ALB
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
You’re lucky, comrade, as the nearest church to Head Ofice is one of those. Next time are up for a meeting you can go there while the rest of us go on to the Manor Arms pub a few hundred yards down the same street. Smoking is not allowed there, so it will be better for our health:
And there’s a transvestite bar just round the corrner.
I suppose there could be a few British capitalists who will agree with the logic of leaving a huge market on their doorstep to concentrate on the furthest possible away market:
If I was a British capitalist I would regard the Brexit government currently in office as bonkers.
Just realised that that letter in the Financial Times of 29 January is behind a paywall for some. So here are some extracts from what Daniel Gross, of the Centre for European Poliy Studies in Brussels, wrote (emphases added):
“A major supplier, AstraZeneca, has just announced delays in its delivery schedule while the pandemic continues unabated. How did it come to this?
The EU negotiators made two mistakes. First, they concluded their contracts much later than other large buyers, for example three months after the UK (as reported by AstraZeneca). AstraZeneca could thus confidently start to prepare for increased supplies to the UK much before doing the same for the EU. Moreover, the EU haggled for a low price, creating an incentive for companies to serve first those who ordered first (and paid a higher price).
(…).
But with a constant price per dose the companies have no incentive to ramp up production overnight given that they would not be compensated for the additional costs.
Bygones are bygones. The EU is now sitting on contracts which specify a low price for a large quantity; but only “best effort” promises on timely delivery. However, something could still be done.
The EU should offer to pay AstraZeneca or BioNTech/Pfizer an additional premium for any doses delivered early.”
Yes, that’s the sort of language they’d understand. How stupid of the EU negotiators not to have realised that you only get what you pay for. I would have thought that they would have had more experience of how capitalism works to have known that.
More on the pricing policies of the drug companies which reveals that the issue is not “vaccine nationalism” but the drug companies dubious business practice.
Interesting snippets from the British Medical Journal:
“A string of revelations about vaccine prices has focused attention on a practice considered normal in the drug industry but often frowned on elsewhere: charging different prices to different customers for the same product.”
“AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson have committed to not making a profit from the pandemic, while Moderna and Pfizer did not. AstraZeneca reserved the right, however, to declare the pandemic phase over and take profits from later vaccine sales.”
This fom the Financial Times suggests that the way out for EU is to offer to pay more.
An article in this weekend’s i paper headed “UK paid more and acted quickly to secure doses” gives a clue as to why AstraZenica is reneging on its contract with the EU in favour of supplying the UK market with its vaccine:
“the UK is believed to be paying more per dose than the EU”
Ah, yes, I see.
You want to go to a rugby international in Cardiff and hear them singing;
Guide me, O Thou great Jehovah,
Pilgrim through this barren land;
I am weak, but Thou art mighty,
Hold me with Thy pow’rful hand.
Bread of heaven, Bread of heaven,
Feed me till I want no more;
Feed me till I want no more.A perfect example of human self-abnegation before the figment of their own imagination. It sounds good, though despite the words. Not that they mean them (even if their great grandfathers did).
I make that 10 weeks. That means when they say “up to 12 weeks” it’s going to be nearer 12 than the 3 weeks recommended (and applied to start with — I know a comrade who’s had both, but then he’s 90). Let’s hope they know what they’re doing.
Continuing our crash course in Indian politics and society, as far as I can see — literally from photo and tv images of sword-wielding Sikhs on big tractors — this is a movement of independent capitalist farmers defending their particular sectional interest. (By the way, does anyone know if Sikhs are farmers anywhere else in India apart from the Punjab?) So why on Earth would they be interested in a message saying “good luck but you are going to lose in the end so become a socialist”?
This shows the danger of basing our position on “compassion” rather than class. Mention “Indian peasants” and in many people’s minds that conjures up an image of a subsistence farmer with one cow and land the size of a soccer pitch or two. Such people exist in India, millions of them, but they are not involved in the protests nor affected by the new laws. They really do need socialism now but would settle for more land.
The one-day token general strike last year did involve people of all castes and religions. That’s a good thing. Ignoring caste and uniting people of all religions is one of the principles of the main opposition party (Congress) which I suppose makes them the “lesser evil” compared to the ineffable BJP and its Hindoo communalism.
Anyone for a thread on who the next Congress prime minister of India might be (and how he or she won’t be any different from the last one as they’ll be governing within the context of capitalism and so have to put profits and conditions for profit-making first)?
Here is how the “learn” section of the Robinhood app that small investors used to do down the hedge funds defines socialism (but which later banned them). They seem to be “libertarians” of some sort. I suppose they were trying to understand but what’s the crap about Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia which don’t even fit their mixed-up definition?
“Socialism is an economic system under which the means of production are owned by everyone in society rather than by individuals. Historical examples of socialist countries include Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.
What are the characteristics of a socialist system?
The primary component of a socialist system is collective ownership. In a socialist system, nobody owns the land, natural resources, or business interests within the country. Instead, the entire population theoretically benefits from any wealth that is created. In most cases, the government would coordinate the activities of the people, which implies a centrally planned command economy.
“A socialist system strives for a classless society, in which the people have similar financial situations. A basic standard of living is usually guaranteed through the government.”
Reply from our companion party in India:
“We know that the farmers’ movement is a “reactionary” movement. So, I didn’t find any interest in writing an article on it, few comments notwithstanding.”
They are talking about nothing else on stock exchanges all over the world. It confirms (as does the current Bitcoin bubble) that, whatever else they are, stock exchanges are a gambler’s paradise.
This is also a case of Left and Right Unite against …. shorters. From today’s Times of London:
“Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, a Democratie congresswoman, said: “This is unacceptable. We now need to know more about Robinhood’s decision to block retail investors from purchasing stock while hedge funds are freely able to trade the stock as they see fit. As a member of the financial services committee, l’d support a hearing if necessary.”
Her comments, made on Twitter, drew widespread support. Elon Musk, the Tesla boss, responded by saying: “Absolutely.” Nigel Farage, the British politician, said: “Free markets and free speech are under threat.””There is also our pamphlet Are We Prisoners of Our Genes?;
It looks as if the government is backing down on this provocative proposal. This time it is political as opposed to economic reality that has trumped “sovereignty”
