Also in the News - Part 2

[StriderHiryu]

25 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said:

You wouldn't let it lie, would you?  

You know me too well!

 

On a serious note, one thing that I am very upset about is the wealth disparity, not just here, but globally. I think to myself, if you were born after the 2000's and coming out of University or School now, what hope is there for you? You would feel helpless, property prices are out of reach, the cost of living is spiralling out of control and climate change might make it all redundant anyway. I think that because the Feudal system was present in England for over a thousand years that people here have become accustomed to it, so people just accept their lives being made that little bit worse year after year and not questioning why at the same time as that is happening, the elite gets wealthier and wealthier. To be fair, this isn't just the case here, but in many other countries too.

 

I want to state that I'm a hypocrite because it's not like I actively do anything to make a change either, because like many people, I feel powerless to make change. We see the current Government break their own rules and hand out multi-million pound contracts to their pals at the taxpayer's expense. I have my own company, a startup and the primary reason I did that is because IF it became successful, perhaps I would attain financial freedom. If this is the way of the world, and these are the rules of the game, I think it's one of the few things I can do to get out of it. It shouldn't be like that, but it is.

 

I won't go on because I could talk for hours about it. But it makes me both sad and angry.

[ozleicester]

7 hours ago, Alf Bentley said:

 

I agree with most of what you say here: your long-term historical perspective, the downward pressure on real incomes & living standards of working people, the preference for a disenfranchised working class - accompanied by clampdowns on opposition to power, often exercised mainly on behalf of wealth. I even agree that the Tories are not idiots - and certainly that it's important they are turfed out in 2024.

 

But I do wonder about the conspiracist tone implicit in saying "this is what they want". I see it more as a reaction to circumstances largely beyond their control - namely the trajectory of global capitalism, particularly that GDP growth in the West has shrunk to very low levels in the last 40 years, compared to the period from the industrial revolution until the 1970s. That reaction to circumstances is massively damaging for most of us, but I see it less as something "they want" and more as the opportunistic use of power (which largely belongs to the wealthy, directly or indirectly) to protect and promote the interests of wealth/capital. The pie is barely growing, so by political and economic means the wealthy are ensuring they still keep getting a bigger slice - that income growth for capital continues - by snaffling some of the slice previously claimed by labour. Rewards for capital and senior executives serving their interests continue to grow (profits, dividends, fat cat pay), while real incomes & social provision for most working people decline.

 

@ozleicester posted an excellent graph before showing this, which I wish he'd fish out again (I can't find it). It basically shows how, over recent decades the share of GDP going to labour (working people) has been falling and the share going to capital (the owners of wealth in multiple forms) has been rising. Sometimes, growth has meant that the income of working people has still risen slowly, but latterly (esp. last 15 years), real working incomes have mainly been stagnant or falling. Apart from during short-term crises like WW1, WW2 & economic crashes, this simply wasn't happening during the previous 150 years or so. In the West, at least, this is a new, different phase of global capitalism - different dynamics are at play in the developing world.

 

The Tories aren't stupid, you're right - at least, not stupid as regards promoting the interests of those they mainly represent (those with wealth in various forms). One thing they've been exceptionally good at for decades is to retain power by winning the votes of people who don't necessarily benefit from policies and economics being skewed in favour of wealth/capital. Promoting traditional, small-c conservative values was always a part of this, as many people on low incomes share those values. Latterly, through, diverting blame for people's crap living standards away from wealth/capital and onto scapegoats has become increasingly important. Blaming EU migrants and the EU, leading to Brexit, was one example of this. The recent focus on "small boats" is another such diversion. I'd say that the populist attack on "pointless degrees" is another opportunistic move - they know it will appeal to a lot of resentful, reactionary people, particularly grumpy old folk or those whose lives are a bit crap.

 

 

This argument reminds me of a 1st-year uni essay that I wrote 30 years ago (I got an A-grade ): " 'What the bourgeoisie creates above all are its own gravediggers' - Marx. Discuss". Marx's theory, as I recall, was that competition and other factors (mechanisation?) would lead capitalists to force down the real incomes/conditions of workers, causing them to band together, have a revolution, establish socialism and then communism etc. What I argued - and your argument seems similar, Jon - was that Marx didn't anticipate the fruits of long-term economic growth (partly achieved through empire) or the willingness of capital to give some of those fruits to labour in the form of almost continuously rising living standards. Capital could do this, as continuous growth meant that their own income was also continuously rising - and rising living  standards for all created beneficial stability.

