[Bijou Drains]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

 But with socialism, we speculate that there will be less meat-eating because:1.  meat-eating is not an efficient method of food production2. that there is very good evidence that it is not nutritious or healthy, and3. it is reprehensible to impose pain and suffering upon other living beings where there is no need to do so. 4. Livestock rearing is a major contribution to global-warming hot-house gases …………………………. We associate ourselves with the steady-state, zero-growth model of economy for a socialist society and we envisage an anti-consumerism trend to prevail and expect a drop in consumption levels

Sorry to disappoint you, but I dont agree with much of the above.1. Meat eating is not a form of food production, it is a method of food consumption. What is counted as efficient in a capitalist society will not be what is considered efficeint in a socialist society. It is impossible to say what the technological and environmental situation will be when/if a socialist society is implemented. There are many pros and cons about meat production. We do not as a Party have a position on this, anymore than we have a party position on what colour the rubbish bins will be in a socialist society.2. There is also lots of good evidence that it is nutritious and healthy. The difficulty is that in a capitalist society evidence is generally biased to which ever industry is sponsoring it.It is intersting to llok at some some of the sponsors of the Produce for Better Health Foundation which was largely responsible for the start of the 5 a day movement in California::Logistics firms: C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.;Caito Foods, Inc.;Capital City Fruit;Coast Produce Company and J&J Distributing. –Specialist producers:Driscoll’s (berries);U.S. Highbush Blueberry Council (blueberries);Ocean Mist (artichokes and fresh vegetables);Giorgio (mushrooms);Columbine Vineyards (grapes);Nature sweet tomatoes;Potandon Produce (potatoes)Paramount Farms (nuts and flavoured nut snacks).General fresh produce firms includeW. Newell & Companies;Eurofresh Farms;Giumarra Companies;General Mills (Green Giant brand);Sun-Maid raisins and dried fruit;Kagome juicesDuda Farm Fresh Foods. –also other: such asBASF (the world’s leading chemical company, and a provider of fungicides, insecticides and herbicides);Glad Products Company (containers, bags and ovenware);Nunhems USA (commercial vegetable seeds);No conflict of interest there then.3. This is a moral judgement. I agree with it, but it is not the Party's postion to moralise.4. Again this is open to question, we grow the crop, feed it to the cow, the cow farts a lot, then we eat the cow, as opposed to we grow the crop, eat the crop, then we fart a lot.Similarly, I do not agree that we associate ourselves with a steady state, zero growth economy. I would say we associate ourselves with an econmic model that is democratic and hopefully has the least harmful impact on our environment. It is perfectly feasible that this could be attained and that economic growth (how that is defined is another question) continues.

[Bijou Drains]

robbo203 wrote:

Vin wrote:

Major McPharter wrote:

Will Oswald bring his blackshirts with him up to the north east ?

Divint wurry marra. Thail nivver stop wor pie and pee suppa neets. Gannaway wir a  a leek up the jacksey, Mare like  

 I tried "GeordieTranslator" on this but it dinna work.  http://www.whoohoo.co.uk/main.asp So c'mon guys, tell us .  What does "wor pie and pee suppa neets"  mean then?

Wor = OurPie and Pee Suppa neets – Pie and Peas Supper nights. A traditional night of entertainment, usually focussed on fund raising or some other charitable cause, where savoury mince pies (usually large version known as plate mincve pies) and mushy peas (Geordie Guacamole) are consumed in large quantities (gravy optional). The evening may also involve a game of bingo or a beetle drive (this is not a cruel insect baiting activity). In times gome by further entertainment could be made by the singing of culturaly significant songs such as "wor Geordies Lost 'is Liggy" "Eeh Wor Nanny's a Mazer" "Keep ya feet Still Geordie Hinny" "The Blaydon Races" and south of the Tyne "The Lambton Worm". https://www.newcastlegateshead.com/blog/read/2015/03/where-to-get-the-best-pies-in-newcastle-britishpieweek-b89

[Bijou Drains]

Vin wrote:

Major McPharter wrote:

Will Oswald bring his blackshirts with him up to the north east ?

