Labour admits the Tories were right all along

[leicsmac]

Your definition of affluence has never been a realistic target from the bottom in one generation. You've always needed luck to make that kind of jump and probably always will. That kind of lifestyle is on the upper tail of the bell curve and if your wealth redistribution dreams come true it will be chopped off the end; it won't be available to anyone.

 

You're probably right. But allow me a little raging against the machine. 

[Rincewind]

Doesn't anyone get annoyed with the ones that muck things up in their job and then given a huge handout to leave? Or the ones that have most of their money in Swiss banks to avoid paying tax? They are sacked and not long after given another directorship at another mega-corporation and negotiate for themselves huge bonuses. They don't know what it is like to choose between keeping warm or buying food like some OAP's do.

I cannot and will not defend or admire these people.

[The God Emperor]

Doesn't anyone get annoyed with the ones that muck things up in their job and then given a huge handout to leave? Or the ones that have most of their money in Swiss banks to avoid paying tax? They are sacked and not long after given another directorship at another mega-corporation and negotiate for themselves huge bonuses. They don't know what it is like to choose between keeping warm or buying food like some OAP's do.

I cannot and will not defend or admire these people.

I dont admire these people, but I cant really complain because I'm not paying there mega wages or if I do, I do so voluntarily by buying the products the companies they work for sell.

Politicians on the other hand who do a poor job of governing and then when they leave parliament and get a nice job in the EU on mega wages I do have a problem with.

[Rincewind]

Them as well.

[MooseBreath]

Doesn't anyone get annoyed with the ones that muck things up in their job and then given a huge handout to leave? Or the ones that have most of their money in Swiss banks to avoid paying tax? They are sacked and not long after given another directorship at another mega-corporation and negotiate for themselves huge bonuses. They don't know what it is like to choose between keeping warm or buying food like some OAP's do.

I cannot and will not defend or admire these people.

This is just a messy amalgamation of numerous excuses you've had fed to you by people who seek to create enemies for you so they can come in and play the hero. Even someone as deluded as you can't seriously suggest that the existence of a handful of rich executives plays even a small part in the reason why you never developed and maintained a profitable skillset.

[Rincewind]

I dont admire these people, but I cant really complain because I'm not paying there mega wages or if I do, I do so voluntarily by buying the products the companies they work for sell.

Politicians on the other hand who do a poor job of governing and then when they leave parliament and get a nice job in the EU on mega wages I do have a problem with.

I was thinking more bankers and heads of things like British Gas who are head by name only. I have no problem with somebody that  has worked their way  up and are qualified to do the job. But when they make mistakes which costs the company millions and the loss of workers jobs I find it unfair that they are rewarded by fat payoff cheques. Theaverage working man when making a mistake at their work is just dismissed and would find it difficult to walk straight into a similar role or given mega bucks on leaving. To do so would be unfair on those that do work hard to improve themselves.

[Guest MattP]

It's absolutely incredible what some people on here still try to defend.

[purpleronnie]

It's absolutely incredible what some people on here still try to defend.

I know some people even defend margaret thatcher.

 

 

Bottom line is tories made mistakes, and so did labour, its just rare to hear about politicians actually admitting that other parties didn't fook everything up.

[Rincewind]

 Politicians of all parties shaft the public. Whichever sector it is, rich or poor you can be certain they don't come off worse.

[Rincewind]

It's absolutely incredible what some people on here still try to defend.

I was defending the average tax-paying working man.

[Guest MattP]

I was defending the average tax-paying working man.

Becoming one would be a start.

[Guest MattP]

I know some people even defend margaret thatcher.

Bottom line is tories made mistakes, and so did labour, its just rare to hear about politicians actually admitting that other parties didn't fook everything up.

In economical terms Thatcher is easily defendable. :-D

All governments do. No parties policy was more deletrious than Labour's under Brown though and their opposition to the so called cuts over the last 3 years has made them look a joke.

They have a Tory gov that has lost its core support and they still aren't polling for an overall majority. It's staggering.

[leicsmac]

In economical terms Thatcher is easily defendable. :-D

All governments do. No parties policy was more deletrious than Labour's under Brown though and their opposition to the so called cuts over the last 3 years has made them look a joke.

They have a Tory gov that has lost its core support and they still aren't polling for an overall majority. It's staggering.

 

With Milibland in charge, I don't think it's all that surprising.

 

2015 - Hung parliament, no coalition able to be formed, political chaos followed by electoral reform so it can't happen again. Get your readies on it.

[purpleronnie]

Becoming one would be a start.

ouch.

[Rincewind]

ouch.

 

I do work though. Admittedly not many hours but it's the best I can get ATM. Also I will be off JSA in the next month or so.

