Desperate for change

People’s thinking is controlled today is by confusing them and creating muddled and disordered double-speak, illogical reporting filled with “fake news” in a merry-go-round of conflicting reports.  So is it surprising that the world appears astoundingly incoherent, totally absurd, and completely irrational for reasons we can’t seem to comprehend? The mainstream media do this daily, reducing the average person seeking to stay informed to bewilderment over world events. One is left one baffled, devoid of any sense of truth.

 Bill Clinton’s misinformation led to the air onslaught against Serbia in 1999. In 2003, Bush blatantly deceived in order to wage a barbaric war against Iraq. Later Obama and Hilarity Clinton misled the world and launched air strikes against Gaddafi's Libya.  And political parties exist to delude.

The Labour Party and the Tory Party fight for political office and in order to get votes both make promises of better times to come, though both sides know full well that whichever government is elected, the future holds in store nothing but a continuation, if not a worsening, of present hardships. What the working class of Britain and of the whole world need is the abolition of capitalism and the creation of socialism. They need it but do not yet understand their need. We are therefore faced with the tragedy that millions of workers listen to and accept the willful lies of their political leaders. For those workers who in the past have voted for the Labour Party in the mistaken belief that it was in some way moving towards a new form of society, it is tragic indeed, for the leaders of the Labour Party have now ceased to have faith in anything except the cynical belief that they do the day-to-day job of running capitalism no worse than the Conservatives. In the past, the Labour leaders believed in state capitalism (or nationalisation,) but now this has proved to be so unpopular with the workers that the leaders are soliciting votes by letting it be known that there are to be no new nationalisation schemes in the future. Among bread-and-butter questions, they laid great emphasis on being able to raise wages and reduce the cost of living, but the steady rise of prices and the lagging behind of wages during the past few years has reduced them to the Tories are juggling with the facts to deceive the electors. There is little to choose between Labour Government and Tory Government, but unlike them, we have a message of hope and action to give to the working class. In their own interests, the working class should choose neither Labour nor Tory. Labourism has failed as Toryism failed. The urgent need of the working class is to establish socialism. A Corbyn Labour Government will not escape the economic crises and war preparations thrust on it by capitalism and in spite of all its efforts to make life less burdensome it will not make capitalism palatable. So end all attempts to operate capitalism “in a different way." It will be predoomed to failure.

There is an aspect of vastly greater importance for the working class than the internal bickerings of the Labour Party. This is the question of what it is that has failed. It is Labourism that has failed, not socialism. The Labour Party never at any time in its history aimed at or tried to introduce socialism. Labourism aimed to carry on Great Britain as a capitalist unit in a capitalist world; seeking only to modify its social evils at home and its predatory nature in the international sphere. Of course, it had to fail. Socialism is an international conception which will involve the end of capitalist production and distribution for profit, the end of the wage-system and price system and of the international conflict over markets and raw materials. Socialism is not concerned with turning private capitalism into state capitalism. Socialism requires the conversion of the means of production and distribution from private ownership to common ownership and democratic control by the whole of society, with resulting abolition of property incomes and the carrying on of production solely for use. Socialism has not failed because it has never been tried here or in any other country.

Capitalist production is concerned with the realisation of a profit, not the satisfaction of human needs. No profit — no production, is the criterion, though millions of people are ill clad, ill housed and hungry. This is something we have said many times. There would then be harmony of interests and full cooperation between people everywhere, for the sole criterion of production would be the satisfaction of human needs. Society would apply this acid test when considering productive resources, whether these were fields, factories, or gas and oil plants.

The Socialist Party does not condemn the workers' attempts to defend their standard of living. On the contrary, we unreservedly support the use of trades and industrial action to defend or improve standards of living (without, however, supporting tr advocating strikes on all occasions, irrespective of whether the time and circumstances are well chosen).

What we wholly condemn is “reformism," that is, the Labour Party policy of building up a political party on a programme of reforms, and gaining seats in Parliament on such a programme. We say that the only party which can be of service to the socialist movement is a party built upon the principles of socialism and nothing else, a party composed only of socialists.

Our Planet's Pollution

Pollution kills more people each year than wars, disasters and hunger, also causing huge economic damage, a study says. 

Almost half the total deaths occur in just two countries.

One in every six of the 9 million premature deaths worldwide in 2015 could be attributed to diseases caused by toxins in air or water, the study says. It says air pollution was the main cause of deaths, responsible for 6.5 million of the fatalities, followed by water pollution, which killed 1.8 million.

The estimate of 9 million premature deaths, considered conservative by the authors, is one and a half times higher than the number of people killed by smoking, and three times the death toll from AIDS, turberculosis and malaria combined. It is also 15 times the number of people killed in war or other forms of violence.

Ninety-two percent of pollution-related deaths occurred in low- or middle-income developing countries, with India topping the list at 2.5 million, followed by China at 1.8 million.

The Lancet editors Pamela Das and Richard Horton said the report came at a "worrisome time, when the US government's Environmental Protection Agency, headed by Scott Pruitt, is undermining established environmental regulations." Pruitt announced this month that the US, a major producer of air pollution and greenhouse gases, would be pulling out of former President Barack Obama's Clean Power Plan. The plan, which aimed to cut carbon dioxide emissions from electricity production, was expected by the EPA to also reduce smog and soot in the air by 25 percent and thus avoid thousands of premature deaths through asthma and other lung conditions.

Scotland's money laundering SLPs

UK companies using an obscure Scottish business structure are at the centre of a multibillion-dollar operation to funnel cash out of Azerbaijan, an investigation by the Guardian has found. Some of the billions moved through the letter-box companies were used to pay for legitimate lobbying work for Azerbaijan, luxury goods and the medical expenses of the Azerbaijani political elite. The Scottish companies have also been linked to a corruption scandal involving the alleged bribery of a member of the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe.

