Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Uk Debate Mk 2, the UK's liveliest political and social debate site.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
An Ideological Battle; George Osborne has urged business to counter what he sees as an anti-free market movement led by trade unions and charities.
Topic Started: Oct 3 2014, 03:35 PM (1,250 Views)
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/03/george-osborne-businesses-case-free-market

Quote:
 
George Osborne has urged businesses to raise their heads “above the parapet” and counter what he sees as an anti-free market movement led by trade unions and charities.

Speaking to business leaders at the Institute of Directors’ annual convention, Osborne said principles of enterprise and business as a force for widespread prosperity were “up for grabs” for the first time in his adult life.

Quote:
 

He added: “For the first time in my adult life that is up for grabs. That issue felt like it had been resolved when the Berlin Wall fell … Politicians like Tony Blair from the left felt like they had understood that free markets create the taxes to fund public services. That argument has gone.”

Osborne’s comments about businesses taking a stand in a battle of ideas around capitalism contrasted somewhat with a perspective from his fellow speaker, Peter Kellner, president of the pollsters YouGov.

Setting out a list of controversial business practices such as zero-hours contracts and large executive bonuses, Kellner urged business leaders to consider how their behaviour affected their reputations. He flagged up the dwindling reputations of those in power – be it in central government, local government or business.

Kellner said there had been a marked decline in recent years of trust in politics, driven by the weapons of mass destruction (WMD) revelations and later the expenses scandal. But YouGov had also noted that the reputation of business leaders had declined as a group, he said.


It's time the ideological battle went beyond "capitalism or no capitalism", reforming the system doesn't work, most if not all left-wing and right-wing ideologies don't work.

Why won't people think beyond the current paradigm and see that there are different ways of operating things that go far beyond the imaginations of simplistic politicians like Gideon
Edited by jeevesnwooster, Oct 3 2014, 03:36 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Replies:
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 10:26 PM
It was Iceland the state that acted like a double crossing unprincipled thief. Their banks were just woefully incompetent - like many of ours were.
I think you mean "wilfully incompetent" as in deliberately allowed the things we now know happened.

All The Best
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Oct 7 2014, 10:36 PM
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 10:26 PM
It was Iceland the state that acted like a double crossing unprincipled thief. Their banks were just woefully incompetent - like many of ours were.
I think you mean "wilfully incompetent" as in deliberately allowed the things we now know happened.

All The Best
I'd say wilfully reckless, woefully incompetent. Especially the auditors

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Pro Veritas
Upstanding Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 10:42 PM
I'd say wilfully reckless, woefully incompetent. Especially the auditors

Who were the big gainers from the financial collapse?

Follow the money.

All The Best
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
Pro Veritas
Oct 7 2014, 10:45 PM
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 10:42 PM
I'd say wilfully reckless, woefully incompetent. Especially the auditors

Who were the big gainers from the financial collapse?
Dunno, there would have been some smart or lucky short sellers but we do know it was the top 10% of earners who lost most as did bank shareholders.

Of course Cameron did well out of it. Brown was just about to go for a snap election he likely would have won when the first issues became visible and instead he went on to defeat in 2010.

So what's your evidence on who gained?


Edited by Steve K, Oct 7 2014, 11:05 PM.
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 11:01 PM
Dunno, there would have been some smart or lucky short sellers but we do know it was the top 10% of earners who lost most as did bank shareholders.

Of course Cameron did well out of it. Brown was just about to go for a snap election he likely would have won when the first issues became visible and instead he went on to defeat in 2010.

So what's your evidence on who gained?
I saw this myself, mate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJw-pdwGm8

"I dream of another recession"


It's a shame so many people still want to see the best in the men at the top.

"Jaws have collectively dropped"

Mine sure did when I saw that. :P
Edited by jeevesnwooster, Oct 8 2014, 12:45 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
jeevesnwooster
Oct 7 2014, 10:19 PM
Mate, they're all bloody parasites, just because the Capitalism over in a handful of Scandinavian countries is a bit less ruthless thanks to years of more social welfare based on vast natural resources we can only dream of, does not really mean they have a conscience.