Divint wurry marra. Thail nivver stop wor pie and pee suppa neets. Gannaway wir a  a leek up the jacksey, Mare like  

the last time a fascist caalled Oswald torned up in th’ Toon, me fatha an is Marras waddn’t let’m Gan t’th hoppins. He awnly wanted to gan on a shuggy, https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.thefreelibrary.com/amp/Fighting+fascists+on+Tyneside%253B+When+the+leader+of+the+British+Union…-a0382399245

[Bijou Drains]

alanjjohnstone wrote:

Nearly $70 billion on our cats, dogs, and other companion animals, and a 2015 Gallup poll found that one-third of all Americans believe animals should have the same basic rights as people.  Despite our love for animals, over 9 billion land animals per year are slaughtered for food in the U.S. alone

So if we turn agricultural production over to purely agrarian farming, what do we do with the 9 billion animals that are ready for slaughter, turn them loose? I think a lot of people who don't have much of a connection with the countryside belive it's all a bit David Attenborough out there (the lizard always beats the snake). How do you imagine wild animals meet their deaths, Do you have visions of elderly Mr badger, surrounded by famiy and friends, slowly passing away in his bed as the Badger priest reads him the badger last rites. In reality most wild animlas meet deaths that are at least as unpleasant as the ones that die in slaughterhouses, often at an earlier age.Again the slaughterhouses of a Socialist Society would not be driven by cutting corners and making as much profit for the owners. I for one would be ok with working in a well run, humane slaughter house, knowing it is the best interests of my fellow workers.There is also a lot of bollocks talked about local food production and the environmental benefits of it. A recent programme on Radie 4 pointed out that it was far more environmentally friendly to undertake large scale production of tomatoes in a climate like Spain and then transport to the UK, that it was to use energy producing tomatoes in the UK. The amount of greenhouse gasses produced in transporting, especially by sea, is far less that heating greenhouses in the UK.

[Bijou Drains]

TheMightyYoghourt wrote:

 The point, surely, is that 'farming' under capitalism – for which read 'factory farming as an efficient means of maximising profits' is at once fucking up the planet and producing meat that is scarcely worth eating.  Most mass-produced supermarket meat is flavourless and almost entirely lacking in nutritional value.  The same is true, incidentally, of mass-produced fruit and vegetables.  Capitalism has produced an entire generation of people who simply don't have a clue what an apple or a tomato taste like, leave alone the explosive umami experience of a well-reared cow.  FFS!  Lots of people don't even know where their food comes from.  I think that it's mistaken to believe that there is any quantitative or qualitative difference between cow factory farming, sheep factory farming, chicken factory farming or fish factory farming.  It's all harmful, both to people and the environment and the only slightly-sentient creatures that it fucks about with. (If livestock were so clever it'd have a socialist party!)  From my point of view, socialism won't be socialism if it treats animals in the way that capitalism does.  So forget about your chicken nuggets and your beefburgers.  If they still exist after the revolution – except as a frozen exhibit in the museum of idiocy and total divorce from the concept of a food chain – it won't have been a revolution at all.  Human liberation equals animal liberation, it seems to me.  And I don't even like animals.  I like animals about as much as I like humans.  Which is to say, scarcely at all.  I'm not a vegetarian.  My attitude to food is simple.  If you speak to it and it can't answer then it's on the menu.  And that includes tabloid readers and the watchers of the X-Factor.  But you really shouldn't be eating that stuff unless you know where it came from. 

Fuck me, someone who is as misanthropic as myself, Right on brother/sister. The only slight points of disagreement, beefburgers can be delicious, if made with properly produced beef, and you seem to rule out eating parrots.

[Bijou Drains]

ALB wrote:

Be careful not to provoke the Hindu nationalists, Bijou. They kill people for eating meat.

Round my way they’d kill whole families for a Greggsy’s pastie.

[Bijou Drains]

John Oswald wrote:

But we who wish to stop you will be free to do so. Unless you choose to stop us, dictatorially. Even that won't work. And, exactly, you won't have what today's capitalists have: a police force to stop us stopping you!

you’re welcome to try, Bonny lad!

[Bijou Drains]

Vin wrote:

Alan – you are talking about production for profit, which I oppose whereas I am talking about freedom to eat a sausage roll. Don't conflate the two.We have a completely different views of post capitalism. Socialism will increase my freedom otherwise I wouldn't want it. So don't tell me what I can eat and what I can't  

Did somebody mention sausage rolls?

[Bijou Drains]

LBird wrote:

jondwhite wrote:

http://en.internationalism.org/forum/1056/demogorgon/14540/lbird-banned

For those Democratic Communists with any real political interest in these issues, about "Workers' Power" and about why 'materialists' will always ban Marxists (as indeed did the SPGB), please read this ICC thread regarding 'Do stones talk to us?'.http://en.internationalism.org/forum/1056/baboon/14363/do-stones-talk-usYou'll notice that, as usual, I quote from Marx himself.Marx warns that 'materialists' will divide society into two, with the smaller part (the 'materialists') always dominating the larger part (the proletariat).That's why 'materialists' will not have workers deciding for themselves about 'matter'. The 'stones' thread explores this further.Oh yeah, Merry Christmas, and have a 'Materialist New Year'.

