Jump to content
British Coin Forum - Predecimal.com

50 Years of RotographicCoinpublications.com A Rotographic Imprint. Price guide reference book publishers since 1959. Lots of books on coins, banknotes and medals. Please visit and like Coin Publications on Facebook for offers and updates.

Coin Publications on Facebook

   Rotographic    

The current range of books. Click the image above to see them on Amazon (printed and Kindle format). More info on coinpublications.com

predecimal.comPredecimal.com. One of the most popular websites on British pre-decimal coins, with hundreds of coins for sale, advice for beginners and interesting information.

Recommended Posts

yes I think there is an interesting point to be made re: the value of charity.  Throughout each year there are always natural and man initiated disasters which actively thrust upon the everyday person devastation hunger and death.  Every year disaster management by charities helps populations re-build to live out a meagre life nothing even remotely as fancy and comfortable as our own.   We are the fifth largest economy in the world and astonishing and often unbelievable fact (apparently) and we give a tiny fraction of our GDP for development.  DFID really are in many ways a marketing tool and a large part of the budget does not go directly to the peoples affected it pays for salaries of civil servants from out own country to work in overseas departments.  It is almost impossible for the small charities of which there are millions of to ever get remotely close to any money because as you rightly suggest is pays for development structures within governments it helps.  In part it is a bargaining tool to encourage nations from investing disproportionately in space travel or more often buying arms from the western countries and to deal with poverty in other countries.  But if you reduce the budget all this does it remove the tool to help the individual.  There is fundamental philosophical reason for supporting humanity less able than ourselves to cope with disasters as well as demographic transitions. 

In the end there is a selfish incentive develop new markets to sell more arms or tobacco too or burberry coats too. Charities that try to get around this barrier to support the individual often face a problem but a few things like access to water and education or rural electrification are often able to kick start individual as well as societal growth.  At the bottom of this pile are often the most disenfranchised usually girls and women and if we believe that this country is so great this is in part due to philanthropic attempts in the Victorian age to improve health sanitation education and access to clean water and at the present time to see women as equals.Part of the reason why this forum is able to spout these kind of vile postings is that sadly there are not any active women here as far as I see it and so it has a feeling of  "Dad's Shed" about it which is often unhealthy.

as for the value of our investment in countries by our contributions.  Having lived and worked in countries in Southern Africa and been into to countries such as Romania after the fall of the apartheid and the dictatorship respectively I have seen at first hand how lives have been made sociologically better in that people have freedoms, same in Malawi and Uganda.  Ok so the structures may not be fully developed in your life times but if you were an alien living in an imaginary country with perfect lives and you invested in Victorian Britain you would look in your lifetime and think Jesus when is it ever going to get better.  But it is a slow process and it is almost impossible to speed up demographic transition thinking that if they just do as we do then life would be sweet but our growth and transition fed on the resources of the very nations you are saying we shouldn't even be willing to help support get water.  Now that such resources are gone yes there may be some freedom and yet some power crazy MEN always want more and more of the shinny lumps of flattered metal this group seem to hold in esteem above all else.  Greed and power and corruption and a philosophy of look after me first is the very reason why men such as Mugabe reach prominence and then destroy internally all the good that was put in place (and let's remember it was our state funded support of Mugabe that put him there) so if we want things to change then the fundamental shift has to happen within each of us too to reduce the reliance on the need to only feel fulfilled if we have the riches of these shiny lumps of metal in plastic folders or in our pockets and adopt a more holistic and humane approach. 

I see now that the majority on this forum lean far to the right of centre which is disappointing and conservatism (small c) rarely leads to anything but regressive ideas and practice and usually results in very little development and creative thinking, in truth it hinders all the very reasons and purpose of being on here for me.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You shouldn't be too surprised that coin forum members value little round lumps of metal, nor that they are the reason for the members being on here in the first place. Most forums are populated with members that have an interest in the relevant subject.

