economic situation is dire

[saturdaygig]

 

People don't try to see the interconnected pieces. How one rich guy in a Bentley may have started his own business and employs 500 people.

A bit more on those interconnected pieces: the guy may not have been able to afford the Bentley without the help/support/ingenuity and more of those 500 employees.

 

Of course he wouldn't. I don't get your point.

[tonyh29]

 

 

People don't try to see the interconnected pieces. How one rich guy in a Bentley may have started his own business and employs 500 people.

A bit more on those interconnected pieces: the guy may not have been able to afford the Bentley without the help/support/ingenuity and more of those 500 employees.

 

Of course he wouldn't. I don't get your point.

 

i beleive the point being made is that one doesn't get something without the help of others , even if they claim they deserve the Bentley cause they worked hard

 

I don't totally subscribe to that theory  , but I do think that it's unfair that somebody in a company can earn a salary of millions as some of the chairman of large corporations do , whilst the people they employ struggle on minimum wage ..

[peterms]

 

The quality of left wing memes continues to decline I see.  What utter nonsense that is.  Take Bentley cars for example, obviously out of reach price-wise to most, but the Crewe factory can't keep up with demand, and employs over 4,000 people, plus all the people employed elsewhere in factories who make the parts, ad agencies, etc etc.

The quality of right-wing analysis remains constant, I see. Still bumping along the bottom.

Yes, think of all the maids, chimneysweeps, liverymen who were employed to service the idle rich. They should be damn grateful. If those jobs weren't there, they would be starving on the street.

Or possibly, the vast resources sucked up by the unproductive parasites who hold the most wealth could be used for, oh I don't know, public services, job creation, improving the quality of life for a vast number of people, rather than being sat in taxdodging jurisdictions and partly spent on ludicrous self-regarding vanity purchases?

[saturdaygig]

 

 

 

People don't try to see the interconnected pieces. How one rich guy in a Bentley may have started his own business and employs 500 people.

A bit more on those interconnected pieces: the guy may not have been able to afford the Bentley without the help/support/ingenuity and more of those 500 employees.

 

Of course he wouldn't. I don't get your point.

 

i beleive the point being made is that one doesn't get something without the help of others , even if they claim they deserve the Bentley cause they worked hard

 

I don't totally subscribe to that theory  , but I do think that it's unfair that somebody in a company can earn a salary of millions as some of the chairman of large corporations do , whilst the people they employ struggle on minimum wage ..

 

I agree when those chairman are working for big established companies, when all they really did was get appointed to a job, like anyone. We seemed to be talking more about people who start up a company, with all the gamble and dedication that takes, and making a big buck out of it. That seems legit. Without some people doing that, there wouldn't be any jobs for people who just want a salary in exchange for a day's work.

[snowychap]

I don't totally subscribe to that theory

Unless they make the thing from scratch themselves, without the help of teachers, engineers, prior knowledge of engineering and so on, then it is trivially true - isn't it?

It may be struck out as 'pedantic' but it needs to be reiterated that we don't exist/die/prosper/fail/survive/do okay in this world without the intervention of others.

Things happen and people's actions impact on the lives of others.

This stupid, silly arsed notion that 'hard work' gets you somewhere (necessarily) and that people therefore deserve where they find themselves is utterly disgusting.

It's shit peddled by shits.

[snowychap]

People don't try to see the interconnected pieces. How one rich guy in a Bentley may have started his own business and employs 500 people.

A bit more on those interconnected pieces: the guy may not have been able to afford the Bentley without the help/support/ingenuity and more of those 500 employees.

Of course he wouldn't. I don't get your point.

i beleive the point being made is that one doesn't get something without the help of others , even if they claim they deserve the Bentley cause they worked hard

It's not the only point being made.

The other is that the interconnections work both ways (or more likely in a kind of circle).

It's not just a top down thing (hence the kind of post that Peter made) and it's not just a bottom up (envy) kind of thing (hence the post that Conor made).

Everything is relative and that includes the economy: George Osborne's arse is Merkel's elbow and so on.

Edited December 9, 2014 by snowychap

[tonyh29]

 

I don't totally subscribe to that theory

Unless they make the thing from scratch themselves, without the help of teachers, engineers, prior knowledge of engineering and so on, then it is trivially true - isn't it?

It may be struck out as 'pedantic' but it needs to be reiterated that we don't exist/die/prosper/fail/survive/do okay in this world without the intervention of others.

Things happen and people's actions impact on the lives of others.

This stupid, silly arsed notion that 'hard work' gets you somewhere (necessarily) and that people therefore deserve where they find themselves is utterly disgusting.

It's shit peddled by shits.

 

 

you had me right up to  "teachers " 

[CVByrne]

 

People don't try to see the interconnected pieces. How one rich guy in a Bentley may have started his own business and employs 500 people.

A bit more on those interconnected pieces: the guy may not have been able to afford the Bentley without the help/support/ingenuity and more of those 500 employees.

 

 

While many of those people may not have got jobs if it weren't for the bravery/ ingenuity/ entrepreneurship of the founder

[lapal_fan]

It's always either/or isn't it?

 

It's quite shocking that some people cannot see either side of the coin.

[CVByrne]

 

 

 

People don't try to see the interconnected pieces. How one rich guy in a Bentley may have started his own business and employs 500 people.

A bit more on those interconnected pieces: the guy may not have been able to afford the Bentley without the help/support/ingenuity and more of those 500 employees.

 

Of course he wouldn't. I don't get your point.

 

i beleive the point being made is that one doesn't get something without the help of others , even if they claim they deserve the Bentley cause they worked hard

 

I don't totally subscribe to that theory  , but I do think that it's unfair that somebody in a company can earn a salary of millions as some of the chairman of large corporations do , whilst the people they employ struggle on minimum wage ..