I'm sure if we had their generous amounts of natural resources we'd be a bit better off too, I've thought about going off to one of those countries but frankly the cold is very detrimental to my health, I fear the worst could happen so definitely not for me.
You live in an imperfect world full of imperfect humans. There are no roads to Shangri la, but we should appreciate the fact that most people in the West are far better off in many many ways than our ancestors.
In this country that is mainly due to three things; Capitalism, plus Labour governments and the trade unions.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
jeevesnwooster
Oct 8 2014, 12:45 AM
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 11:01 PM
Dunno, there would have been some smart or lucky short sellers but we do know it was the top 10% of earners who lost most as did bank shareholders.

Of course Cameron did well out of it. Brown was just about to go for a snap election he likely would have won when the first issues became visible and instead he went on to defeat in 2010.

So what's your evidence on who gained?
I saw this myself, mate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhJw-pdwGm8

"I dream of another recession"


It's a shame so many people still want to see the best in the men at the top.

"Jaws have collectively dropped"

Mine sure did when I saw that. :P
Alessio Rastani's controversial comments were made in 2013 so his last comment that in less than 12 months the savings of millions of people are going to disappear was wrong. I wonder how many more of his comments and ideas were wrong?

There are wealth makers in the system and there are wealth takers. IMO the latter are the scum of the earth. They damage democracies because they simply do not care about anything other than their own wealth.
Edited by C-too, Oct 8 2014, 08:11 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
No one is going to get me to praise Goldman Sachs, but I'll defend them. They had the balls to bet against the market in mid 2007. They could have lost big time but, as I posted, those who sold short did make big gains.

Just like those who bet on the Grand National winner did this year. Anyone going to say they were immoral for taking a risk?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 8 2014, 09:27 AM
No one is going to get me to praise Goldman Sachs, but I'll defend them. They had the balls to bet against the market in mid 2007. They could have lost big time but, as I posted, those who sold short did make big gains.

Just like those who bet on the Grand National winner did this year. Anyone going to say they were immoral for taking a risk?
No I don't think they will. But any individual who just can't wait for another recession in order to make a killing, sends a shiver down my spine.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Steve K
Member Avatar
Once and future cynic
[ *  *  *  * ]
C-too
Oct 8 2014, 09:53 AM
Steve K
Oct 8 2014, 09:27 AM
No one is going to get me to praise Goldman Sachs, but I'll defend them. They had the balls to bet against the market in mid 2007. They could have lost big time but, as I posted, those who sold short did make big gains.

Just like those who bet on the Grand National winner did this year. Anyone going to say they were immoral for taking a risk?
No I don't think they will. But any individual who just can't wait for another recession in order to make a killing, sends a shiver down my spine.
Put like that yes but then there's the morality of those that are there to deal with accidents. If there were none they'd be out of a job. Most people see the lawyers as very bad people and the higher paid A&E surgeons as heroes. Bizarre isn't it.

Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 7 2014, 07:32 PM
papasmurf
Oct 7 2014, 04:19 PM
Tytoalba
Oct 7 2014, 04:15 PM
Begging is illegal ,especially as so many beggers like the one depicted are making up to £200 a day., and treat it like a fulltime job.
Begging is illegal? Reference please.

So many beggars making £200 a day? Evidence please?
Begging lawful? or unlawful? can you be arrested for it? yes? or No?

I Goggled it and know the answer to both questions.

Do some beggars make lots of money,? I know the answer to that one as well

Took all of 40 seconds back breaking hard work.  ::)
I dont automaticlly disagree with another poster, on matters of fact, and will take most things said at face value If I have doubts about it,or want to reinforce my knowlege of something I do what you did and Google it for the information is usually there in black and white.
I dont see the boards asa means of imposing my will on others or forcing my opinion down their throats, but as a means of exchanging information and gaining an understanding of what drives other people to think like they do.
You googled it and so did I, though I had lnowlege from personal experience , so I expect we came to the same conclusion and found the same results.
For Papa who seemed to doubt my integrity in replying here is a link he might like to open. There are others if he chooses to look. He becomes defensive on such issues IMO

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/beggar-who-earned-50000ayear-and-lives-in-300000-fulham-flat-is-arrested-again-8646973.html

I think that the BIG ISSUE magazine was a means of overcoming the begging question , as selling matches etc in the streets was designed to do, as long as they did not cause an obstruction. There are strict rules relating to charitable collections in the streets just in passing.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Oct 8 2014, 10:35 AM

For Papa who seemed to doubt my integrity
I was not doubting anyone's integrity, merely asking them to back up their contention and implication that beggars are in the main raking in £200 a day and most are scammers. (I am still waiting for such credible evidence.)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 10:26 PM
Tigger
Oct 7 2014, 08:36 PM
Steve K
Oct 7 2014, 08:29 PM
Iceland acted like an unprincipled double crossing thief
We've disagreed on this before, but then our banking sector also acted like double crossing thieves as well but we seemed to overlook that........

