although I beleive in giving the government some control over private industry to keep corporations from taking over and to enforce safety regulations etc... what you propose is really communistic. The government has no right to take over private industry. To give a simple example, how would you like it if you started a lemonade stand, and then the government came and took it over, to make sure you didn't do anything to harm anybody, denying you your right to run a business and make money? Of course the government should be able to restrict business and industry for the sake of a country, but they shouldn't be in total control.

To summarize, they should be able to tell you not to poison your customers with poorly made lemonade, but they shouldn't be able to come in and take it over against your will.

by a facist. i'd rather be in a silly proposal thread than be a right-wing mussolini lover

I'm a facist, too, then. I loved Mussolini's face.

by a facist. i'd rather be in a silly proposal thread than be a right-wing mussolini lover

Hey noob, I told ya ,I'm too much of a capitalist to be a Facist. Furthermore, I'm too big of a fan of the Gipper, to love Mussolini(although I love his grandaughter's comments to Lybia)

Official Proclimation

The Pure Socialist Holy Empire of Shazbotdom herby declares that this proosal is worthless. While we have de-privatised certain aspects of our economy, we feel that the majority of the industry should be privatized for job security of those involved with that sector of the economy. We feel that the Privatization or De-Privatizaton of a Nations Industry is the sole responsibility of that Nation and not that of the NationStates United Nations.

[/railway_hijack]
[/pointless_insults]
[on_topic]
[serious_debate]

[/railway_hijack]

OOC: Sorry about the hijacking. I hope you learned something about the British railway system as a form of compensation.

OoC: I never had a chance to reply! You'll never learn about the about turn in rail profitability in the early 1950's! How unneccessary nationalisation was! Comparisons before and after nationalisation!

Although it is interesting that Hack used the word "railway"; that means he's not American...