 

I think that used to be a valid argument - certainly at least until the 70s and I'll forgive myself for not noticing things had started to change by 1992, when I wrote my essay.  But I think things  have changed now. Whereas growth once meant that working people benefited from capitalism via improving living standards, that is no longer the case - due to slow growth and redistribution of income from working people to the owners of wealth/capital.

 

Whether that means that Marx might yet be right - that people might band together to overthrow a system that no longer benefits them, I'm not so sure....if we don't watch out, given social fragmentation & misuse of social media, it could mean increasing crime and anarchy and/or increasingly authoritarian governments working to benefit the interests of capital - increasingly using the stick and not the carrot to keep working people (or those displaced by AI) on board to make money for the moneyed classes. Russia and China already have versions of such authoritarian, anti-democratic regimes benefiting the wealthy. The USA under Trump creaked loudly and almost started down the same path. The creaks in the UK have been less loud so far, but have been increasingly evident since 2019, especially under Johnson. That's something that scares me, even if the Tories get booted out next year. Starmer seems determined to govern alone, not in alliance with the LDs and not to legislate for electoral reform (hope I'm wrong about that). Our economy is in such a bad way  and the structural factors (low growth, aging demographics etc.) are such that, even if Labour wins in 2024 AND does a great job, a big IF, the country will probably still be in a mess in 2029 and there's every chance that Labour gets blamed, booted out and replaced by....what?

 

 

 

An exceptionally good question. Also, a strong argument for AI to be controlled by democratic politics at an international and/or global level, rather than being controlled by laissez-faire economics, I'd say. That way, we might be able to get the potential benefits of AI (including, perhaps, greater green economic growth) and the opportunity to plan appropriate policy changes, without the potential economic, social and personal disasters of millions out of work, even greater wealth inequality, crime, insecurity, poverty and social disorder. But when economics and finance operate globally and democracy and politics only operate nationally or regionally, I can't say that I'm optimistic about that happening - capital is more powerful than democracy....

 

If we're not careful, AI could just be an accelerated phase in the proportional redistribution of wealth and power from labour to capital - perhaps with capital also suffering negative growth, but thriving through lower costs and higher profit margins, supplemented by authoritarian governments serving their interests?

 

That might all be bollocks, though.....  

This one?

 

or

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, ozleicester said:

This one?

 

or

 

It was a different one that you posted before, showing the share of labour and capital going in opposite directions over recent decades.....but this one illustrates the same point using the trajectory for labour alone.

Thanks! 

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

You know me too well!

 

On a serious note, one thing that I am very upset about is the wealth disparity, not just here, but globally. I think to myself, if you were born after the 2000's and coming out of University or School now, what hope is there for you? You would feel helpless, property prices are out of reach, the cost of living is spiralling out of control and climate change might make it all redundant anyway. I think that because the Feudal system was present in England for over a thousand years that people here have become accustomed to it, so people just accept their lives being made that little bit worse year after year and not questioning why at the same time as that is happening, the elite gets wealthier and wealthier. To be fair, this isn't just the case here, but in many other countries too.

 

I want to state that I'm a hypocrite because it's not like I actively do anything to make a change either, because like many people, I feel powerless to make change. We see the current Government break their own rules and hand out multi-million pound contracts to their pals at the taxpayer's expense. I have my own company, a startup and the primary reason I did that is because IF it became successful, perhaps I would attain financial freedom. If this is the way of the world, and these are the rules of the game, I think it's one of the few things I can do to get out of it. It shouldn't be like that, but it is.

 

I won't go on because I could talk for hours about it. But it makes me both sad and angry.

It's totally understandable to think it's "too big" a problem - but look at it this way: change is going to be, in a way already is being, forced upon those with more power - as Alf mentions, they appear to be backsliding to increasingly authoritarian means to try to maintain that power, but such methods aren't going to hold as the world changes further, not if the powers that be want to maintain their own standard of luxury. Put simply, our civilisation won't be able to stand such a disparity between the "have's" and "have-nots" running on laissez-faire given the way we are advancing technologically and the way the Earth is changing, so either there is a change in governmental methods in a lot of places...or the whole thing comes tumbling down. I would wonder which the ultra-powerful would prefer.