And in other news bank deposits of up to one million quid are now protected by the taxpayer, up from the previous £85k. It seems the "thieving" banks who complained it would hurt their business if they had to hold larger reserves to compensate savers have once again got you and me to underwrite their gambling habits.

No hint of Iceland here...........
It was Iceland the state that acted like a double crossing unprincipled thief. Their banks were just woefully incompetent - like many of ours were.

And you are grossly misrepresenting that latest proposal, the extension to £1M is ONLY to cover transitory items like house buying monies that right now have a horrible short term vulnerability for ordinary people potentially left with a massive mortgage, no house and the money gone. BTW seems we are doing this to comply with an EU directive.

Private banks SHOULD NOT be relying on the taxpayer to cover any potential losses by anyone who leaves money in their safe keeping, they should have ample reserves and be properly run and regulated, if this was the case we would not be on the hook once again. But it would seem that being responsible is bad for the balance sheet.

The fact this is even happening at all is a disgrace and yet more back door support for this pampered "industry".
Edited by Tigger, Oct 8 2014, 11:05 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 8 2014, 10:44 AM
Tytoalba
Oct 8 2014, 10:35 AM

For Papa who seemed to doubt my integrity
I was not doubting anyone's integrity, merely asking them to back up their contention and implication that beggars are in the main raking in £200 a day and most are scammers. (I am still waiting for such credible evidence.)
Never said in the main or most Papa, but to post an emotive picture was bound to get a responce. I expect that you have googled the question by now.
For your information police did arrest beggers as well as drunks , sometimes out of sympathy for their circumstances, and magistrates did send tthe worst cases to prison for a month especially in a harsh winter, so they could get fed ,washed and dried out and to be advised. It was done with the best of intent, as well as to allay complaints, Some even pretended to do so so that they could get a bed for the night.and a breakfast in the morning. Around Waterloo station next to the Old Vic they did their 'tapping' as it as called, to get money for a bottle of Tizer and a bottle of meths from the chemist, mix them together and suck on them like a baby. Like you with your charritable needs, you have to be amongst it to understand it and see a bigger picture.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Oct 8 2014, 11:11 AM
Like you with your charritable needs, you have to be amongst it to understand it and see a bigger picture.
Fortunately I don't have any charitable needs, and I am already "amongst it" with a large number of people living rough locally, in old cars, vans, lorries, and various buildings and bunkers left over from the 2nd World War.
The numbers using food banks locally went beyond a crisis back in October 2013. (I have been at a meeting with my MP where coincidentally several local food bank managers and volunteers were in attendance.)
If beggars were able to make £200 a day, the streets would be littered with them.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Alberich
Member Avatar
Alberich
[ *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 7 2014, 04:19 PM
Tytoalba
Oct 7 2014, 04:15 PM
Begging is illegal ,especially as so many beggers like the one depicted are making up to £200 a day., and treat it like a fulltime job.
Begging is illegal? Reference please.

So many beggars making £200 a day? Evidence please?
I am not up to date on criminal law these days, but begging is illegal under the Vagrancy Act of 1824. It was made a recordable offence in 1993. And as for proof, most of it is anecdotal from the beggars themselves, but it is possible to make a tidy living on the right pitch.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Heinrich
Member Avatar
Regular Guy
[ *  *  *  * ]
Alberich
Oct 8 2014, 12:37 PM
papasmurf
Oct 7 2014, 04:19 PM
Tytoalba
Oct 7 2014, 04:15 PM
Begging is illegal ,especially as so many beggers like the one depicted are making up to £200 a day., and treat it like a fulltime job.
Begging is illegal? Reference please.