Scottish limited partnerships (SLPs), structures originally established in the early 1900s for farm holdings, acted as shell companies to channel $2.9bn (£2.2bn) from Azerbaijan into the UK where it was used to buy luxury goods and peddle political influence throughout Europe. The money was moved through the Glasgow-based companies Hilux Services LP and Polux Management LP via an Estonian branch of Danske Bank between 2012 and 2014. The companies benefited from loose national disclosure laws that allowed firms to hide the identity of their owners while enjoying the benefits of being a UK-registered company. The two companies at the heart of the Azerbaijani money-laundering scheme, Hilux and Polux, were registered to a Mail Boxes Etc shop in Glasgow. The only trace of who may have controlled the laundering vehicles leads to the British Virgin Islands – another secrecy jurisdiction, where the registered partners are Solberg Business Limited and Akron Resources Corp.

The companies are among thousands of Scottish limited partnerships set up in the past decade. 

“One of the real attractions for serious money, however it has been obtained, is finding a jurisdiction where the rule of law is predictable,” said L Burke Files, an international financial investigator. When it comes to jurisdiction, would you prefer to use a company in Scotland, under Scottish law, or some place like Burkina Faso or Algeria where the judges go to the highest bidder? The SLP structure and how it was crafted into law also provides for an element of privacy,” said Files.

The number of SLPs increased rapidly following a tightening of the law elsewhere in the UK in 2006. The restriction prohibited private and limited companies from setting themselves up without a named individual as a director. However the change did not extend to SLPs and as a result it is still possible to register a company only disclosing corporate partners in an offshore jurisdiction. The surge in the number of SLPs resulted in four times as many companies being created since 2006 as were established in the previous century. The majority of the companies formed in the past decade are registered to a handful of locations, with thousands of SLPs at the same mailbox addresses. Of the new companies set up between 2006 and 2017, 70% are registered to just 10 addresses in Scotland, a report by Transparency International and Bellingcat found. More than 800 SLPs are registered to the mailbox address in central Glasgow that Hilux Services and Polux Management listed as their business address. The structures have also played a role in other UK-linked money-laundering schemes.

Following new anti-money-laundering legislation all SLPs were required to register people with significant control by 7 August. However, a review of the disclosures filed after the deadline shows the vast majority of partnerships have not yet disclosed who controls the company, while more than half the partnerships who have filed statements stated that they did not know who controlled the company or were taking steps to find out.

“The initial responses really back up our suspicions about how many of these entities set up recently are being used,” said Hames. “Of those who have declared their beneficial ownership, an analysis by Bellingcat showed that there are as many based in the UK as there are in Russia and Ukraine. Even the most recent information to come to light confirms the appetite for using this corporate vehicle in some high risk jurisdictions,” he added.

Anti-money-laundering legislation was rushed through parliament in June to bring disclosure of the ownership of SLPs into line with EU law. However, there are still concerns the companies could be used as money-laundering vehicles.

“At the moment the combination of corporate partners, minimum filing requirements, and separate legal personality make the Scottish limited partnership particularly attractive to those looking to use it as one of the layers in a money-laundering scheme,” said Duncan Hames, director of policy at Transparency International.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/04/the-scottish-firms-that-let-money-flow-from-azerbaijan-to-the-uk

No more smacking children

Smacking children is to be banned in Scotland, the Scottish government has confirmed.

The move would make the country the first part of the UK to outlaw the physical punishment of children. At present, parents in Scotland can claim a defence of "justifiable assault" when punishing their child - although the use of an "implement" in any punishment is banned, as is shaking or striking a child on the head. Mr Finnie, a former policeman, tabled a members' bill at Holyrood calling for the "justifiable assault" defence to be scrapped and for children to be given "equal protection from assault".

The physical punishment of children is already illegal in 52 countries.

Banning smacking has been backed by the UN, academics and charities, while the Association of Scottish Police Superintendents and Scottish Borders Council have supported Mr Finnie's bill.

Childrens' charity NSPCC Scotland said the move was a "welcome step on the road towards fairness and equality for children", saying a change in the law would be "a common sense move".

Star Gazing

 In Victoria Derbyshire's program on channel two October 17^th her guests were Professor Brian Cox and comedian Robin Ince.  Professor Brian Cox was discussing how two black holes merge together and create gravitational waves which can be registered here on Earth and seems to answer the question of how gold is created as the method of producing gold was a bit of a mystery until the idea of two stars banging together made them realise this could just be how gold was created.

Groups of young students asking questions ensued and one was "How are the poor people going to earn a living when those robots do more and more of the work?"

Professor Cox said it was a good question and at a recent conference they thought the answer to be the generation of new machines and new industries faster than industries failing.

Robin Ince was more aware what was being ignored (the elephant in the room) He jumped in with the need to think more about people and human relationships than profit. "These things will have to be considered"

Professor Cox must think more about how capitalism works back here on earth.  Workers are paid a wage based on what it takes to produce his skills and maintain his replacements. New industries have been appearing (Television, Satellites, Computers etc.) Production has doubled since the end of the war. Poverty is widespread. On the same program Homelessness (only being one of the problems) was being highlighted. The question asked was " how are the poor people going to earn a living when those robots  do more of the work"

The answer is the working class must get rid of the profit system by replacing capitalism with a system of common ownership of the means of production. We call it socialism. A moneyless society, where people own planet earth in common.

Stargazing and moving to new planets are not the most important things to be attended too.

egoutture

Fight for Socialism

Make up your mind to which class you belong. If you are of the working class, then get off your knees, stand up and be a real man or woman and fight to achieve a society that can offer you a life worth living. You have been a tame and docile wage worker long enough, voting for political quacks who have led you up every garden path they can find. On the political field, you will find many parties which aim to make all sorts of alterations to the present social system, but which will show their venom when anyone suggests abolishing it. Yet that is where your interests lie, not in struggling to crawl out of your class into the capitalist class, which is well nigh impossible, but in striving to end a class system of society altogether.

