Quote Originally Posted by HenryLB View Post
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Wages are static in Germany, even in an economy that you acknowledge is rigged by neo-liberal fiscal domination of the EU. Where the regulation you describe does exist, it does so to facilitate this cheating, to the huge detriment of Southern Europe and those outside EU borders.

So I don't understand why you think these countries are that different. They aren't run on some radical new lines, in general they just tax more and spend more, and have a better balance of workers' rights. How that would differ from the UK envisaged by Jeremy Corbyn I'd love to know.
The more I discuss things with you, the more I realise that you're not terribly interested in viewing things in any ways other than the way you already view them. No argument, regardless of how fair or logical, is enough because you only view the world one way.

You seem to be implying, consistently, that Norway, Germany or the Netherlands are largely equivalent to the UK. This simply isn't true, by any measure of their economies, and you're obfuscating these facts by falsely equivocating individual aspects that form merely a part of the economy you're describing.

I'm not terribly sure why I'm bothering, to be totally honest.

I already defined neoliberalism, the way I'm using the term, and you've hijacked it here to mean almost the exact opposite of what I told you my working definition is. The regulations we're both talking about heavily favour Germany, but largely as a result of its ability to take advantage of the export benefits they've created. Creating regulations is, quite literally, the opposite of neoliberalism as I erstwhile defined it.

Trying to alter the definition, despite my clarity, doesn't wash.

As to your second question, the major difference between northern Europe/Scandinavia and the United Kingdom or America is in their political system, and the behaviour of the fourth estate. The political system in the UK is laughably out of date, and is kept in place solely because it suits the right wing agenda of those who believe they're born to govern; the class system, as well as institutionalised bigotry, is still rigidly in place. The difference is that it's now obfuscated by a media service that's almost wholly attempting to cover up the influence of its lobbyists.

But why should that matter?

It matters because the public cannot hold the government to account. In Scotland this problem is particularly acute, because no matter what were to happen, points don't mean prizes. The SNP got almost a clean sweep in 2015, yet had no impact whatsoever because of an English-built Conservative majority. Pretty much 80% of elected MPs are from English constituencies - this means that Sinn Fein, Plaid Cymru and the SNP could come under a single banner, sweep the boards in their individual countries, and...

Well, nothing. Combined, they'd still form one out of five MPs in the commons while the other four would pull in the direction of England.

Democratically, nobody could ever argue that this system is fit for purpose. Were Scotland independent today, and asked if they wanted to join a political union like the one we have now, barely a single Scot would vote for it.

So if Jeremy Corbyn were to end up at No. 10, it wouldn't matter one iota to Scotland. The situation would be exactly the same, as the Labour party would run Britain for the benefit of England.

Quote Originally Posted by HenryLB View Post
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
I'd be interested in how you think we could re-tool away from neo-liberalism in this country.
This is the crux of the problem between us, and why we're continually at odds.

The way you've worded this makes it abundantly clear that you think neoliberalism is self-evidently correct. No matter the problems it creates, both personally and socially, you clearly believe that it's the only real option. I'd have to present an entire economic model to you in order to satisfy what you're asking (which is what you did in previous arguments about the Scottish economy), because individual ideas will simply be taken out of context, quite deliberately, and dismissed.

This is why I'm keen to keep saying:

Universal Basic Income needs to be part of an economic overhaul.

If all we did was change one part of the economy, an economy built almost exclusively to suit London's wealthy, the system wouldn't work. It would need to be part of an overarching set of changes that looked at poverty as a social problem, not merely where you throw a bit of welfare cash.

Quote Originally Posted by HenryLB View Post
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
What you are saying makes no logical sense when compared to your previous argument.
I'm sorry, but it's 100% logical. I've no idea why you're saying otherwise.

My assertion is this:

England controls the political destination of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (fact).
Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have no means of changing that via the current electoral system (fact).
For Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland to control their political destination, something must change (fact).

These three assertions are all completely inarguable. You're deliberately conflating the question of ethnicity, because you know that they're true and don't want them to be. Whether or not Scotland can decide its own political future has nothing, whatsoever, to do with the current political views of Scots. Should those views diverge, as they did with the EU referendum for example, there is no democratic way to escape the fact that another country has decided what Scotland will do.

I'm not sure what's proving impossible for you to grasp about this.

Quote Originally Posted by HenryLB View Post
This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
Or the fact that you also routinely seem to think of 'English' people as monolithic in their thinking, which is the bedrock of ethnic nationalism, at least in reverse.
And there we have it.

The assertion that I must just be an anti-English racist, despite the fact I've made no such claim or assertion like the one you're attributing to me.

Good job.