So many beggars making £200 a day? Evidence please?
I am not up to date on criminal law these days, but begging is illegal under the Vagrancy Act of 1824. It was made a recordable offence in 1993. And as for proof, most of it is anecdotal from the beggars themselves, but it is possible to make a tidy living on the right pitch.
Being homeless, poor, and asking for help could be a crime only in a heartless country.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Heinrich
Oct 8 2014, 12:43 PM
Being homeless, poor, and asking for help could be a crime only in a heartless country.
It is getting close to that in Britain.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 8 2014, 11:21 AM
Tytoalba
Oct 8 2014, 11:11 AM
Like you with your charritable needs, you have to be amongst it to understand it and see a bigger picture.
Fortunately I don't have any charitable needs, and I am already "amongst it" with a large number of people living rough locally, in old cars, vans, lorries, and various buildings and bunkers left over from the 2nd World War.
The numbers using food banks locally went beyond a crisis back in October 2013. (I have been at a meeting with my MP where coincidentally several local food bank managers and volunteers were in attendance.)
If beggars were able to make £200 a day, the streets would be littered with them.
No Papa they would not , for the police would respond to public concerns and arrest them or move them on.
It is their duty to uphold the law.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
I didn't see this

Ctoo
 
You live in an imperfect world full of imperfect humans. There are no roads to Shangri la, but we should appreciate the fact that most people in the West are far better off in many many ways than our ancestors.
In this country that is mainly due to three things; Capitalism, plus Labour governments and the trade unions.



I already have said I appreciate the fact that Capitalism has advanced us as a human race, just that I feel its time has come to pass, we are probably automatically going to move onto something better, if we don't destroy ourselves and the planet first that is.

And for all the things you cite that Labour, unions and Capitalism did "right", I can cite a million things they did wrong, there are no easy or fast answers that "justify" Capitalism.

The one and only argument in its ifavour, that I can see, is that it's better than anything that came before it

Quote:
 
Alessio Rastani's controversial comments were made in 2013 so his last comment that in less than 12 months the savings of millions of people are going to disappear was wrong. I wonder how many more of his comments and ideas were wrong?


http://www.newsroom.hsbc.co.uk/press/release/88_million_households_would_no

"8.8 million households would not last the week on their savings "

So a moot point anyway, but..

Maybe not "millions", but quite a lot of people have lost their savings.


Quote:
 
There are wealth makers in the system and there are wealth takers. IMO the latter are the scum of the earth. They damage democracies because they simply do not care about anything other than their own wealth.


WHo are these so called wealth makers?

SK
 
No one is going to get me to praise Goldman Sachs, but I'll defend them. They had the balls to bet against the market in mid 2007. They could have lost big time but, as I posted, those who sold short did make big gains.

Just like those who bet on the Grand National winner did this year. Anyone going to say they were immoral for taking a risk?


As c-too has sort of alluded to, those who bet on huge losses, compound losses and who INTENTIONALLY cheat the markets and worst of all, steal money legally, really are the scum of the earth, that is rampant greed, the sort encouraged by our economic system

Quote:
 
Put like that yes but then there's the morality of those that are there to deal with accidents. If there were none they'd be out of a job. Most people see the lawyers as very bad people and the higher paid A&E surgeons as heroes. Bizarre isn't it.


And those two examples are completely incomparable
Edited by jeevesnwooster, Oct 8 2014, 03:29 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Tytoalba
Oct 8 2014, 01:46 PM
No Papa they would not , for the police would respond to public concerns and arrest them or move them on.
It is their duty to uphold the law.
You must be joking. The police upholding the law, responding to public concerns.

Edited by papasmurf, Oct 8 2014, 03:32 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Quote:
 
Alessio Rastani's controversial comments were made in 2013 so his last comment that in less than 12 months the savings of millions of people are going to disappear was wrong. I wonder how many more of his comments and ideas were wrong?

I think where he went astray was in not factoring in that these 'leaches' must realise that death is final, so killing off the the source serves none. We survive to be able to continue, to continue to be that source of wealth.

Edited by Affa, Oct 8 2014, 03:46 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
jeevesnwooster
Oct 8 2014, 03:26 PM
I didn't see this

Ctoo
 
You live in an imperfect world full of imperfect humans. There are no roads to Shangri la, but we should appreciate the fact that most people in the West are far better off in many many ways than our ancestors.
In this country that is mainly due to three things; Capitalism, plus Labour governments and the trade unions.



I already have said I appreciate the fact that Capitalism has advanced us as a human race, just that I feel its time has come to pass, we are probably automatically going to move onto something better, if we don't destroy ourselves and the planet first that is.

And for all the things you cite that Labour, unions and Capitalism did "right", I can cite a million things they did wrong, there are no easy or fast answers that "justify" Capitalism.