I see nothing wrong in sticking up for those more vulnerable than myself. Does not seem right defending those that are doing the trampling of the underdog.

[DANGEROUS TIGER]

I'm not saying anything. My computer and I aren't talking! 

[Dr The Singh]

I'm not saying anything. My computer and I aren't talking! 

Thank f*** for the that!!!  May it long continue 

[Rincewind]

Anyway the title of the thread is misleading. And to think I was accused of doing the same thing.

[MooseBreath]

Anyway the title of the thread is misleading. And to think I was accused of doing the same thing.

And to think!!!! How ghastly!!

Sometimes I'm sure you're a troll. If you are, very well played, you straddle the barely believeable line with consistant precision.

[Jon the Hat]

Doesn't anyone get annoyed with the ones that muck things up in their job and then given a huge handout to leave? Or the ones that have most of their money in Swiss banks to avoid paying tax? They are sacked and not long after given another directorship at another mega-corporation and negotiate for themselves huge bonuses. They don't know what it is like to choose between keeping warm or buying food like some OAP's do.

I cannot and will not defend or admire these people.

 

Really, stop believing everything you read.  Your or the media's definition of "muck things up in their job" is based on what exactly?  Often a huge amount of good work is overridden by some PR mess up or something those in charge were unaware of.  If they really stuff something up they really would not walk into another senior job.  Everyone I know in a senior position at my company has worked bloody hard and delivered in a number of senior positions to get to the top, and they take their decisions and the risks involved very seriously.  All successful businesses take risks, and the board signs off on serious decisions, but the Chief Exec is usually the fall guy.  Yes they are well paid, but they have often thousands of jobs and even more peoples pensions riding on their performance.

[Captain...]

Agree with the vast majority of that Col.

That said, unless you're saving for a very particular objective (as you seem to have done) I think that too much saving damages an economy. If money isn't moving by people spending it then economies stagnate, as has happened recently and is still happening, to a degree. People have become afraid and are hoarding their money, and while that's a noble sentiment it isn't going to get and economy going again.

Exactly this, capitalism only works if we have close to full employment and money keeps on flowing through the system.

Obviously Col's small potatoes are not going to make a difference, but it is the vastly wealthy that in this country have millions of pounds in their name and they are easily able to make more money with that, money breeds money, and whether this money is just sitting there making a couple of % interest, or is being funneled through tax havens the government sees virtually none of it and rich get richer.

For capitalism to work people need to live just within their means, this is why the really top earners, those how earn so much that they have no chance of spending the majority of it, should be taxed heavily because otherwise they just save it, which is bad for capitalism, or they spend it all and waste it on frivolity and excess, which is better for the economy, but not great for them or the environment.

It is going to be interesting to see where we end up.

[MooseBreath]

I very much doubt your average wealthy person has much money sitting in savings accounts. They're not daft. Far more money to be made investing it, which does go towards keeping the economy moving.

[Captain...]

I very much doubt your average wealthy person has much money sitting in savings accounts. They're not daft. Far more money to be made investing it, which does go towards keeping the economy moving.

Only if they are paying taxes on it and they are moving it around within this country and not tax havens. There are lots of loopholes and tricks and 'risk free' investments that the rich use to make their money work.

[Webbo]

Exactly this, capitalism only works if we have close to full employment and money keeps on flowing through the system.

 

Being a bit philosophical here but imo capitalism neither fails or succeeds it just happens. It's evolution and human nature combined. The strong get stronger and the weak fall by the wayside, eventually something new comes along and the old leaders start to decline and fall by the wayside. That's how progress is maintained and it's why no artificial system can work.

 

As long as we have a safety net (not pure capitalism admittedly) so that no one falls too far then it's the best system to provide prosperity.

[Captain...]

Being a bit philosophical here but imo capitalism neither fails or succeeds it just happens. It's evolution and human nature combined. The strong get stronger and the weak fall by the wayside, eventually something new comes along and the old leaders start to decline and fall by the wayside. That's how progress is maintained and it's why no artificial system can work.

As long as we have a safety net (not pure capitalism admittedly) so that no one falls too far then it's the best system to provide prosperity.

It is hard to call it the best when it is one of only a few to be fully tested by many countries over many years without external factors such as wars and anti-communists imposing trade embargoes. You could also use China as an example of success without capitalism.

But you're right maybe successful isn't the right term for capitalism, it is an economic philosophy, success and failure is down to implementation, you can adopt the most successful tactics in football, ie try and play like Barcelona, but if you put Pulis in charge and Andy Carroll up front it is not going to be successful.

Doesn't mean the tactics are unsuccessful.