Capitalism, the present social order, brings into being a working class, the members of which must sell their mental and physical energies to the class owning the land, factories and other means of wealth production. Their dependence upon the price (or wages) they receive for these energies (or labour power) places them in a position of continuous bondage to the capitalist class. This is the social system that made slaves of both men and women to-day. Only when the establishment of socialism rids the world of classes and the wages system will the economic and social emancipation of all become a reality. The conquest of governmental power is useless and pernicious unless there is behind it and controlling it a socialist working class, consciously organised for the one worthwhile aim, that of establishing socialism.

How can production be so increased that a world of plenty is created? The barrier is the capitalist system and it is also obvious that the war-machine created by all the countries of the world is one of the major drains on resources. Millions of men are in the armed forces of the world, millions more are producing armaments. Only socialism, which would make war superfluous, can stop this terrific waste of manpower and materials. How much of the work which we do to-day is essential in order to produce the things we need? How much of it which although necessary under capitalism would be unnecessary under Socialism? The vast army of civil servants needed by the State, the huge number of office-staff engaged in keeping records of the financial transactions of capitalism plus a hundred and one other different occupations which although necessary under capitalism would not be required if goods were produced for use instead of for profit. Modern methods of production, plus the gigantic increase of manpower available for production, could turn out goods in such quantity so as to provide plenty for all. Unfortunately, at the present time, only the socialists see the endless possibilities of potential abundances. If only all the wonders of new technologies could be put into operation for the service of mankind and not for the purpose of profit making for the owners of industry, what bountiful changes could be made in the world? Not only could all people have more of the wealth that they produce but the hours spent in its production could be so much shortened. Not only could the tasks be so much easier but the conditions under which they are performed could be made enjoyable. There need be no “dirty work," much less occupational illnesses, and so much more time for leisure to enjoy the arts, amusements, and entertainments.

Many will ponder why, when there is such technology as robotics and automation available, that people in huge areas of the world still use primitive tools and transport; why, when wealth can be produced so plentifully, that so many people are in need of the absolute necessities of life; why, when there is so much labour-saving machinery, that multitudes of people are overworked. There are a number of reasons why new inventions do not get taken up and utilised immediately they are made. One reason, probably the most effective, is that a new inventionS will cut across the interests of existing capitalist companies. We can remember the opposition that the turnpike and stagecoach companies put up against the early railways. The whale-oil companies fought against the use of gas for lighting, and later the gas companies fought against the use of electric light. The telegraph companies put up bitter opposition to the telephone. All these instances are of opposition that may have delayed the application of new inventions but failed to prevent it. There must be many, many cases where the opposition was successful and we have never heard of the invention at all. Other aspects that retard development is the difficulty of finding a profitable market for goods that are in plentiful supply. Fear of overproduction with the consequent shattering of price levels. Also with wages at low levels, it is often cheaper to use a number of manual workers to do a task than to install expensive machinery that will displace them. All this adds up to the fact that the existing system of production is now a fetter on social progress.

If the full force of the benefits of new technology is to accrue to mankind, then the capitalist mode of production must be abolished. The production of goods for a market in order to make a profit must end. It is clogging the wheels of social progress, it is causing suffering and misery, poverty and unhappiness, ill-health and insecurity, all of which can end when the workers take the means of production from the existing owners and use them for the common good.

Inverness and Universal Credit

Inverness is more than a year ahead in trialling the system. People who were never in debt before have been catapulted into crisis. People expressed bemusement at their situation, stressing that they had never previously been in rent arrears or in debt, and voicing confusion over how their situation had rapidly sped towards crisis. Alasdair Christie, manager of Inverness Citizens Advice, said his colleagues were under pressure, working beyond contracted hours, to help sort out universal credit problems.  "People come in crying, in despair, with no hope of how to remedy the situation. The biggest issue is the length of time that people wait to get their first payment, which is causing huge pressure on families, pushing people to food banks, having a detrimental effect on people’s mental health,” he said. “We’ve seen problems escalate at each point of the rollout – the unfairness, the complexities, the delays. In terms of a benefit system, it is worse than your worst nightmares.”

"It is a disaster,” the area’s SNP MP, Drew Hendry, said. More than 60% of his caseload is connected to universal credit. 

Partly the problems are caused by an in-built six-week delay to all new payments, which pushes many families instantly into arrears. Partly they are the result of anomalies within the system. “We see short payments, missed payments, lost paperwork, incredibly poor communication between the DWP and the jobcentre, whose staff are not allowed in many cases to speak to the person within the DWP to find a solution,” he said. “It is a chaotic system, beyond inefficient. Every day we see a different situation where someone is being put under unacceptable pressure. " Hendry is angry at the government’s refusal to listen to the mounting list problems he has reported. “We have given evidence for three years about the problems we’re seeing, and they have not reacted. The system is meant to support people who are vulnerable, but the ones who are being devastated by it are the ones who can least cope.“Simplifying the benefit system is the right thing to do. But it’s worthless if the new system is so complex and heartless that it doesn’t achieve any of the objectives.”

For many of Inverness’s universal credit guinea pigs, the past year has been exceptionally stressful. The many glitches of a malfunctioning scheme have already caused widespread misery in this city, which has been trialling various forms of universal credit since 2013. 

Highland council has 1,521 tenants receiving universal credit, 80% of whom are in arrears, amounting to around £1m; the council has said it is worried that the growing debt will reduce the services it is able to provide. With the system being rolled out in 54 more jobcentres nationally this month, concern is mounting in areas next in line.