The one and only argument in its ifavour, that I can see, is that it's better than anything that came before it

Quote:
 
Alessio Rastani's controversial comments were made in 2013 so his last comment that in less than 12 months the savings of millions of people are going to disappear was wrong. I wonder how many more of his comments and ideas were wrong?


http://www.newsroom.hsbc.co.uk/press/release/88_million_households_would_no

"8.8 million households would not last the week on their savings "

So a moot point anyway, but..

Maybe not "millions", but quite a lot of people have lost their savings.


Quote:
 
There are wealth makers in the system and there are wealth takers. IMO the latter are the scum of the earth. They damage democracies because they simply do not care about anything other than their own wealth.


WHo are these so called wealth makers?

Good, we agree on the benefits of capitalism.

You can cite many things they got wrong, but the overall outcome is in the main positive.

I don't think these people had much to lose in the first place. I know I didn't when I purchased my first house. Some wealth appears to accrue very late in life, I remember as a young man thinking why is it old people have nice cars, I now know.

The wealth makers are the businesses that invest in research and development and do all the organising. They are the people who build-up businesses and create work/employment for others. That is as opposed to those who create little or nothing and spend their time sucking the financial blood from the system.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 8 2014, 03:31 PM
Tytoalba
Oct 8 2014, 01:46 PM
No Papa they would not , for the police would respond to public concerns and arrest them or move them on.
It is their duty to uphold the law.
You must be joking. The police upholding the law, responding to public concerns.

Even your cycnicism is biased.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
C-too
Oct 8 2014, 04:08 PM
Good, we agree on the benefits of capitalism.

You can cite many things they got wrong, but the overall outcome is in the main positive.

I don't think these people had much to lose in the first place. I know I didn't when I purchased my first house. Some wealth appears to accrue very late in life, I remember as a young man thinking why is it old people have nice cars, I now know.

The wealth makers are the businesses that invest in research and development and do all the organising. They are the people who build-up businesses and create work/employment for others. That is as opposed to those who create little or nothing and spend their time sucking the financial blood from the system.

We may well agree on the benefit (no s there) of capitalism, but that's neither here nor there.

You believe that capitalism can be saved and some left-wing social democratic "capitalism with a conscience" party can take us out of trouble.

I have pointed out why this is a false view.

You are wrong about people not having much to lose. A lot of young people have this odd view that they can expect a house and car and everything on a plate at 25. When you raise the bar like that, you inevitably shove yourself harder to reach that bar...and fall harder when/if that doesn't happen.

That's incomparable to any decade past when young people had a lot more responsibility and it seems were taught almost as a rule to act as if they were older than their years.

I think the death of responsibility in most young people is pretty awful to be honest, they've been taught they can drink til they drop, indulge themselves in every vice known and still they can expect everything on a plate

Your comment about wealth makers is dead wrong, the real wealth-makers are those who CREATE wealth through their hard work.

Most businesses are dead-weights who provide society with absolutely nothing of value, all they do is leech off of the hard work of others in all areas.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
The drawback for people who "CREATE wealth through their hard work", is that as soon as they have made that wealth, (probably giving employment for others in the process). They then become vilified as 'rich bastards' who deserve to be taxed till their eyes water, and face the prospect of a Mansion Tax if they build or buy an expensive property.
Edited by somersetli, Oct 8 2014, 06:19 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Cymru
Alt-Right
[ *  *  *  * ]
Wealth is created by workers, not bosses.

If workers did not work no wealth would be created.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
somersetli
Oct 8 2014, 06:19 PM
The drawback for people who "CREATE wealth through their hard work", is that as soon as they have made that wealth, (probably giving employment for others in the process). They then become vilified as 'rich bastards' who deserve to be taxed till their eyes water, and face the prospect of a Mansion Tax if they build or buy an expensive property.
Spot On without someone taking a risk and creating a business what comes first ?workers with no work therefore no money to live on? or a business with work for them to earn the money they need to live?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
papasmurf
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Stan Still
Oct 8 2014, 07:35 PM
Spot On without someone taking a risk and creating a business what comes first ?
Without workers it is not possible to grow beyond being a one man band.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Stan Still
Member Avatar
Regular Member
[ *  *  * ]
papasmurf
Oct 8 2014, 07:48 PM
Stan Still
Oct 8 2014, 07:35 PM
Spot On without someone taking a risk and creating a business what comes first ?
Without workers it is not possible to grow beyond being a one man band.
Without anyone having a good idea, or inventing something seeing its potential saleability and not producing enough therefore not selling enough with little profit not able to expand or not taking a risk with their money or borrowing money to expand that is all you will ever have is one man bands.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Affa
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]

How many of these wealth creators can be identified, named?
Even Branson was opportunist, hasn't really demonstrated the qualities being listed as requirements for exaltation.