You are wrong to suggest that the majority are far right of centre. There might be a majority that are more right than left, but the overwhelming majority are close to the centre. Most of us without any political affiliations take a pick and mix approach as we are able to recognise that both sides bring something to the argument. Adherents to a cause don't have that option available.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rob said:

You shouldn't be too surprised that coin forum members value little round lumps of metal, nor that they are the reason for the members being on here in the first place. Most forums are populated with members that have an interest in the relevant subject.

You are wrong to suggest that the majority are far right of centre. There might be a majority that are more right than left, but the overwhelming majority are close to the centre. Most of us without any political affiliations take a pick and mix approach as we are able to recognise that both sides bring something to the argument. Adherents to a cause don't have that option available.

yes I agree that balanced approaches are best and I hope that is what we may have more of.  In that one instance and considering the number of active participants that last thread came across as very much slanted in that direction especially the ease in which it blossomed. Causes are important and adherence does not preclude balanced participation or view.  I have many causes I can still be very flexible and happy to apologise if I get something wrong but then when I say something I try to consider with some care what I write in a forum in order not to cause offence.  In my own ideas and theories there are many elements that are so off the deep end that I cannot wonder some find them strange I stick to them as a matter of commitment to idea which may take some years to follow through on.  In the coin world as in any other world there are many new and exciting ways to discover something, be that varieties or strange patterns but at the core of that is willingness to cause no offence and to remain open minded.  

I will however show I have enough confidence not to be bullied, I won't keep my mouth shut if I see something offencive.... that is simply the way I show my life experience in all types of forums.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Larry dont be bullied :)

Can i ask though what does "lean far to the right of centre " mean please ?.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all those who decry the value and effectiveness of charities - another example I could quote is 'micro-economics'. This is where absurdly small - by our Western standards - loans are made to people in Third World economies to start up a very small business, often something like selling street food. The transformative effect of this not only on the people directly involved, but also the wider community, cannot be overestimated.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, DrLarry said:
Quote

Part of the reason why this forum is able to spout these kind of vile postings is that sadly there are not any active women here as far as I see it and so it has a feeling of  "Dad's Shed" about it which is often unhealthy.

Quote

Now that such resources are gone yes there may be some freedom and yet some power crazy MEN always want more and more of the shinny lumps of flattered metal this group seem to hold in esteem above all else.  Greed and power and corruption and a philosophy of look after me first is the very reason why men such as Mugabe reach prominence and then destroy internally all the good that was put in place (and let's remember it was our state funded support of Mugabe that put him there) so if we want things to change then the fundamental shift has to happen within each of us too to reduce the reliance on the need to only feel fulfilled if we have the riches of these shiny lumps of metal in plastic folders or in our pockets and adopt a more holistic and humane approach. 

Quote

I see now that the majority on this forum lean far to the right of centre which is disappointing and conservatism (small c) rarely leads to anything but regressive ideas and practice and usually results in very little development and creative thinking, in truth it hinders all the very reasons and purpose of being on here for me.   

 

<Snipped for brevity>

First quote above: Most women aren't interested in coin collecting. It's predominantly a male hobby - fact. 

Second quote above: The entire purpose of the forum is numismatics, so the fact that posters here are invariably happy to acquire coins, shouldn't really surprise you. Conflating coin collecting with power crazed men and the quasi dictator Mugabe, is offensive in itself.  

Third quote above: Define "leaning far to the right of centre". 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1949threepence said:

<Snipped for brevity>

First quote above: Most women aren't interested in coin collecting. It's predominantly a male hobby - fact. 

Second quote above: The entire purpose of the forum is numismatics, so the fact that posters here are invariably happy to acquire coins, shouldn't really surprise you. Conflating coin collecting with power crazed men and the quasi dictator Mugabe, is offensive in itself.  

Third quote above: Define "leaning far to the right of centre". 

 

well it is hardly surprising they are not interested.  

