This sort of wealth\obscenity:
How many people have come out of poverty since the 1980s? Not some obscure “relative” measure pointed at in western societies, absolute poverty globally?
The US, which is the home of capitalism, has admitted that the average workers spending power hasn’t increased since the 80’s vs the cost of living.
Whereas prior to that since the 30’s real growth went up exponentially year on year. Why do you think that is Tim?
Yes and that is one of the reasons for Trump which I totally understand and defended, but please have some perspective.
Capitalism has also reduced global poverty from 36% of the global population to less than 9% now. Hunger has dropped and living standards generally have gone up.
There’s literally a cap on capitalism then I think you’ll agree. It only goes so far for the majority, while the real wealthy elite/establishment continue to thrive. Government policy needs to be more centred.
cc @anon7035031
That depends.
The Welfare State is still enormous in the West. It has grown. People will cite declines in incomes but these do not capture the serious advances in free medical care for the elderly living longer or pensions. The stats on that are misleading.
Thatcher (but this had been happening for 10 years before her) and Co dismantled widespread state ownership and planning, not the welfare state. She arguably just didn’t get round to it, but it didn’t happen on the scale that the reorganization of British industry did.
I have never denied a large role for Government.
That’s simply not true. Capitalism provides the opportunity for literally anyone with ambition and drive to improve their situation, regardless of their background. Yes there is a lot of old wealth but it’s constantly being renewed as new industry and technology replaces old. Just one example, if you look at the Internet space since say 1990, literally 80% of companies have been replaced.
Poverty is relative. Compare the lives of the poor in capitalist countries versus Marxist countries. I know Marxists hate the mention of Venezuela but it should be like Norway is it wasn’t ruled by goons.
The US isn’t the home of capitalism nor the best example of free market economies. Hong Kong and Singapore would be the best in class.
Wages depend on supply and demand. There are plenty careers that are paying significantly higher salaries than a decade ago, let alone the 80s, IT, programming, etc.
For a lot of jobs in the US and Western Europe uncontrolled immigration is what has driven down wages. You can’t say that as it’s perceived as racist but when you talk to tradesmen and contractors that’s the reality.
Ah the old rags to riches bullshit … the American Dream crap. Sure you’ll get people who get wealthy from low beginnings but in the scale of things it’s nonsense. The vast majority of wealth is still controlled by the people who controlled it 200 years ago. Even the plutocracy which exploded after the demise of the USSR didn’t really change the global picture.
Yes, government should regulate excesses in the economy, prevent monopolies, prevent too big to fail, stop uncompetitive practices,etc. They don’t though because politicians are totally corrupt and are funded by big industry.
The number one government change I would suggest is to make all lobbying illegal. That would solve a lot of the issues.
1 Like
That’s simply not true. Look at the list of the richest people in the US, most of them didn’t come from wealth. Same in the Ireland of today I would imagine. Look at the CEOs of the top 500 companies in the US, lots of minorities, immigrants, etc. What you’re stating is a myth not fact.
The rich consolidate their wealth. No dispute.
That second link while displaying that headline actually show the opposite! Top 1% gained more than anybody else.
Kick em out ta fuck. We’ll all party. and ate all the meat we want
FAO of @Fagan_ODowd: Gordonstoun-educated uber-Brexshiteer Isabel Euphemia Oakeshott is on Question Time now*.
*If you’re watching on BBC Mainland, 11:25 for those of you cut off in Paddy-land.
Er this is a classic case of misleading stats. The 1% is ever changing. As are all income brackets.
As pointed out, there are asset bubbles and growth out there, so the windfalls are bigger.
As it happens, I think the Amazons and Facebooks are far too big but are really an inevitability of globalization and the Information Age. I do think we need higher inheritance taxes but the Bill Gates, Warren Buffets, Zuckerbergs etc or the world are largely self made. They are not rags to riches, they all had some advantages in life (plenty didn’t) but are not the same.
1 Like
Yes, the results of capitalism are that the owners of capital and those who invent and innovate get rich. However, capitalism has also lifted the vast majority of people out of poverty in countries where free market economics has been practiced. Look at Ireland since the 1960s, look at Singapore ffs which only became independent in 1965 and today the average income is twice that of the UK.
I agree that the wealth inequality seen since the 2008 crash is obscene, but that won’t get fixed easily, and certainly won’t be fixed by Marxists. The most obvious way to fix it imo is to eliminate corruption in government and get rid of central banks. There are zero examples where Marxists have accomplished anything other than totalitarian states and misery.
Euphemia says “we must walk away with no deal”.
Gammon erupt.
1 Like
I’m watching question time here on de telly. Did Cornyn really ride your wan?
Fuck me he must have brought a bag of flour with him
1 Like
Somebody should set up a new trip hop group called Massive Backtrack and release an album called “Red Lines”.
Like a soul without a mind
And a body without a heart
My Brexit’s falling apart
1 Like
I think you’ve just demonstrated why they shouldn’t