 

Also, good to see you posting big again @Alf Bentley. It's been far too long.

[Daggers]

On 13/07/2023 at 19:02, Wymsey said:

For what?

There you go, a fuller explanation of what Wooton's been up to

 

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/07/17/gb-news-star-dan-wootton-unmasked-in-cash-for-sexual-images-catfishing-scandal/

[st albans fox]

19 minutes ago, Daggers said:

There you go, a fuller explanation of what Wooton's been up to

 

https://bylinetimes.com/2023/07/17/gb-news-star-dan-wootton-unmasked-in-cash-for-sexual-images-catfishing-scandal/

I’ve seen some stuff that the primary informant is not reliable 

[Bellend Sebastian]

7 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I’ve seen some stuff that the primary informant is not reliable 

Rupert is getting on a bit, it's true

[Bellend Sebastian]

Is Petronella Wyatt being thick to take the heat off Dan Wootton?

[Daggers]

It’s another glorious day in Tory Central Office

 

 

[The Horse's Mouth]

Sir Kid Starver is probably the best political slander name in some time 

[Zear0]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66236837

 

[leicsmac]

12 minutes ago, Zear0 said:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66236837

 

Indictment, arrest, conviction and time in the big house, hopefully.

[Lionator]

These barges, surely they’re illegal? I know they want them to be a deterrent, but people won’t be able to go outside, won’t be able to leave the barge etc, that sounds like prison/an internment camp to me? 

[Wymsey]

The barge looks like student accommodation, that is feeling a bit sorry.

[Daggers]

The UK has become the global version of Millwall.

[Zear0]

19 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

The barge looks like student accommodation, that is feeling a bit sorry.

Probably get Jane McDonald performing on it to really torture the poor souls.

[st albans fox]

45 minutes ago, Lionator said:

These barges, surely they’re illegal? I know they want them to be a deterrent, but people won’t be able to go outside, won’t be able to leave the barge etc, that sounds like prison/an internment camp to me? 

Report I heard said that people could leave the barge 

[kenny]

5 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Report I heard said that people could leave the barge 

It's the same as any other centre I think, it's just quicker to build as it exists already.

[Parafox]

8 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

Report I heard said that people could leave the barge 

[weller54]

1 hour ago, Lionator said:

These barges, surely they’re illegal? I know they want them to be a deterrent, but people won’t be able to go outside, won’t be able to leave the barge etc, that sounds like prison/an internment camp to me? 

Despicable, horrible, immoral Poxy Tories for you 🤬🤬

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

Report I heard said that people could leave the barge 

Fair, just seems like a horrendous waste of money, resources when creating safe routes and then processing more people, more quickly seems to be the obvious solution. 

[Zear0]

24 minutes ago, Lionator said:

Fair, just seems like a horrendous waste of money, resources when creating safe routes and then processing more people, more quickly seems to be the obvious solution. 

Suspect it's painfully popular policy and is aimed at the electorate ahead of next year. Same with Kier backing the two child benefit cap. They're just backing vote winning policies rather than actually fixing problems now. 

[Dunge]

2 hours ago, Lionator said:

These barges, surely they’re illegal? I know they want them to be a deterrent, but people won’t be able to go outside, won’t be able to leave the barge etc, that sounds like prison/an internment camp to me? 

I’m not convinced they are, when the argument will be that the migrants can just “go home” anytime. They’ll get challenged in the courts of course, so we’ll find out one way or another.

 

However, my money’s on there ending up being more of them, that it will play well to right wing voters and give Starmer an argument at the next election.

[Wymsey]

The migrants who are set to live in them, how are they chosen?

What's going to happen to the rest of them who couldn't get a room?

Which nation will be responsible for paying for the barge service, or any more than may be built in the future - or is it half-half between two countries?

 

Too many questions that need answering, let alone national security..

[Wymsey]

Am not surprised about the McDonald's groping etc. allegations..

 

You look at some of the people behind the counter and think a couple of the staff don't seem all there (no offence to those on here that may work there presently..).

 

Has anyone got any McDonald's stories?

Edited 18 July 2023 by Wymsey