Mhairi Thomson, a 35-year-old care worker who faced eviction from her home of 16 years, are typical. She claimed universal credit last September just before she got married; her fiance was moving into the house she shared with her 15-year-old daughter – forcing a reassessment of her benefit eligibility and shifting her on to the new system. For reasons that remain unclear, the benefit was not paid for five months, leaving her unable to pay her rent, struggling to buy food for her family and often without £2.50 dinner money to give her daughter, who was studying for her exams. Crucially, with no money to pay her phone bill she lost access to her landline and her internet connection, which left her unable to query the absence of payments because the benefit is designed to claimed online. Without her landline, she had to use her mobile to call the helpline at considerable cost, because delays on the line ate up all the free minutes on her pay-as-you-go mobile package, pushing her on to a 30p-a-minute rate. The speed with which problems spiral into household catastrophes is one of the most striking features of the new benefit system. “After a while I couldn’t afford to make the calls; it was costing an absolute fortune,” Thomson said. She spent many hours standing in the doorway of Asda, using the supermarket’s free wifi, following the online complaints procedure to try to get the payments restarted. She raised 26 queries in her online journal – which sits at the heart of the new system, and is designed to simplify communication between claimant and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP); none were answered. The journal told her the money had been paid but her bank account showed it had not. When the housing association rang to tell her she was nearly £1,000 in arrears and faced eviction, she felt close to nervous breakdown.  Thomson’s experiences are neither unique nor particularly extreme.

Thomson has always worked, and has never previously been in debt, but without benefits coming in (to supplement the low wages associated with the essential work done by care workers), she was unable to buy petrol and car insurance, and on the point of losing the car, which would have meant losing her job. Soon after Christmas (which the family could not afford to celebrate) she was referred to a food bank, but was too embarrassed to go.

Advertisement

“We went days without eating properly; we’d just have a bit of toast. My daughter was going to school with no breakfast, and no lunch. It makes me feel so bad to think about it,” she said. When Thomson told someone from the council about her difficulties, it sent a woman from the welfare department to talk about better budgeting – which she found a peculiar response. “There was nothing left to budget.” The family only got by because Thomson’s sister and mother-in-law helped out with food, and her neighbour let her use the landline to try to contact the DWP. Finally, her husband, an former soldier who served in Iraq, was advised by a veteran’s charity to go to Hendry’s office, where staff helped Thomson to stave off eviction. Some back payments have been made, and an army charity contributed to paying off some of her arrears, but she remains in debt and shattered by the experience.

Leslie Ross, 51, said he had not received any payments since 16 August and that he was surviving on food bank vouchers. He opened his fridge, to show milk, but no food; in his store cupboard he had four donated tins of soup, two tins of custard and some rice pudding. There were a couple of frozen bread rolls in the freezer.

“It has been unreal. Have you ever tried to go to sleep at night when you’re hungry? I don’t eat most days until six,” he said. He too has found his situation complicated by losing his internet connection (owing to non-payment of bills) just at the time he needed it most to query why money was not being paid.

Because the six-week delay for his first payment last year pushed him into rent arrears of around £900, he is paying back £63.56 a month out of minimum benefits allowances, which for the past two months have not been paid. Ross had always worked – a lifeguard, a job at Tesco, a car mechanic, a swimming teacher – until a breakdown in September last year. He has found the experience of trying to claim the new benefit overwhelming, not least because payment accuracy has been erratic. He has a long list of belongings he has sold to keep going – his bike, his fishing equipment, his camera. “I’m on antidepressants because of this. You do start to give up on yourself a bit. Things take a spiral downwards.”

Richard Stokes, 48, a former care worker, is not working because of a breakdown he says was caused in part by the problems he had with claiming universal credit to supplement his income last year. Stokes said a systems error made the universal credit computer believe he was getting double his actual monthly earnings of £500, because two payments came in during one universal credit calendar month, triggering the suspension of his benefits. On another occasion, the universal credit records said he had been paid £382, a sum that never appeared in his bank account. The disparity has never been explained, he said. He too found himself hugely in arrears for the first time; his mother had to step in to pay some of it off, but some of the debt remains.

For some Inverness claimants the problems have been with poor wifi signals in the more remote parts of the pilot area. In places where the signal is weak, claimants can find themselves halfway through filling in a form before losing their data because of a dropped connection.

Ailsa Young, a cook, was dismayed that so much had to be done on smartphones or a laptop – since she has neither. “I wasn’t computer literate and I don’t want a smartphone. I struggled with it,” she said. She was frustrated at the long waits when she telephoned, and angry at the cost. “When people are struggling financially, surely they should be entitled to a free call to find out why the money hasn’t come through.” She too got into rent arrears – for the first time – because of the six-week delay for payments, and visited a food bank – for the first time – when she was in that period with no money. “I’d never been in a situation where I had nothing to eat,” she said. Back in work now, she has paid off the arrears; she describes the experience as “very depressing”.

Jennifer Soley from the local Albyn Housing Society said many other tenants were in similar situations, a large proportion of whom were in work. About 65% of universal-credit-claiming tenants are in arrears, with average debts of just over £700, compared with just 20% of the rest of their residents. “The thing that disturbs me most is that this isn’t one or two people who are complaining. This is hundreds and hundreds of people.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/17/we-went-days-without-eating-properly-universal-credit-misery-inverness

Thinking Revolution

The only way to take on social problems and climate change is to build a mass socialist movement of people. The world’s governments are captured by the interests of multi-national corporations, so we need movements of people who can challenge the dominant economic system and push for change. We must come together across communities, countries, and continents. We can take the initiative and build a global movement of people. We need to mobilise to overcome capitalist power and truly start to change the economic system that is destroying our lives and our planet. Some conceive of socialism as nothing more than government legislation or state-ownership of the economy but those don't guarantee that society's resources will be used to the benefit of the people of the world. State capitalism plays a massive role in defending the status quo and is meaningless because people who produce all the wealth don't have any control over the fruits of their labour.

For socialism to be worthy of a movement to fight for it, it must offer something more than holding up the Scandinavian countries as a model. It has to be based on the proposition of mass democratic participation of working people in managing the day-to-day affairs of the economy and society. As Marx and Engels put, socialism must be "the self-emancipation of the working class" -- the mass participation of the majority of society in organizing to take economic and political power away from the ruling class and to construct a revolutionary post-capitalist society that extends into every corner of social life. This power of the working class to run society in its own interests must be at the heart of the world socialist movement.