It, the idea of wealth creators being the only source of wealth and progress, is BS ........ the rich get richer, that is how it works, and there are very few risks involved.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
somersetli
Member Avatar
somersetli
[ *  *  * ]
Not forgetting, of course, many small businesses have the owner working alongside his employees.
Edited by somersetli, Oct 8 2014, 08:49 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
somersetli
Oct 8 2014, 08:48 PM
Not forgetting, of course, many small businesses have the owner working alongside his employees.
Yes, making sure all that good work that needs doing gets done  ::) , most Wonderful Messianic Small Businesses being completely useless to society as well by the way
Edited by jeevesnwooster, Oct 8 2014, 09:17 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
somersetli
Oct 8 2014, 06:19 PM
The drawback for people who "CREATE wealth through their hard work", is that as soon as they have made that wealth, (probably giving employment for others in the process). They then become vilified as 'rich bastards' who deserve to be taxed till their eyes water, and face the prospect of a Mansion Tax if they build or buy an expensive property.
You have to ask yourself why this is? Is it the class system, the growing disparity in wealth already mentioned or something else entirely?

Making money in Britain has become a moral free pursuit in many cases, this is not only wrong but ultimately destructive to the fabric of society, we have hedge fund managers destroying jobs for a bumper pay out,read up about Phones4U, businessmen demanding less rights for those who toil for them and politicians on the take whilst telling everyone else wage rises with destabilise the economy. It's not right and it causes unnecessary hardship, but apparently some seem to think this can be easily overlooked.

I have created scores of jobs over the years and I constantly wrestle with these thoughts as I see what is happening to our country, what a shame some far better off people than me never bother with any of that...........
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tigger
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
somersetli
Oct 8 2014, 06:19 PM
The drawback for people who "CREATE wealth through their hard work", is that as soon as they have made that wealth, (probably giving employment for others in the process). They then become vilified as 'rich bastards' who deserve to be taxed till their eyes water, and face the prospect of a Mansion Tax if they build or buy an expensive property.
You have to ask yourself why this is? Is it the class system, the growing disparity in wealth already mentioned or something else entirely?

Making money in Britain has become a moral free pursuit in many cases, this is not only wrong but ultimately destructive to the fabric of society, we have hedge fund managers destroying jobs for a bumper pay out,read up about Phones4U, businessmen demanding less rights for those who toil for them and politicians on the take whilst telling everyone else wage rises will destabilise the economy. It's not right and it causes unnecessary hardship, but apparently some seem to think this can be easily overlooked.

I have created scores of jobs over the years and I constantly wrestle with these thoughts as I see what is happening to our country, what a shame some far better off people than me never bother with any of that...........
Edited by Tigger, Oct 8 2014, 09:35 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
Well said Tigger, I completely concur with every part of your post
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
jeevesnwooster
Oct 8 2014, 05:55 PM
C-too
Oct 8 2014, 04:08 PM
Good, we agree on the benefits of capitalism.

You can cite many things they got wrong, but the overall outcome is in the main positive.

I don't think these people had much to lose in the first place. I know I didn't when I purchased my first house. Some wealth appears to accrue very late in life, I remember as a young man thinking why is it old people have nice cars, I now know.

The wealth makers are the businesses that invest in research and development and do all the organising. They are the people who build-up businesses and create work/employment for others. That is as opposed to those who create little or nothing and spend their time sucking the financial blood from the system.

We may well agree on the benefit (no s there) of capitalism, but that's neither here nor there.

You believe that capitalism can be saved and some left-wing social democratic "capitalism with a conscience" party can take us out of trouble.

I have pointed out why this is a false view.

You are wrong about people not having much to lose. A lot of young people have this odd view that they can expect a house and car and everything on a plate at 25. When you raise the bar like that, you inevitably shove yourself harder to reach that bar...and fall harder when/if that doesn't happen.

That's incomparable to any decade past when young people had a lot more responsibility and it seems were taught almost as a rule to act as if they were older than their years.

I think the death of responsibility in most young people is pretty awful to be honest, they've been taught they can drink til they drop, indulge themselves in every vice known and still they can expect everything on a plate

Your comment about wealth makers is dead wrong, the real wealth-makers are those who CREATE wealth through their hard work.