My discussion on Mugabe was in relation to the issue of the impact of charity western values and the role of countries in elevating certain individuals that suit their political needs at a certain time....hence it has nothing to do with coin collecting 

Right of centre is any position that is right of centre it requires no definition by me there are certain values held by the centre politic and certain that are left of centre and others that are right of centre.  

Perhaps you are having difficulty following the feed which is a defence on the aspect of the role of charity and possible explanation of geopolitical power following on from an attitude which was grounded on very little intelligent due process. Paddy asked a question and before I could answer as you so rightly pointed out he had some good points the moderator closed down the ill conceived posting.  I personally thought it deserved some explanation and pulled upon two or three examples where the role of international development and politics had been misdirected.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Peckris said:

To all those who decry the value and effectiveness of charities - another example I could quote is 'micro-economics'. This is where absurdly small - by our Western standards - loans are made to people in Third World economies to start up a very small business, often something like selling street food. The transformative effect of this not only on the people directly involved, but also the wider community, cannot be overestimated.

yes and it works very well in many Indian and Malawian settings allowing individuals to take out tiny loans and build something for themselves and their family and this in turn often feeds back into the community 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, PWA 1967 said:

Yes Larry dont be bullied :)

Can i ask though what does "lean far to the right of centre " mean please ?.

to hold a set of 

You can describe a person or political party as right-of-centre if they have political views which are closer to capitalism and conservatism than to socialism but which are not very extreme.

politics

closer to conservatism and capitalism than to socialism, but not very extreme

The extreme left means the followers of principles of Marxist philosophy. The extreme right is a government which believes in capitalism. The median between the two is Socialism.

Left of centre is the centre between the left and socialism. The ideals of leftists and socialistic ones are taken. It will not be extreme left or purely socialistic. You can also call it moderate left politics. Left of Centre believe in working within the established system to improve social justice. It opposes wide economic gap between the rich and poor and supports measures to reduce the gap. Progressive income tax laws, child labour laws, limits to working hours, minimum wage laws, working conditions are some of the fields Left of Centre support. Unlike far left which propoundes the complete equality of outcome, the left of centre, believes equal opportunity improves equality of opportunity of society.

Right of centre is the median between the extreme right i.e. capitalistic economy and Socialistic economy. Here all the good that are beneficial to the state from both capitalistic and socialistic economies are taken. In a way Indian economy is right of centre. It is also called moderate right. Right of centre is closer to the right than the right wing variants. Liberty, equality of opportunity, personal freedom and economic development under rule of law is provided. These governments which are founded on social and political values provide for all personal freedoms and human rights, as enshrined in universal declaration of human rights. Free and fair elections, organisation of effective parliamentary opposition, freedom of speech etc are provided for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, DrLarry said:

well it is hardly surprising they are not interested.  

My discussion on Mugabe was in relation to the issue of the impact of charity western values and the role of countries in elevating certain individuals that suit their political needs at a certain time....hence it has nothing to do with coin collecting 

Right of centre is any position that is right of centre it requires no definition by me there are certain values held by the centre politic and certain that are left of centre and others that are right of centre.  

Perhaps you are having difficulty following the feed which is a defence on the aspect of the role of charity and possible explanation of geopolitical power following on from an attitude which was grounded on very little intelligent due process. Paddy asked a question and before I could answer as you so rightly pointed out he had some good points the moderator closed down the ill conceived posting.  I personally thought it deserved some explanation and pulled upon two or three examples where the role of international development and politics had been misdirected.  

I'm not having any difficulty with following anything, Larry.

You didn't say just right of centre, you said "leaning far to the right of centre". I think you should explain what you mean by that. You said it, and clearly aimed it in a derogatory manner at posters who were simply questioning the honesty of charities. Quite how that defaults them to "leaning far right of centre", I don't know. 

