Would you vote for me?

It's worth a go, but I can't see anything with this ever happening :/

Abolition of the un-democratic House of Lords and the monarchy. For an elected Head of State.

I would ^_^ that minimum wage sounds amazing, I'd be able to work then and not get in debt cos of what I'm gonna be paying for living.

I probably would, if I lived over there

If by some miracle you actually won (no offense), would you still have time for PF?

Yes id vote for you, much better than "Plaid Cymru". Well when i can vote that is..

like the ideas.

ya id vote.

i would. if i was old enough. and lived over there.

Don't get me wrong here, wonderful policies but how exactly would you plan on paying for the minimum wage and tuition fees policies!!! ?

"Don't get me wrong here, wonderful policies but how exactly would you plan on paying for the minimum wage and tuition fees policies!!! ?"

Perhaps you missed my second point:

"For nationalisation, of rail, health, post and all sectors of the economy under workers' democratic control with no compensation to their former owners."

Just a couple questions how you plan on doing some of the stuff you advocate.

Wouldnt nationalizing all the programs listed without compensation be theft? I would assume you couldnt get away with it and the law would back the people who currently own them. Of course you could purchase them. But where would you get the money from?

How would getting rid of private pensions help anyone. Wouldnt the system you want be like social security in the us. (Which is currently going bankrupt)

Rasing minimum wage? It is a noble cause to get behind. But when you get to the meat and potatoes of subject buisness dont want to lose money. If you raise minimum wage that just means that the prices go up and you dont actually help anyone. In fact they will make more profit and you will have hurt the middle class which would not benifit from a minimum wage increase. Wouldn't it be more logical to create more education systems in which people can learn trades to get higher paying jobs?

Reducing the work week. To what end. To help buy votes? If you reduce the work week without loss of pay then prices will go up.

Isn't the capitalists not paying people the value of their work theft? Hasn't the tyranny of the bosses gone on long enough? Being in government lets you create the laws, a constitution would be passed outlawing the exploitation of human by human.

Private pensions are a huge hassle for people, the stress it causes people alone is reason for them to be scrapped and replaced with a simple state pension. You hit retirement age, say between 50 and 60 and you get money related to how much you earned while working, simple. It also saves huge amounts of money by scrapping all the unneeded bureaucratic mess you find in private pension schemes.

How can capitalists (which don't exist after nationalisation) steal more surplus value from having a higher minimum wage? They steal less because they have to pay the workers more. The minimum wage will go up to reduce the surplus value that nationalised companies make to on average 0%. The worker then receives the full fruits of his or her labour.

The working week needs to be reduced so people can participate in politics and running the new economy they now have control over. Prices also wouldn't need to go up, in western economies there is huge amounts of waste, salesman, advertisers, estate agents, company executives etc, all unneeded in the new society, they will be employed doing productive work. Plus having businesses under the control of the workers and not the capitalists always boosts productivity, you only need to look at the factory occupations going on today and in the past to see that, a market in total anarchy obviously doesn't work as well as an economy that is planned from the ground up at the point of production and distribution.

My point is simple. How could 1 person make such outragous promises. Say in theory you make valid points. That doesnt mean you would be able to enact anything.

Capitalism is simple and it works if people are educated enough to understand the system.

Capitalism does pay the employee thier rightful wage. The employee has the free will to turn down any job they do not feel like is worth thier time. In Louisiana after hurricane Rita there was really no workers to call upon to fill most jobs to keep places running. This in turn caused the wage to increase to intise workers to come to work. The system works like that if the workers decide they wont work for a certain pay then they have the freedom to walk away.

Since when did the government start caring what stressed people out? I would agree some people dont have the technical knowledge to properly invest thier pensions but to remove all peoples pensions would be folly. I suggest that you make it optional. Something people can choose. After all you want to give people as much freedom as possible right?

1. You cant nationalize the countries total economy due to international companies operating on your soil.
2. Buisness will not lose money they will simply pass the cost to the consumer. The consumer of most products are the middle class. The minimum wage increase will not help the middle class. The middle class will be hurt due to higher prices. (This is what happens any time minimum wage is increased it never changes and what helps to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. If you really want to help the poor education is the best way)

Reducing the work week is a novel idea. But reduced hours would mean reduced pay. Perhaps they pay you 40hrs worth. But they reduce your salary to make up the difference. Buisnesses are not in the buisness of loseing money.

The new society that you speak of seems like one where there are little to no freedoms. You are limiting peoples opportunities to make something out of themselves. You are being forced to uphold only the governments system. It seems like it would be an easy system to manipulate for someone who gains control. After all if the government owns everything how easy would it be for the government to subjecate the people.

Countered here: http://www.dasmirnov.net/blog/2007/05/11/debunking_neo_liberal_pro_market_nonsens

Perhaps you missed my second point:

"For nationalisation, of rail, health, post and all sectors of the economy under workers' democratic control with no compensation to their former owners."

Erm... and you think re-nationalisation of the whole rail network will not cost you money!!! ?

Of course there are costs involved, the point is the owners deserve nothing.

Why should they get anything, the very people who wrecked the railways, they're lucky they're not in jail.

So you first use the re-nationalisation idea as an antidote to the high costs of your other policies... then in a blink of an eye admit that the renationalisation idea involves costs! Now your really are sounding like a true politician. :-p

I agree with one thing... the conservatives should be shot for what they did to our railways.

The costs of renationalisation are tiny, administration costs of dealing with setting up democracy within the companies and things like that. Absolutely miniscule. The companies would still be making billions, obviously.