I can't say I missed you all that much, my feathered friend, but I'm glad to see you haven't fallen off your perch. I hope you have a the New Year you voted for, all the best.

[Bijou Drains]

robbo203 wrote:

Brian wrote:

HollyHead wrote:

 [Remember these rates are ten years old! and also lets bear in mind London cost of living rates]

The present average payment in London (2017) for a full-time Office Manager is £31,789 p.a. and for an office administrator its £20,748 p.a.

  If a self employed full time worker is out of the question for legal reason then why not  just settle for a full time paid employee on a temporary contract renewable annually on a salary of, say, 25K –  a reasonable compromise figure.in relation to the above figures? The  Party can easily afford this at the present time and, if its financial situation were to deteriorate markedly in the future, it is not obliged to renew the contract. Lets be bold and try this as an experiment.  Having someone working full time at HO 5 days a week  with an expanded remit to undertake political work and well as adminstrative duties could very well make a huge difference  and lift the whole mood of the Parrty. I'm tired of this negativism already  and I have only rejoined in the last month or so!  What have we got to lose apart from our ingrained depression?  If the SWP can employ multiple full time staff, why can't the SPGB employ at least one full time office worker? Actually , offering a temporary contract to the person concerned would, if anything, incentivise that person to make a big impact  in order to secure the contract for the following year.

It seems to me that we are saying on the one hand that we are organised and plan to create a world wide social revolution which will possibly be one of the most important events in human history and will involve billions of people on a world wide scale, however on the other hand having a full time employee might just be a bit difficult for us to get our heads around!I have run a small company, mainly employing myself and my Partner, for the last 13 years. I have acted as a consultant to several charities, etc. who have gone down the employment route. I have also helped put together a staff team to provide the care for two family members using the direct payments model, which employed several staff over several years. The process is fairly straightforward. Yes you need to have certain policies and procedures, but I have copies of current approved policies and procedures, etc. and am happy to offer advice, adapt any of the Policies and Procedures I have in current use and I am sure the woman that does all of my wage slips and calculates tax returns for us, would be happy of the work, she charges buttons and it keeps you compliant.There are literally 10s of thousands of small organisations employing staff, I refuse to believe that the process is too complicated for the SPGB. Lots of clubs, organisations, etc. have elected paid officials (Working Men's Clubs, Golf Clubs, Allotment Societies, etc.) so having a one year elected paid worker should be very easy.

[Bijou Drains]

Howay Harley, Hiiny, divvent gan awa awld slavva man. Wuz's aal marras noo

[Bijou Drains]

ALB wrote:

jondwhite wrote:

At the last conference when employing staff was on the agenda, I was told the party employed a member full time presumably as an IT consultant which must date to the 1990s or 2000s. I was shocked to hear this.

It seems that all sorts of urban myths about Head Office are circulating up North!  The Party never employed anybody full time in the 1990s or 2000s. That would have required a Conference resolution and the money, neither of which existed. Even the Head Office Assistant only receives travel and subsistence expenses for being there part-time, for two-and-half days a week

I've also heard a rumour that South London Branch hold satanic masses at HO where they dance around naked whilst flagelating themselves with wet copies of Questions of the Day. There's some pretty weird folk down there in that there London, I tell tha' that for nowt!

[Bijou Drains]

ALB wrote:

Bijou Drains wrote:

I don't get to HO as often as I would like. But the last time I called in apart from ADM, I tried to get hold of information such as a list of members and contacts in the NE region. I was told by the then Head Office Assistance that no central data base for any of that information existed (I think Brian might be able to elaborate on the difficulty in getting hold of info for the current survey).

Well, you were told wrong ! It is easy to get a print-out of members in the North East and also of contacts there by North East post codes (or anywhere else, for that matter). I can do this tomorrow when I'm at HO if you still want it. Won't take 10 minutes. We are not that incompetent !Head Office supplied the Survey Committee with the addresses, as printed labels, of all members and what email addresses we had and could get for members.But to come to the point at issue, I agree that employing or engaging a non-member to do essential admin work is a non-runner for the reasons mentioned by Robbo. On the other hand, employing/engaging a Party member to do the work of General Secretary/Treasurer/Central Organiser is a sensible way forward. Whatever impression some members may have got, there is a coherent strategy. Following a Party Poll on the matter, we are investing the money from legacies surplus to immediate requirements in an investment fund (to get 5% interest instead of 0.5% in a deposit account)  with a view to using the interest towards paying a full or half timer.The only problem that remains is finding a suitable member.