So I believe it is incumbent on you to define what you mean by that, and why you are making offensive presumptions regarding the political views of people who you don't have the remotest clue about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in the example in context to the discussion on water aid the view held by the contributors seemed to me to be based on a principal of market forces geographical position and access to water predicate who has value in the world and who does not.  It seemed along with the definition above to contradictory to the left of centre approach which supports the reduction in the gap between rich and poor with supporting measure (perhaps including charity). In the discussion that the response related to the view was right of centre and seemed to be based on a series of values which were neither centre or left of centre 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 1949threepence said:

<Snipped for brevity>

First quote above: Most women aren't interested in coin collecting. It's predominantly a male hobby - fact. 

Second quote above: The entire purpose of the forum is numismatics, so the fact that posters here are invariably happy to acquire coins, shouldn't really surprise you. Conflating coin collecting with power crazed men and the quasi dictator Mugabe, is offensive in itself.  

Third quote above: Define "leaning far to the right of centre". 

 

I rarely snip for brevity.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

I'm not having any difficulty with following anything, Larry.

You didn't say just right of centre, you said "leaning far to the right of centre". I think you should explain what you mean by that. You said it, and clearly aimed it in a derogatory manner at posters who were simply questioning the honesty of charities. Quite how that defaults them to "leaning far right of centre", I don't know. 

So I believe it is incumbent on you to define what you mean by that, and why you are making offensive presumptions regarding the political views of people who you don't have the remotest clue about.

I would hate to have to copy and paste the ridiculous comments that were made about dealing with poverty and water access in tertiary and secondary demographic transitional types but comments which suggest if a person cannot reach water then it is of no interest to the individual in question and they deserve all they get presumably ultimately death, likely caused by dehydration which when you see that in a baby is not a pleasant site ....to paraphrase then I believe very strongly that this is a far right of centre position.  It is the ultimate Malthusian argument that populations are controlled by pestilence, starvation, war and death a position held by most sane commentators as being in direct opposition to the UN declaration of Human rights.  I was answering paddy who asked a valid question after excusing himself from that right wing position by asking valid questions.

 

I repeat the references to macroeconomics of countries such as Romania and Zimbabwe , South Africa under white supremacist law during apartheid, all to some extent were affected for many years by UK government policy at differing times.  I am fully aware that I follow avidly the values of Noam Chomsky  in my value set in regard to market economies, economics and capitalism and the effects it has on poorer nations.  I would therefore place myself left of centre neither is an extreme left of centre or right of centre.  In the context of the discussion three out of the five contributors felt confident enough to follow the right of centre or leaning further off centre to right wing positions when they contributed.  if not a value held by those individuals then they showed a lack of judgment over the topic to link a completely different set of controlling factors to the story of a child who may have to walk for 3 hours there and back to the nearest water source perhaps twice a day.  usually the girls are forced into this position hence losing a chance of education.  Most societies are sadly paternalistic and will remain so until women and girls gain education to challenge this situation and it is one of the Key Millennial Goals (missed) that most countries ascribed to under various UN conventions.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

I

 

I repeat the references to macroeconomics of countries such as Romania and Zimbabwe , South Africa under white supremacist law during apartheid, all to some extent were affected for many years by UK government policy at differing times. 

The main thing about south africa now is that we can say to them "Look at the mess you have made of the country" to the black politicians of the country and not the white minority goverment

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

I would hate to have to copy and paste the ridiculous comments that were made about dealing with poverty and water access in tertiary and secondary demographic transitional types but comments which suggest if a person cannot reach water then it is of no interest to the individual in question and they deserve all they get presumably ultimately death, likely caused by dehydration which when you see that in a baby is not a pleasant site ....to paraphrase then I believe very strongly that this is a far right of centre position.  It is the ultimate Malthusian argument that populations are controlled by pestilence, starvation, war and death a position held by most sane commentators as being in direct opposition to the UN declaration of Human rights.  I was answering paddy who asked a valid question after excusing himself from that right wing position by asking valid questions.