 

 

The point isn't that they simply worked hard to get the Bentley. But that they went out and created something that benefited many people. If he decides to exploit his workers and has them on minimum wage and low pay that is his character that has done that. But simply owning the Bentley doesn't mean he keeps his workers on minimum wage. 

 

Then you get the the point where even if he did have his workers on minimum wage, when posed the option of greedy person sets up successful business and employs a lot of people vs nice person sets up a business and it fails due. Which is the more preferable option?

 

Of course we'd love it if all people were decent people, but we have to accept the fact the world isn't that way.

 

Yes we should increase minimum wage but unfortunately raising it significantly has the knock on effects of putting struggling companies out of business and also reducing the competitiveness of the UK which would lead to less jobs growth. All this would mean more people out of work so you are stuck with the dilemma. 

 

What should be instituted is profit sharing, or to call it by it's real name. Bonuses. That employees at all levels share in the profits of the company they work for. This would not harm struggling companies and would benefit any who are being exploited while the company makes vast profits.

 

The problem with this is the majority of companies are owned by the super rich via hedge funds or by pension funds. Both of these need the dividends, need the profits to either pay peoples pensions or add to the mountain of wealth of the super rich. We have this interconnected global system which has good and bad at every level. 

[MakemineVanilla]

Socialism is all about choice..

 

[lapal_fan]

Oooooh a metaphor!

[CVByrne]

 

 

 

The quality of left wing memes continues to decline I see.  What utter nonsense that is.  Take Bentley cars for example, obviously out of reach price-wise to most, but the Crewe factory can't keep up with demand, and employs over 4,000 people, plus all the people employed elsewhere in factories who make the parts, ad agencies, etc etc.

The quality of right-wing analysis remains constant, I see. Still bumping along the bottom.

Yes, think of all the maids, chimneysweeps, liverymen who were employed to service the idle rich. They should be damn grateful. If those jobs weren't there, they would be starving on the street.

Or possibly, the vast resources sucked up by the unproductive parasites who hold the most wealth could be used for, oh I don't know, public services, job creation, improving the quality of life for a vast number of people, rather than being sat in taxdodging jurisdictions and partly spent on ludicrous self-regarding vanity purchases?

 

 

 

You are by and large talking about those born into wealth? Like your old aristocracy here in England or are you talking about people like Richard Branson & Bill Gates?

 

As the former disgust me, but the latter I admire. Yet all of them would I would imagine employ maids, drivers, chefs, gardeners etc..

[CVByrne]

 

I don't totally subscribe to that theory

Unless they make the thing from scratch themselves, without the help of teachers, engineers, prior knowledge of engineering and so on, then it is trivially true - isn't it?

It may be struck out as 'pedantic' but it needs to be reiterated that we don't exist/die/prosper/fail/survive/do okay in this world without the intervention of others.

Things happen and people's actions impact on the lives of others.

This stupid, silly arsed notion that 'hard work' gets you somewhere (necessarily) and that people therefore deserve where they find themselves is utterly disgusting.

It's shit peddled by shits.

 

 

But who peddles this notion?

 

Hard work will only get you so far. Take America for example, vast cost barriers for anyone to go to 3rd level education. But compare that to Denmark the country with the lowest inequality in the world. Contrast the fortunes afforded to a bright hard working kid born into a minimum wage family in those two countries. 

[Jon]

Socialism is all about choice..

 

 

Is it?

 

I thought that was consumerism?

 

I thought Socialism was all about (or should be) collectivism, fairness, equality and caring?

[MakemineVanilla]

Only capitalists exploit workers..

 

[chrisp65]

I've been to that same club.

 

Word of advice, it's dead until after midnight when the House of Commons bar kicks out.

[Risso]

I thought Socialism was all about (or should be) collectivism, fairness, equality and caring?

Socialism is about making things equally shit for everybody.

[TrentVilla]

I thought Socialism was all about (or should be) collectivism, fairness, equality and caring?

Socialism is about making things equally shit for everybody.

Which might be marginally better than making things better for the few and shitty for the majority under the banner of 'all in it together'.

I'm no socialist, far from it but however misguided their policies may be at least there is some honesty and good intentions behind them.

[CVByrne]

 

 

I thought Socialism was all about (or should be) collectivism, fairness, equality and caring?

Socialism is about making things equally shit for everybody.

Which might be marginally better than making things better for the few and shitty for the majority under the banner of 'all in it together'.

I'm no socialist, far from it but however misguided their policies may be at least there is some honesty and good intentions behind them.

 

 

 

You're right, socialism does have good intent but it is naive. It does not account for human nature. The fact that people care vastly more about themselves and their family than they ever can or will about others. 

 

The marriage of some socialism with capitalism.

 

Lets look at the top three on lowest inequality, Norway, Sweden and Denmark.

 

We exclude Norway because of the absurd levels of national wealth they possess from natural resources. The countries soverign wealth fund is the largest in the world and has if liquidated would result in $200,000 being distributed to each citizen. So that puts perspective on the level of wealth the country has.

 

So Sweden and Denmark.

 

R/P 10% - The ratio of the average income of the top 10% to the poorest 10%, and also R/P 20% is top 20% to bottom 20%

While the Gini Coef is a number between 0 and 1, where 0 corresponds to perfect equality and 1 perfect inequality.

 

For Sweden R/P 10% is 6.2 and R/P 20% is  4.1  - Gini is 0.26

For Denmark it's 8.1 and 4.3 and gini 0.25

 

The United States is 15.9, 8.4 and 0.48 which is double that of Sweden. 

The UK is 13.8, 7.2 & 0.34 

 

I believe countries like Sweden and Denmark should be the models by which we aspire to. Both have higher levels of taxation and superior public services than the UK for a start.