 Anti-capitalism needs a political party. The only form of organisation which can take political power is a political party because only a party based on individual conscious voluntary membership, where every member knows the aim and understands it, can operate in a united fashion for it. The actual work of parliamentary activity will build a socialist membership in the localities which will dispel confusion by debating the mistaken views of reformers. Socialists must use electoral politics, despite the fully expected powerful counterattacks from the bourgeois parties. The political power of capital must be broken.  If not, the capitalist class will find ways to undermine the rising socialist movement. Capitalism must be confronted and abolished completely, or it will come back more destructive and chaotic than ever.

The Socialist Party has no connection with any other left-wing group, including the Labour Party or the various Communist, Trotskyist and Maoist parties of any description. We are an organisation completely independent, and in favour, as always, of a fundamental social change from capitalism to socialism by which we mean a worldwide system of society based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means of wealth production and distribution, obtained by a politically enlightened majority using the franchise where it exists to be used. The working class must get socialist knowledge, they must resist apathy and challenge the status quo. We must make achieving socialism as our priority. The Socialist Party is optimistic about the future, and we are optimistic that the working class will achieve this urgent and necessary social change. The socialist movement cannot merely re-iterate a series of abstractions parrot-fashion and wait for the workers to eventually accept them. It is imperative that there exists a socialist political party to capture political power.

Capitalism has made it possible to meet all of the world's needs, but control over capitalism's output remains in the hands of a tiny minority for their own profit and gain. By placing the means of production under the common ownership and democratic control of the workers who make the wheels turn, socialism offers a way to use society's resources to meet human need. By placing the community and the workers at the centre of industrial democracy society's decisions can be raised to the highest level.

Why are the poor poor?

The Guardian carries an interesting piece of information 

.A Eurobarometer report in 2010 examined attitudes to poverty in the European Union. The most popular explanation among Europeans (47%) for why people live in poverty was injustice in society.

But the other half of respondents opted for some other cause:

16% said people live in poverty because of laziness and lack of willpower, 16% saw poverty as an inevitable part of progress,

13% said people live in poverty because they have been unlucky. 

The article quotes George Bernard Shaw who saw the cure for poverty is an adequate income. “The crying need of the nation,” he wrote, “is not for better morals, cheaper bread, temperance, liberty, culture, redemption of fallen sisters and erring brothers, nor the grace, love and fellowship of the Trinity, but simply for enough money. And the evil to be attacked is not sin, suffering, greed, priestcraft, kingcraft, demagogy, monopoly, ignorance, drink, war, pestilence, nor any other of the scapegoats which reformers sacrifice, but simply poverty.” The solution he proposed was what he called a “universal pension for life”, or what we now call a universal basic income.

The Socialist Party disagrees. The correct answer to the question, "Why are the poor poor?" is that they are poor because the means of production and distribution are owned and controlled by the capitalist class instead of by the whole community, and consequently so is the wealth produced by the workers. The Socialist Party says that the cause of poverty and of all the evils which arise from it lies in the fact that all the means whereby you live are owned and controlled by a section of society. These people not only own the factories, offices, shops, etc. but, by virtue of this fact, own your very lives. You are slaves.  You are allowed, not to live, but merely to exist as profit-making machines. You are poor because you are robbed. You are robbed because you are slaves—hired slaves or wage slaves. You are slaves because you own nothing but your power to labour, and must, therefore, hire your labour-power to those who own the means of livelihood. These are the masters. Owning your means of life, they can lay down the terms upon which they will hire you. Their terms are, that in return for the hire of your labour-power they will give a sufficient sum to enable you to support life and reproduce your kind. This sum is called wages, and the system based upon wage labour is called capitalism.

There is no need for anyone to be poor. There is no need for anyone to be robbed. There is no need for slavery in any form.  The remedy is to dispossess that class of its ownership. The workers must revolt and it must be a conscious, intelligent revolt aimed, not at some little easing of their servitude. They must, by means of their votes, capture Parliament and proceed to reconstruct society. Instead of the product of the nation’s toil being divided among the handful of immensely rich who own the means of wealth-making, each member of the community would receive according to his or her need. The colossal waste of capitalist society; its competition; its advertising; its over-production; its under-employment; its war industry; its production of shoddy goods, and so forth, would be eliminated.

Freezing to death

More people die in the cold winter months than in the other seasons.

In Scotland, new figures show an increase in the number of winter deaths of 421 on the previous year. There were 20,930 deaths registered in the period December 2016 to March 2017, the latest figures showed, up from 20,509 the previous year.

The “seasonal difference” for winter 2016/17 was 2,720. Seasonal difference is calculated by comparing the number of deaths in the four winter months with the average for the two adjacent four-month periods, the 2016/17 seasonal difference of 2,720 was slightly lower than the corresponding figure of 2,850 for winter 2015/16.   Overall, the seasonal increase of 2,720 in winter 2016/17 was smaller than in most of the 65 previous winters, but it was still above the level seen in five of the previous ten winters.

Very few deaths were caused by hypothermia. The underlying causes of most of the ‘additional’ deaths are circulatory system diseases (such as coronary heart disease), respiratory system diseases (such as pneumonia), dementia, Parkinson’s, Alzheimer’s and other degenerative nervous system diseases. In only a small proportion of deaths is influenza recorded as the underlying cause.

Profit rules over safety

HSE press release below, fails to mention that both companies are wholly owned subsidiaries of construction giant Laing o'Rourke - a multi-national that has admitted its guilt in blacklisting union safety reps.

 Two companies fined following death of worker at Worksop site
 A manufacturer of large concrete panels and a plant hire company were sentenced following the death of a worker at a factory in Worksop, Nottinghamshire.

 Nottingham Crown Court heard that on 8 July 2014 Richard Reddish, who was employed by Explore Manufacturing Ltd at its site on Explore Way, was working in the finishing area. He was working in a mobile elevating working platform (MEWP) removing the lifting attachments from the top of a concrete panel, which weighed about 11 tonnes and was stored on a transport pallet.

 The accident took place when the panel started to topple, while he was standing in the raised MEWP basket. This first panel struck the MEWP throwing him from the basket. It also caused a number of other concrete panels to topple, one of which fell onto him.

 The transport pallets were supplied by Select Plant Hire Company Ltd who shared responsibility for their maintenance with Explore Manufacturing Ltd. An investigation by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) confirmed that the frame used to secure the panel was not properly connected to the pallet, as a locking pin had not been correctly reinserted after the frame had previously been replaced, and there was no system of pre-use checks. The pallets were in a poor condition, with defects including missing support bearers and stabilising legs. Other failures included the storage of large freestanding concrete panels in the finishing area, which should have been secured in storage racks, and a lack of sufficient planning. The investigation also identified concerns with the wider systems for the storage of concrete panels at the site.

 Explore Manufacturing Limited, of Bridge Place, Anchor Boulevard, Admirals Park Crossways, Dartford, Kent DA2 6SN, pleaded guilty to the charge of breaching Section 2 of the Health and Safety At Work Etc Act 1974 in that they failed to ensure so far as reasonably practicable the health, safety and welfare of its employees during the transportation and storage of the pre-cast concrete panels.

 Select Plant Hire Company Limited, of the same address, pleaded guilty to the charge of breaching Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Etc Act 1974 in that the company failed to properly maintain the transport pallets in operation at the Explore facility and thereby exposed the Explore employees to risks to their health and safety.

 Explore Manufacturing Limited was fined £2million and ordered to pay costs of £13,922 while Select Plant Hire Company Ltd were fined £1.8million and ordered to pay costs of £13,922.
Speaking after the hearing Stuart Pilkington, HSE Inspector, said “This tragic incident led to the avoidable death of a young man, whose death could easily have been prevented if the companies had acted following previous warnings to identify and manage the risks involved, maintain the equipment, and put a safe system of work in place.”

How can socialism work, and how can it be organized?

The classical description of socialism is a class-free, money-free and state-free society where the means of production and distribution are commonly owned by the global community so human needs are satisfied. This is no different from communism for both terms of reference mean exactly the same.

Nonetheless, its also a term of reference to a theory which traces the process of social evolution from its primitive beginnings to the highly sophisticated and complex means of the creation of wealth. Below is an article I wrote on this subject:

Production

There will be a complete transformation in the calculation of resources, and their production and distribution. In capitalism articles of wealth (commodities) are produced to be bought and sold on markets, at a profit. This trade in commodities generates waste; pollution and externalities; overproduction and underproduction; built-in obsolescence; quantity over quality; crisis and booms; poverty amidst plenty; employment for some and a waste in human potential for most; and obscene wealth for the few.

With no commodity production and trade, there will be no exchange value and prices, just the inputs and outputs of resources and human needs. The decision-making process will aim to ensure there’s sufficient stock control to meet projected needs through calculation in kind.

This decision-making process will also configure: environmental impact assessments; a high standard of quality control and durability; positive recycling - where products will be deliberately designed so to ensure that they last longer and when they are passed their usefulness all their component parts are easily recycled into other useful products; and transportation miles for distribution of human needs so the shortest journey possible is covered. This efficiency of calculation will ensure the energy required for producing needs will be kept to a minimum and promote the production of renewable energy sources.

Decision-making

Here the system will be participatory delegate democracy. In capitalism, political parties represent the sectional interests within the capitalist class with all of them competing for political control of the state and its machinery of government. With no sectional interests to be represented when there is common ownership, there won’t be political parties or a state machinery. Nonetheless, major issues will be thrashed out with decisions being made on what’s the best course of action for gaining a successful outcome.

A bottom-up decision-making process involving voluntary participation cannot be imposed by a hierarchy or a vanguard or the concept becomes meaningless. The basic building block is the community or neighbourhood assembly, face-to-face meetings where citizens meet to discuss and vote on the issues of the day, not that there will need to be a vote on every issue as most of day-to-day work carried out will be routine. These assemblies elect mandated and recallable delegates who then link with other assemblies forming a confederated council, a 'community of communities'. The difference between this form of delegate democracy and our current form of representative democracy is that in a representative democracy power is given wholesale to the representative who then is free to act on their own initiative. In a delegate democracy, the initiative is set by the electing body and the delegate can be recalled at any time should the electing body feel that their mandate is not being met, thus power remains at the base.

Culture

Due to the impact of common ownership on the global community, there’ll be even more of an increase in cultural choices and options than there is under capitalism. Unrestricted to the social conformity of private property relationships, individuals and communities will be able to focus on an ongoing celebration of freedom of expression - leading to an increase in cultural diversity.

Leisure activities are likely to increase in scope and decrease in size. Presently, with package holidays the most affordable way of taking a break from the drudgery and monotony of the production line or the office, they are the most popular form of holiday.

In socialism, where the principle of free access underpins the common ownership of the means of living, our options and choices on travel and holidays would be extended and influenced by what positive contribution we can make to the country we are visiting. And with package holidays and mass tourism a thing of the past, it is likely holidays in socialism would not be restricted within a timescale of 10 to 14 days of hectic hedonism, but transformed into a unique opportunity to stay in a particular location for as long as it takes to understand the history and culture of that region. In effect, the transformation in the social relationships from private property ownership to common ownership will radically alter our perception of culture, leisure, and travel.

Human nature

But wouldn’t all this be against human nature? No. Socialists make a distinction between human nature and human behaviour. That people are able to think and act is a fact of biological and social development (human nature), but how they think and act is the result of historically specific social conditions (human behaviour). Human nature changes, if at all, over vast periods of time; human behaviour changes according to changed social conditions. Capitalism being essentially competitive and predatory, produces vicious, competitive ways of thinking and acting. But we humans are able to change our society and adapt our behaviour, and there is no reason why our rational desire for human well-being and happiness should not allow us to establish and run a society based on co-operation.

Needs have a physiological and a historical dimension. Basic physiological needs derive from our human nature (e.g. food, clothing, and shelter), but historically conditioned needs derive from developments in the forces of production. In capitalism, needs are manipulated by the imperative to sell commodities and accumulate capital; basic physiological needs then take the historically conditioned form of ‘needs’ for whatever the capitalists can sell us.