Most businesses are dead-weights who provide society with absolutely nothing of value, all they do is leech off of the hard work of others in all areas.
I was in exactly the position you describe when I took out my first mortgage many years ago. I worked full time and at times I had to work on two part time jobs (at different times) as well in order to pay my way.

NL were centre-left, and their policy of capitalism for the benefit of the many not the few was a very central position in politics. There is nothing to stop the capitalist system from continuing to improve. You have not shown any proof of why improvement is a false view, AFAIK all you have produced is one man's opinion.
If capitalism goes backwards then it will be replaced but that will be no guarantee of improvement for the many.

People can work hard while earning nothing and producing very little. It takes organisation, investment and innovation, that is what allows people to both earn a living and produce something worthwhile. Having said that I would agree that one of the problems in the UK is a lack of reasonable reward for effort for far too many workers.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tytoalba
Senior Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Cymru
Oct 8 2014, 07:19 PM
Wealth is created by workers, not bosses.

If workers did not work no wealth would be created.
Define workers please.
Isnt the working boss of a company a worker, or those who have degres and studied hard to gain knowlege and skills, Doctors, lawyers, accountants and all the other white collard workers also classified as workers.?
How about politicians , for they have to reply to constituants look at their problems prepare their speeches and deal with all manner of social problems also workers. Exactly where is the divisions that identify workers from the rest of society?
In the USA they dont seem to have the problems in class clasifications that so many 'workers' in this country seem to have.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
jeevesnwooster
҈
[ *  *  * ]
C-too
Oct 8 2014, 10:13 PM



Ctoo
 
I was in exactly the position you describe when I took out my first mortgage many years ago. I worked full time and at times I had to work on two part time jobs (at different times) as well in order to pay my way.


What position, wanting loads of money and material possessions?

I have no problem with that in and of itself, it's the things "around" it if you see what I mean..it's the way people will ramp that up and f*** everyone off to get their hands on as much money as they can, I have seen it change people for the worse personally.

That said, some people will always flourish with more money and it will make them, oddly enough, less desperate and greedy and more able to help others.

Quote:
 
NL were centre-left, and their policy of capitalism for the benefit of the many not the few was a very central position in politics.


The statistics paint a different figure regarding
income inequality
wages in general and the business interests of almost all NL politicians themselves (as well as the majority of their backgrounds)

That's not opinion, it's fact

Quote:
 
There is nothing to stop the capitalist system from continuing to improve. You have not shown any proof of why improvement is a false view, AFAIK all you have produced is one man's opinion.


In this this thread, yes, on the rest of the board I've posted loads of evidence to support my claims.

The simple facts are that wages worldwide have not risen with inflation but have gone down since the late-1970's. Income inequality has risen. We've seen the boom and bust cycle repeat itself over and over again and the crux of my argument, is that tens of thousands of people die daily, needlessly due to fully curable diseases and illnesses of all descriptions that we could provide for. This provision isn't met because there is no profit to be gained out of it.

People have seen most if not all of their ideologies demolished, left-wing or right-wing. At this rate, and a lot of Capitalist theoreticians agree with this, Capitalism as it is is NOT sustainable. We will, possibly in our lifetimes, see our standard of living decrease significantly in Western countries and will, unlike the Chinese, have no other arenas to expand into.

Quote:
 

If capitalism goes backwards then it will be replaced but that will be no guarantee of improvement for the many.


Capitalism already has gone backwards, agreed on the other thing

Quote:
 

People can work hard while earning nothing and producing very little. It takes organisation, investment and innovation, that is what allows people to both earn a living and produce something worthwhile. Having said that I would agree that one of the problems in the UK is a lack of reasonable reward for effort for far too many workers.


Yes that's all very true, but most businesses do not offer innovation and investment is only ever made by those with money to do it, they often have a motive to make more money on their investment and that's all.
Edited by jeevesnwooster, Oct 8 2014, 11:19 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
C-too
Member Avatar
Honourable Member
[ *  *  *  * ]
Western capitalism no longer has the world at its feet, if we earn less, then we have to live within our means. Changing the system doesn't mean we will be any better off. We would still require a different mindset from the present top down imposed them and us. The mindset IMO is what needs to change.

Under NL the poor got richer. The gap in wealth was in part caused by the immigration of some very rich people who felt at that time that the UK was the place to be.

One example of the good done by NL was 1.6 million people taken out of relative poverty. And there are plenty of other examples.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply