A "Mixed economy" is still a Capitalist one and is still subject to the mass contradictions of Capitalism.

There are also several issues with the "balancing act" the biggest one is that is class warfare. Poor and working class people have little say in the development of society, youth have absolutely no say. In terms of power all power flows with capital and thus corporations control Government and when they need to win an election, they just market to the groups they need to convince to continue corporate stranglehold.

Another one is that as Capitalism becomes more precarious due to its internal contradictions, crisis becomes worse and more frequent, its likely there will be a massive downturn in  the Global Economy in 2016, thats just 8 years after the largest downturn since the 1920s. Who has to pay for this? Of course the public and the poor. Billions injected into banks and their CEOs.

We can already see a global oligarchy consolidating power, the myth and illusion of balance is slowly falling to pieces.

The sad thing is the left is nowhere to be seen, whenever these contradictions and antagonisms arise, someone the energy of the people is always co-opted into something stupid.

Australia will have full Socialism eventually because its inevitable, as the old saying goes, Socialism or Barbarism.
Governments across the west are already starting to look towards Asian authoritarian capitalism as a model. LKY is constantly brought up more and more these days in economic discussion.

virtually all of Australian politics is right of centre, even the greens on average are at the centre.

I would argue the Libs are more towards the far-right of the scale.

Classic reactionary party, not conservative.

Look at Europe, look at New Zealand, their conservative parties are literally more socially progressive than Labor, in Europe, conservative parties are throwing billions at renewable energy trying to corner a new industry. The UK tories and NZ tories legalized gay marraige.

Australian Liberal party and elements of Labor have more in common with groups like the Tea Party Republicans and UKIP than actual proper old conservative parties.

Dnarever wrote on Nov 5^th, 2015 at 1:54pm:


So what are the socialist measurements?

Muttley wrote on Nov 5^th, 2015 at 2:01pm:

Thats funny, because Engels was a rich factory owner, Lenin led an entire country and won a war against the rest of the world. Both pretty successful.

Socialists understand that Capitalism is unsustainable and strive to build a better future and society. While all you care about is personal wealth, Socialists care about humanity.

Kiron22 wrote on Nov 5^th, 2015 at 2:10pm:


Lenin was protesting against a monarchy in late 1800's

Engels/Marx are both philosophers of the year 1850's - enough said

This has nothing to do with personality or who pays what.

Socialists tend to be people who identify issues in Capitalism be it oppression, exploitation, insustainability etc etc and wish to build a better future where the productive power of all can be used to give a life to everyone.

You also have a very first worldist bias rich view. One social mobility is not actually that fluid even in first world countries, your birth generally defines who you are and who you will be.

Second what chance does some kid born in a slum in Bangladesh or Africa have to become successful or even live a fulfilling life? 00000000000000000000000000000000.1%

Being sychophantic towards capital isn't just lazy, its smacking sad. There is nothing wrong about thinking or striving towards a post capital future.

Muttley wrote on Nov 5^th, 2015 at 2:01pm:

wHERE DOES MONEY COME FROM?

yES, YOU CAN EAT MY C** NOW BUDDY