Social evolution suggests that no mode of production is cast in stone and the dynamics of change also affects capitalism as a social system. Studies of social systems with distinct social relationships related and corresponding to their specific mode of production have identified, for instance, primitive communism, chattel slavery, feudalism, and capitalism. All of these societies changed from one into another due to the contradictions inherent in that society and also due to technological advancement which each society found itself incapable of adapting to. Capitalism reached this point over a century ago. It’s time to move on to socialism.

Brian Johnson

The benefits of socialism

In creating a socialist society we have to always remember that we are not beginning from nothing. The Socialist Party has always acknowledged the progressive nature of capitalism's past in developing the means of production and distribution and its vast planning. These are in place just waiting to be re-focused and re-prioritised to serve the needs of people and not just for the accumulation of wealth for the few. There are also the non-state administrative organisations like WHO, FAO, and a host of well-structured and experienced NGOs such as Oxfam that can be adapted to a socialist world. One of the reasons we advocate capturing the state machine is to make use of the non-coercive parts of the state that could perform a constructive purpose inside socialist society once it is stripped of their profit-making ethos, such as the departments of environment, agriculture, health, education and so on.

Even private capitalism itself has developed methods that can be of use to ourselves. Multi-nationals employ a whole variety of statistic gathering and logistic supply and distribution systems to maintain a global inter-connected chain to provide raw materials for the factories and assembly centres and computerised stock-control networks to fill the supermarket shelves with stuff. We will make use of that capitalist knowledge when the workers in these industries and corporations, along with the communities,  gain control over the decision-making in them. One reason why socialism holds an advantage over capitalism is by eliminating the need to tie up vast quantities of resources and labour in its system of monetary/pricing accounting.

The Marxist theorist, Bertell Ollman, has written:
“...There is no overriding need to build an industry from scratch. Advice from a cooperative public, computers and other modern communication technology, and, of course, repeated trial and error and correction of error will permit quick adjustments whenever necessary. Hence, there is little likelihood of making major miscalculations or of suffering much material deprivation when errors are made. I would also expect socialist planning to occur at various levels—nation, region, city, and enterprise as well as world-wide—so that many of the decisions that were taken by central planners in the Soviet Union would be relegated to planners on levels more in keeping with the actions required for the plan to succeed.

 Equally important is the nature of socialist democracy as it affects the economy of this time. For the workers to function as the new ruling class, it is not enough that the government act in their interests. They must also participate in making crucial political decisions, and none are more crucial than choosing the economic planners and establishing the main priorities of the plan. I would expect debates on these matters to be an essential part of politics under socialism, as workers overcome their political alienation by realizing their powers as social and communal beings..."

One of the beneficial effects of free access is that it will thwart any potential bureaucracy (or as Parecon call them, the co-ordinator class) from arising.  Free access to goods and services denies to any group or individuals the political leverage with which to dominate others which have been a feature of all private-property or class based systems through the control of and restrictions to the means of life. This will ensure that a socialist society is run on the basis of democratic consensus.  It is the actual essence of free access to goods and services that it denies to any one particular group the political leverage with which to rule over others. So where will this power come from, if it cannot withhold the means of life or restrict access to society's wealth from those it wishes to subjugate or exploit or take advantage of.

Many socialists have also had a partiality to democracy by lottery (demarchy or sortition)as a means of administration and decision-making. A lottery is valid enough method of decision making for things as important as whether a man or woman should live or die, whether a man or woman should spend their lives locked up behind bars or go free. We entrust the decision to (in Scotland) 15 randomly picked members of the public, not quite picked off the street but close enough, to form a jury. It also helps to ensure no risk of a bureaucracy by committees.

The idea of opinion polls has turned into quite an accurate science in determining attitudes and predicting outcomes and those are based on not quite random selection by lottery but by adding parameters to create a representative sample. I am sure those involved in this profession will devise a whole variety of even more new practical applications for a socialist society that they have not yet begun studying because still having the capitalist society blinkers on. Epidemiological statistical research and returns is not a head count but are used by health workers and host of other statisticians. When workers in these fields have become socialists and they have built workers councils and neighbourhood communes or whatever,  there will be a surge in innovation and implementation.

Capitalism seems to have adopted the idea in the sense that they now all use focus groups to determine marketing and such like. There is also consumer research, mostly by telephone but also by visits has grown into an industry and if it didn't have some accuracy I doubt it would exist as much. I certainly can conceive of these being used in socialism as mechanisms for feedback on what we actually make and how much of it we should produce.
Democracy and allocation of resources in socialism need not be constant meetings and continual voting on every issue. Certainly, we will be involved more in civic affairs but these may be combined with festivals and celebrations like the medieval fairs which usually had some economic purpose such as alloting access in the commons or choosing work placements for farm labourers.

Certainly, there may be situations that genuine rationing will have to be imposed by communities, for instance,  a failed harvest which depletes the buffer reserve stocks and causes temporary shortage. These can be tackled by  prioritising indviduals (according to needs by vulnerability), and if there is no call for that criteria, by a simple lottery, or even simpler - first come, first served.  Referendums can easily and quickly be organised by various communities to decide such issues. One  purpose of socialism is to minimise administrative structures and make society self-regulating which involves people self-policing themselves for a want of a better word 

Ultimately critics of free access end up questioning it on the basis of present behaviour of people. Under capitalism, people tend to acquire and hoard goods because possession provides some security. People have a tendency to distrust others because the system is a dog-eat-dog one. In capitalist society there is a tendency for individuals to seek to validate their sense of worth through the accumulation of possessions. In socialism, status based upon the material wealth would be meaningless since everything would be freely available so why take more than you need when you can freely take what you need?  In socialism, the only way in which individuals can command the esteem of others is through their contribution to society, and the more the movement for socialism grows the more will it subvert the prevailing capitalist ethos, in general, and its anachronistic notion of status, in particular. How can the status of conspicuous consumption be used as a reward as it is now for a privileged elite when all have equal free access.

