The UK Economy

Status
Not open for further replies.
WheyHey said:
Hate to admit it but the posh lot do seem to know what they are doing. All the indicators, except maybe the potential housing price bubble in that there London, are looking rosy. It's even projected that wages will be increasing greater than inflation soon.

My question is, was it worth it?

A slightly less successful economy and less austerity, for instance.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...

I'm sure they're doing a great job if your bank account is all that matters to you. If you have any concern for the marginalized, the vulnerable and society in general it's been pretty reprehensible.
 


ouro said:
What we need is a complete shift of viewpoint. Those of you old enough to remember the sci-fi of the 50's and 60's will recall machines did all the work and humanity was free to live a life of self indulgent pleasure. Well they were partially correct, only now the newly idle are vilified while the top 0.05% get exponentially richer without any thoughts of philanthropy. If no-one in the world is prepared to limit population growth (the one REAL problem, fuck your climate change), and can't think of anything labour intensive for the masses to do (you can't all be web designers or taxi drivers), we are fucked. Luckily I will be long deed before it gets too bad.
Click to expand...

Aye this too.

At the turn of the 20th century the viewpoint of a lot of the leading thinkers was that in the future machines would do the work, what with it being an increasingly industrialized economy, and people would be free to pursue a life of leisure.

However since then a tiny minority have maintained control of the majority of the world's wealth and continue to only parse out tiny bits of it for other people if they will work for it.

Unfortuantley unregulated capitalism has also ensured that a lof of people have a similar attiude to their own wealth, and it's become a vicous circle. Everyone is out for themselves, yet are simultaenously amazed when other people don't care about them and that concepts of community are falling to pieces.

The politcal/economical system has always been pretty unfair to the electroate, but perhaps for the first team the eclectroate, in Britain at any rate, basically mirror the same values as its politcal classes, of self interest and personal gain at the expense of others.
 
Well we could try and build a society based on sustainability rather than growth. I wouldn't mind living like the amish but I don't think many folk will follow suite.
 
sonson said:
Aye this too.

At the turn of the 20th century the viewpoint of a lot of the leading thinkers was that in the future machines would do the work, what with it being an increasingly industrialized economy, and people would be free to pursue a life of leisure.

However since then a tiny minority have maintained control of the majority of the world's wealth and continue to only parse out tiny bits of it for other people if they will work for it.

Unfortuantley unregulated capitalism has also ensured that a lof of people have a similar attiude to their own wealth, and it's become a vicous circle. Everyone is out for themselves, yet are simultaenously amazed when other people don't care about them and that concepts of community are falling to pieces.

The politcal/economical system has always been pretty unfair to the electroate, but perhaps for the first team the eclectroate, in Britain at any rate, basically mirror the same values as its politcal classes, of self interest and personal gain at the expense of others.
Click to expand...
As everyone downsizes I'm not sure what we're going to do with the surplus. 'More for less' has become some kind of hypnotic catchphrase.
 
We have a large world map on the wall and we're currently teaching our two year old about the different countries.

He mistakenly calls the United Kingdom, 'Krazy Kingdom' confusing it with his favourite soft play.

Ironically he is hugely perceptive.

WheyHey said:
Well we could try and build a society based on sustainability rather than growth. I wouldn't mind living like the amish but I don't think many folk will follow suite.
Click to expand...

Prof Tim Jackson......
 
sonson said:
Aye this too.

At the turn of the 20th century the viewpoint of a lot of the leading thinkers was that in the future machines would do the work, what with it being an increasingly industrialized economy, and people would be free to pursue a life of leisure.

However since then a tiny minority have maintained control of the majority of the world's wealth and continue to only parse out tiny bits of it for other people if they will work for it.

Unfortuantley unregulated capitalism has also ensured that a lof of people have a similar attiude to their own wealth, and it's become a vicous circle. Everyone is out for themselves, yet are simultaenously amazed when other people don't care about them and that concepts of community are falling to pieces.

The politcal/economical system has always been pretty unfair to the electroate, but perhaps for the first team the eclectroate, in Britain at any rate, basically mirror the same values as its politcal classes, of self interest and personal gain at the expense of others.
Click to expand...
Wealth has to be created. It's not just a static commodity. It's regulations (beaurocracy and other barriers to business ventures, plus corporate welfare) that cause many of these problems.
 
Pants said:
Wealth has to be created. It's not just a static commodity. It's regulations (beaurocracy and other barriers to business ventures, plus corporate welfare) that cause many of these problems.
Click to expand...

At what point does one think though, 'OK, I have enough, lets see if I can help others'? And I am not talking about Bill Gates laughably muddle-headed approach to malaria. He only has to look a few few short years back to find out why the relatively harmless DDT was prevented from fighting malaria by members of his own government.
 
If machines are going to do the work we could re-train to be robot mechanics, machine designers, programmers etc.

There will still be a need for service industries even if manufacturing industries are automated.

I can't see robots working as train ticket collectors, traffic wardens, checkout girls etc.
 
Stevie Freestein II said:
If machines are going to do the work we could re-train to be robot mechanics, machine designers, programmers etc.

There will still be a need for service industries even if manufacturing industries are automated.

I can't see robots working as train ticket collectors, traffic wardens, checkout girls etc.
Click to expand...

It sounds to me like you are suggesting an Aldous Huxley style brave new world where the Alphas live a life of ease while the Epsilons toil for scraps and are sneered at - oh, hold on, we are almost there...
 
Pants said:
Wealth has to be created. It's not just a static commodity. It's regulations (beaurocracy and other barriers to business ventures, plus corporate welfare) that cause many of these problems.
Click to expand...
Absolutely it does. But a prerequisite of the creation of wealth is not that a minority, something in the region of about 3% of the population, should hold the overwhelming majority of capital.

You won't be surprised to learn that I'm pretty left leaning, but I'm not going to pretend that capitalism, like Churchhill said of democracy, isn't the "worst system apart from all the others". It has provided great quality of living for more people than any other economic system has managed in history.

But it's bastardised unregulated hyper incarnation has started to push at the very edges of the concept and threatens to undo an awful lot of the equality it has brought about, because it's increasingly a tool used by those who control it for their own ends, at the expense of the majority. But the majority have bought into it, because they too want the same things, and are unlikely to object to it for the time being, meaning they become the willing drones of said elite.

Capitalism as it is now understood stands to become as oppressive and unfair to most people as all of the systems that preceded it. If this is the apex of economic systems then most of the planet will be as fucked, trapped and their lives as predetermined as those of our ancestors.
 
ouro said:
It sounds to me like you are suggesting an Aldous Huxley style brave new world where the Alphas live a life of ease while the Epsilons toil for scraps and are sneered at - oh, hold on, we are almost there...
Click to expand...

Not much difference is there? Ruling élite use alcohol on foetuses to calibrate the socio-economic groupings. People take soma and indulge in more and more outrageous behaviour....

Mix that with 1984 and the authors were pretty much spot on.
 
The trends in the past 15 years, in the UK at least, ate that rich have got richer, the poor poorer. That's an indisputable fact, and one which I think should disturb anyone concerned about society and other people in general.
 
sonson said:
Absolutely it does. But a prerequisite of the creation of wealth is not that a minority, something in the region of about 3% of the population, should hold the overwhelming majority of capital.

You won't be surprised to learn that I'm pretty left leaning, but I'm not going to pretend that capitalism, like Churchhill said of democracy, isn't the "worst system apart from all the others". It has provided great quality of living for more people than any other economic system has managed in history.

But it's bastardised unregulated hyper incarnation has started to push at the very edges of the concept and threatens to undo an awful lot of the equality it has brought about, because it's increasingly a tool used by those who control it for their own ends, at the expense of the majority. But the majority have bought into it, because they too want the same things, and are unlikely to object to it for the time being, meaning they become the willing drones of said elite.

Capitalism as it is now understood stands to become as oppressive and unfair to most people as all of the systems that preceded it. If this is the apex of economic systems then most of the planet will be as fucked, trapped and their lives as predetermined as those of our ancestors.
Click to expand...
I'm yet to see a better alternative. everything is cyclical, there is no equilibrium
 
sonson said:
Absolutely it does. But a prerequisite of the creation of wealth is not that a minority, something in the region of about 3% of the population, should hold the overwhelming majority of capital.

You won't be surprised to learn that I'm pretty left leaning, but I'm not going to pretend that capitalism, like Churchhill said of democracy, isn't the "worst system apart from all the others". It has provided great quality of living for more people than any other economic system has managed in history.

But it's bastardised unregulated hyper incarnation has started to push at the very edges of the concept and threatens to undo an awful lot of the equality it has brought about, because it's increasingly a tool used by those who control it for their own ends, at the expense of the majority. But the majority have bought into it, because they too want the same things, and are unlikely to object to it for the time being, meaning they become the willing drones of said elite.

Capitalism as it is now understood stands to become as oppressive and unfair to most people as all of the systems that preceded it. If this is the apex of economic systems then most of the planet will be as fucked, trapped and their lives as predetermined as those of our ancestors.
Click to expand...
Exactly, people have chosen to buy cheap from the big corps, rather than spread money around and go for variety or quality. The choice is still there to live life differently, but most people don't want to do that. I don't like the economy being dominated by big corps, but I'm just one man and clearly in a minority. Most people obviously do want it that way and neither you nor I have the right to stop them.
 
sonson said:
The trends in the past 15 years, in the UK at least, ate that rich have got richer, the poor poorer. That's an indisputable fact, and one which I think should disturb anyone concerned about society and other people in general.
Click to expand...
have you got data for that?
 
ouro said:
relatively harmless DDT was prevented from fighting malaria by members of his own government.
Click to expand...

Because it may have been relatively harmless to humans but it was catastropic to avifauna by causing their eggs to crumble before the chick was developed enough to survive. Now you might think what does it matter if we wipe out birds along with mosquitoes and malaria but we now know how linked and interactive environments are. Look at how wolves are changing the rivers of Yellowstone!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top