 

I repeat the references to macroeconomics of countries such as Romania and Zimbabwe , South Africa under white supremacist law during apartheid, all to some extent were affected for many years by UK government policy at differing times.  I am fully aware that I follow avidly the values of Noam Chomsky  in my value set in regard to market economies, economics and capitalism and the effects it has on poorer nations.  I would therefore place myself left of centre neither is an extreme left of centre or right of centre.  In the context of the discussion three out of the five contributors felt confident enough to follow the right of centre or leaning further off centre to right wing positions when they contributed.  if not a value held by those individuals then they showed a lack of judgment over the topic to link a completely different set of controlling factors to the story of a child who may have to walk for 3 hours there and back to the nearest water source perhaps twice a day.  usually the girls are forced into this position hence losing a chance of education.  Most societies are sadly paternalistic and will remain so until women and girls gain education to challenge this situation and it is one of the Key Millennial Goals (missed) that most countries ascribed to under various UN conventions.

 

One person said that.

Let me remind you what you said:-

Quote

I see now that the majority on this forum lean far to the right of centre 

Which is patent nonsense, and a nasty, unwarranted thing to say about fellow forum members, many of whom you've never even seen post..  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, copper123 said:

 

well having spent 10 years there working with black and coloured people most of them would rather have freedom in a mess (your view) than to be controlled herded and disenfranchised , if you believe that freedom and democracy have such little value and your view is based on economics then I rest my case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

One person said that.

Let me remind you what you said:-

Which is patent nonsense, and a nasty, unwarranted thing to say about fellow forum members, many of whom you've never even seen post..  

I am happy to stand by that definition yet again : one contributor says he  believes that white

rule and disenfranchising people on the grounds of colour is a better condition to be in that the one where there is democracy 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

The extreme left means the followers of principles of Marxist philosophy. The extreme right is a government which believes in capitalism. The median between the two is Socialism.

I'd have to disagree there Larry.

I'd say the far right is fascism, i.e. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, et al. Capitalism is the underlying economic model of the West, and we all - for good or ill - subscribe to it to some extent or another.

Socialism is GENERALLY thought of as left wing, though not as far left as Marxist. However the waters are muddied by the kind of 'National Socialism' employed by Hitler, which was socialist in that full employment was achieved, autobahns were built, and there was a strange kind of touted equality. It was extreme right though, in that it used thought control with propaganda and mass rallies, not to forget the awful genocide.

Social liberalism is often regarded as centrist, though economic liberalism - espoused by Thatcher and Reagan - is a mark of the right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

I am happy to stand by that definition yet again : one contributor says he  believes that white

rule and disenfranchising people on the grounds of colour is a better condition to be in that the one where there is democracy 

It's factually incorrect.

Bear in mind what the moderator, @TomGoodheart said in the now closed thread about certain things that are said reflecting on the forum, and also bear in mind this is a public area of the forum. You have stated that the majority on this forum lean far to the right of centre, despite having seen only a few people on the forum post any political views, and of them, the prevailing viewpoint was one of questioning charities. Manifestly, that suspicion does not dictate one's overall political opinion or leaning. 

 

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Working with kids who had to pick rubbish off the town waste disposal site to find scraps of food who now have their own kids also with whom i work living in a small brick built house rather than the tin shack that was rat infested cold damp with no sanitation, a solar powered geyser for hot water and access to clean water is a better position than they had before and at the very least they have the right to access education and can fight alongside others for still meagre jobs it takes several generations to re-buid after the kind of onslaught white apartheid imposed and at least you have a vote to remove or change the politics.  I imagine it must be hard for those who have not heard the stories of children and their hopes  to grasp the difference that the right to chose has.  Such situations will always be a hard road especially as I said rebuilding after many of the resources are now stripped by many hundreds of years of colonial rule 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Peckris said:

I'd have to disagree there Larry.