We should not project onto socialism the insatiable consumerism of capitalism. After all, there is a vast advertising industry. Regardless of how modest one's real needs may be or how easily they may be met capitalism has created a "consumer culture" that leads one to want more than one may materially need since - an insatiable desire to enhance his or her status within this hierarchal culture of consumerism.

Socialism does not require us all to become altruists, putting the interests of others above our own. In fact, socialism doesn't require people to be any more altruistic than they are today. We will still be concerned primarily with ourselves, with satisfying our needs, our need to be well considered by others as well as our material and sexual needs. No doubt too, we will want to “possess” personal belongings and to feel secure in our physical occupation of the house we live in, but this will be just that – our home and not a financial asset. Such “selfish” behaviour will still exist in socialism but the acquisitiveness encouraged by capitalism will no longer exist. The coming of socialism will not require great changes in the way we behave, essentially only the accentuation of some of the behaviours which people exhibit today (friendliness, helpfulness, co-operation) at the expense of other more negative ones which capitalism encourages.

The establishment of socialism presupposes the existence of a mass socialist movement and a change in social outlook. It is simply not reasonable to suppose that the desire for socialism on such a large scale, and the conscious understanding of what it entails on the part of all concerned, would not influence the way people behaved in socialism and towards each other. Why would they want to jeopardise the new society they had just helped create? If people cannot change then all speculation about socialism is rather pointless because there simply will not be a socialist revolution without people changing. If too many people once having achieved socialism then decide to not work, then socialism will fall apart. The socialist revolution entails workers acquiring a class consciousness, or participating in political and industrial organisations to expropriate the rich and re-structure production, not just who will do the work but how things are produced and distributed. This will require decision making and interactions with one another. We should be a little reticent to lay down expectations of what sort of procedures will evolve. We can only generalise with broad brush-strokes the picture of what may happen.

As already stated, we are not starting a new society from a blank sheet of paper. Suppose the revolution was tomorrow and we had socialism people will still carry on their duties, business as usual, for the immediate time being, while at the same time adapting and changing their work-places. All those in wasteful socially useless jobs will have to be re-deployed, slotted into other work. No doubt insurance actuaries with their flair for statistics and projections and demographics will orientate themselves to planning and administration. Ex-army will find that they can remain in uniform and be used in natural disaster relief work,  sent to build bridges or whatnot. Use your own imagination on how particular jobs in capitalism will disappear entirely or become transformed into more socially productive jobs in socialism. We are talking millions upon millions of new labour-force now released from retail and commerce to be made available to lessen the hours of work for others.
 Even in this callous heartless capitalist world, people will get together and help each other for mutual benefit. According to the Corporation for National and Community Service, about 64.3 million Americans, or 26.8 percent of the adult population, gave 7.9 billion hours of volunteer service. 94% of the America’s Red Cross are volunteers.

In the UK almost 20 million had performed some sort of voluntary work in the last year. During 2010/11, 39% of adults in England said that they had volunteered formally at least once in the previous 12 months, with 25% volunteering formally at least once a month.

In Australia in 2010, 6.1 million people aged 18 years and more (36% of the Australian population aged 18 years and over) had undertaken some form of voluntary work in the previous 12 months.
That of course probably does not include good neighbours popping in and out of one another’s houses to do some DIY or running errands for others less able or whatever.

There are critics of socialism who declare that there will be a reluctance by people to do hard, dirty and dangerous work, and will avoid it if they can but who's to say what is dirty? Who's to say what is hard? Number crunching could be hard to one person and manual labour could be hard for another. These are both terms which are left to the interpretation of the individual. And some people even enjoy dangerous work. Why else would people climb mountains or sky-dive etc for leisure time if an element of danger is not enjoyable?   People are prepared to work "hard" if they consider what they are doing is enjoyable or necessary. What work is "dirty" is in the eye of the beholder. And some people consider it an honour to do "dangerous" work (eg lifeboat crews or mountain rescue teams, even soldiers). At the present, those who are employed in hazardous and unhealthy jobs do so because they have to, and are often on the job from 16 to 60, 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, with a couple of weeks off a year. Socialists are not suggesting that this pattern will be the normal acceptable practice in socialism.  These type of jobs will not be done by the same people all the time. All able-bodied workers - of both sexes- will take turns at this work on a rotational basis that will be decided by those involved and not by you and i right now. We should not forget that this work will be carried out by socially conscious men and women who appreciate that society now belongs to them and therefore the less pleasant tasks must be performed by them. Don't you ever clean your own toilet in your own house? Or get sweaty and dirty gardening? In a situation where we all own and control the planet, and all that is in it and on it, it unlikely that people will refuse to tackle the dirty and unpleasant jobs. If health and safety is such an issue that people decide that it is too dangerous to expect people to engage in such work - so be it - we will have to do without,  or what is more probable, find an alternative second-best choice which doesn't carry as much risk in obtaining.  What we should not do is force or bribe or morally blackmail such workers.

Socialists do make assumptions but a phrase out of favour and unpopular these days is that our political ideas are based on "scientific socialism", we are scientific socialists. We use certain thinking processes such as inductive reasoning and the materialistic conception of history. We simply do not come up with our ideas independent or outside society. We assume things but it is from precedence. Workers already know how to co-operate and do in fact cooperate. What's lacking at the moment is not the capacity to cooperate but the will to do so to get socialism.

 Rosa Luxemburg wrote:
"...Socialism cannot be realized with lazy, careless, egotistic, thoughtless and shiftless men and women. A Socialist state of society needs people every one of whom is full of enthusiasm and fervor for the general welfare, full of a spirit of self-sacrifice and sympathy for his fellow men, full of courage and tenacity and the willingness to dare even against the greatest odds.

But we need not wait centuries or decades until such a race of human beings shall grow up. The struggle, the Revolution will teach the proletarian masses idealism, has given them mental ripeness, courage and perseverance, clearness of purpose and a self-sacrificing spirit, if it is to lead to victory. While we are enlisting fighters for the revolution, we are creating Socialist workers for the future, workers who can become the basis of a new social state..."