I wasn't having a pop at those comrades that do voluntary work at HO, I was just going off what Keith (forget his second name) told me, apologies if that appeared to be me having a go.As to "having a problem finding a suitable member", ohh err, could that be the first line of the new British Comedy sensation "Carry on up Clapham High Street"

[Bijou Drains]

gnome wrote:

Bijou Drains wrote:

Dave I understand your principled stance on this issue. I have a degree of dissonance about the idea as well. However we in effect pay staff when we hire in someone to fix the boiler, or repair the roof, or any other service we use.

Let me see now.  Over the past seven years we've paid non-members to install a new shopfront and a central heating gas boiler.  Other than that we pay for regular 'servicing' of the photocopiers, fire extinguishers and alarms.  Everything else, be it administrative or maintenance to the property, is undertaken by party members, all for free, zero, zip, zilch.

Quote:

I don't necessarily see this proposal as one which needs to involve "paying comrades to do party work". I think we should get in skilled and qualified paid administration worker to carry out the admin work for the party. I think people underestimate the skills and values of a good admin worker, if we were to hire non party staff to carry out admin duties, this would release volunteer Socialists from the mundane business tasks and allow them to use their activities more fruitfully in putting out the party case. Not only that, we would have those tasks done by a skilled worker who can do these tasks effectively and efficiently

I'm struggling to think of which administrative duties, other than possibly the paying of wages (and I have my doubts about that), the party could safely and securely entrust to non-members.  Would they be let loose on the SS subscription or membership databases, perhaps free to talk to enquirers about socialism, be they callers to the premises or on the phone?  Could they become the General Secretary, Party Treasurer or Central Organiser, maybe serve on the Executive Committee or sub-committees?  Frankly the whole idea is too barmy to contemplate.

I don't get to HO as often as I would like. But the last time I called in apart from ADM, I tried to get hold of information such as a list of members and contacts in the NE region. I was told by the then Head Office Assistance that no central data base for any of that information existed (I think Brian might be able to elaborate on the difficulty in getting hold of info for the current survey). There is one simple example of office administration which is hampering the development of the party.In addition the computer and printing systems from what I saw (and I admit my observations are limited) do not appear to be up to the job of a modern efficeint organisation, The systems for holding personal information do not appear to comply with current data holding practices, returns to the Electoral Commision have been filed late, which may lead to a big fine for the Party. Just a few examples.Perhaps I'm biased, my mother, Cde Mama K, was trained at the same commercial school as Jack Common (who was the model for Karl Marx's brow on the Highgate Cemetary grave and a criminally overlooked writer) and she hammered into her kids the value of good administrative practices in running an organisation.

[Bijou Drains]

gnome wrote:

Bijou Drains wrote:

We can hardly write about the evils of the gig economy and then rely on it ourselves.

But it's OK to rely on "proper employment", eh?  For the party to go down the road of paying comrades to do party work would not only be a retrograde step ideologically but fraught with all manner of difficulties. We can't even, it seems, make elementary returns to the Electoral Commission without landing ourselves in trouble and possible sanctions but here we are contemplating involvement in the paying of wages, national insurance, sickness benefit etc., and all that that necessarily entails.

Dave I understand your principled stance on this issue. I have a degree of dissonance about the idea as well. However we in effect pay staff when we hire in someone to fix the boiler, or repair the roof, or any other service we use.I don't necessarily see this proposal as one which needs to involve "paying comrades to do party work". I think we should get in skilled and qualified paid administration worker to carry out the admin work for the party. I think people underestimate the skills and values of a good admin worker, if we were to hire non party staff to carry out admin duties, this would release volunteer Socialists from the mundane business tasks and allow them to use their activities more fruitfully in putting out the party case. Not only that, we would have those tasks done by a skilled worker who can do these tasks effectively and efficientlyAs to employment of staff, it is a fairly straightforward thing to do, I run a small company with two paid staff (me and my Partner) we pay a payroll service who we tell how much our salaries are and they work out all of the NI, tax, etc. to pay and then we write the cheques out. We pay them £27 a quarter to do it.

[Author]

Posts