I'd say the far right is fascism, i.e. Hitler, Mussolini, Franco, et al. Capitalism is the underlying economic model of the West, and we all - for good or ill - subscribe to it to some extent or another.

Socialism is GENERALLY thought of as left wing, though not as far left as Marxist. However the waters are muddied by the kind of 'National Socialism' employed by Hitler, which was socialist in that full employment was achieved, autobahns were built, and there was a strange kind of touted equality. It was extreme right though, in that it used thought control with propaganda and mass rallies, not to forget the awful genocide.

Social liberalism is often regarded as centrist, though economic liberalism - espoused by Thatcher and Reagan - is a mark of the right.

those are not my definitions they come direct from dictionary definitions socialism is viewed as left of centre and in a discussion we had about Corbyn recently some more views were expressed that suggested a dog would be a better leader surely a dog.  Take from that whatever you want. The right? or right of centre? these are not my definiations as I say they are from the english oxford and the collins dictionaries.  In the reference to the wateraid scandal then the contributor was suggesting that anyone who did not have access to water or the means to clean river water or could move to where the water was should suffer malthusian consequences.  Genocide is a set of actions imposed upon one group based along lines of racial, religious, or cultural difference in order to further the cause of that group with the ability to impose , by force, one view above that of others.  Racial segregation imposing severe reductions in the basic necessities of life, so that one group may benefit from the resources of a country above others, often results in genocide by proxy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

those are not my definitions they come direct from dictionary definitions socialism is viewed as left of centre and in a discussion we had about Corbyn recently some more views were expressed that suggested a dog would be a better leader surely a dog.  Take from that whatever you want. The right? or right of centre? these are not my definiations as I say they are from the english oxford and the collins dictionaries.  In the reference to the wateraid scandal then the contributor was suggesting that anyone who did not have access to water or the means to clean river water or could move to where the water was should suffer malthusian consequences.  Genocide is a set of actions imposed upon one group based along lines of racial, religious, or cultural difference in order to further the cause of that group with the ability to impose , by force, one view above that of others.  Racial segregation imposing severe reductions in the basic necessities of life, so that one group may benefit from the resources of a country above others, often results in genocide by proxy. 

What thread was that on? I've not seen it.

Just made a search for the phrase and it leads straight back here. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

It's factually incorrect.

Bear in mind what the moderator, @TomGoodheart said in the now closed thread about certain things that are said reflecting on the forum, and also bear in mind this is a public area of the forum. You have stated that the majority on this forum lean far to the right of centre, despite having seen only a few people on the forum post any political views, and of them, the prevailing viewpoint was one of questioning charities. Manifestly, that suspicion does not dictate one's overall political opinion or leaning. 

 

in reflecting on my limited experience on the site going back and reading some of the comments racist , political views expressed, attitudes to charity, preoccupation with wine women and money the experience places greater emphasis away from the more liberal towards a somewhat conservative (small c) lean small minded paternalism.  In making the references to women and collecting and women not collecting this is one of those tautological arguments.  If any women came in and saw that posting the other day it is unlikely that they would stay in for too long so you answer your own conditions.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, 1949threepence said:

What thread was that on? I've not seen it.

Just made a search for the phrase and it leads straight back here. 

 

i believe that it was on the barnstable stall thread 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, DrLarry said:

in reflecting on my limited experience on the site going back and reading some of the comments racist , political views expressed, attitudes to charity, preoccupation with wine women and money the experience places greater emphasis away from the more liberal towards a somewhat conservative (small c) lean small minded paternalism.  In making the references to women and collecting and women not collecting this is one of those tautological arguments.  If any women came in and saw that posting the other day it is unlikely that they would stay in for too long so you answer your own conditions.   

It's not reflecting anything. It's merely deflecting away from a point you know you can't logically and factually address. 

Quote

i believe that it was on the barnstable stall thread 

No It isn't. I've just checked all the posts in that thread. 

 

Edited by 1949threepence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×