Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

The top elite have too much of the wealth and no political party can rebalance that.. so what next?


Recommended Posts

I have just been watching Grayson Perry and his take on American politics. He looks a prat in a dress, but I really warm to the bloke and I think he has a good head on him and does whatever he thinks is good for him, top man. His take on the US Democrats was interesting and mirrored my views, many were self entitled free loaders and some were genuine bottom of the food chain with little chance of escaping types, and shockingly many of the Clinton fans were the rich elite who make out they care as long as they are not affected in any way.

Much of the politics in the US  were not a million miles from the UK, where a sizable minority have all  the wealth and all the power and hide behind a mask of fake compassion for the struggling and the weak. I cannot work out their size, many go on about the "top 1%" with many saying in reality it is the top 5 to 10% that hold the cards, I personally think the number is approaching 20%.

Anyone else in the UK that works between 40 and 80 hours per week, has aspiration to better themselves are mostly wasting their time with politics now useless to them if they want change. What options are there now, how do you get change in reality?

I personally think it is now a path of hard protest and probable  violence, and will I be critical when that happens........................................................................

Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether its one percent or ten, whether we have a communist government or a liberal democratic one, neither really matter because we'll never be part of the elite. Even if by some miracle there's someone with a fighting chance of creating meaningful political change they'll just be neutered by the state. 

The only exit plan is to renounce globalism as this is the cause of all these problems. But try telling people that and see what looks you get.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, spunko said:

Whether its one percent or ten, whether we have a communist government or a liberal democratic one, neither really matter because we'll never be part of the elite. Even if by some miracle there's someone with a fighting chance of creating meaningful political change they'll just be neutered by the state. 

The only exit plan is to renounce globalism as this is the cause of all these problems. But try telling people that and see what looks you get.

I could have become part of the elite in terms of making it to the tens of millions, but I chose not to to keep my sanity and health (and morals).

 

Globalism is the problem.  Bring in rules to tilt the playing field heavily in favour of smaller local operators and things will correct themselves slowly over time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, wherebee said:

Globalism is the problem

I'm no fan, but there are economists who say retreat into localism would be a bad thing, too. I don't know if they are thinking of Adam Smith's law of comparative advantage when they are saying this. At the same time, as part of Brexit, the UK is  leaving a moribund market of 400Million people and enter one with 7Billion so we are heading in the wrong direction if globalism is the problem.

I think the important thing is, rather like how sport is only enjoyable when opponents are reasonably matched, we should only trade with countries that have similar levels of technology; education; welfare standards for the workforce , animals, and the environment; and respect for the rule of law.  For example, I don't think we should buy tat made cheaply in backward countries where the building don't even stay up and men die aged fifty, and I don't think we should be selling stuff to the Middle East, where playboys think women shouldn't drive, gay people should be killed, and it is ok to chop up your political opponents.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Nippy said:

I'm no fan, but there are economists who say retreat into localism would be a bad thing, too. I don't know if they are thinking of Adam Smith's law of comparative advantage when they are saying this. At the same time, as part of Brexit, the UK is  leaving a moribund market of 400Million people and enter one with 7Billion so we are heading in the wrong direction if globalism is the problem.

I think the important thing is, rather like how sport is only enjoyable when opponents are reasonably matched, we should only trade with countries that have similar levels of technology; education; welfare standards for the workforce , animals, and the environment; and respect for the rule of law.  For example, I don't think we should buy tat made cheaply in backward countries where the building don't even stay up and men die aged fifty, and I don't think we should be selling stuff to the Middle East, where playboys think women shouldn't drive, gay people should be killed, and it is ok to chop up your political opponents.

Most trade normally occurs between two countries that are the closest together - the gravity model.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, spunko said:

Whether its one percent or ten, whether we have a communist government or a liberal democratic one, neither really matter because we'll never be part of the elite. Even if by some miracle there's someone with a fighting chance of creating meaningful political change they'll just be neutered by the state. 

The only exit plan is to renounce globalism as this is the cause of all these problems. But try telling people that and see what looks you get.

Yep, Corbyn would have been a perfect example of that taking place if he'd got in.

I'd class ''the State'' as the Banks, the Corporatists and the Globalists. 

Although I suspect it might have crossed their minds to allow him to get in.... just so they could then deliberately trash the economy, blame it all on him and his ideology, then they'd be free to install someone with an even more powerful Corporatist/Globalist agenda than what we've already got.

Edited by Royston
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am entirely with @wherebee on this in that the problem is globalisation.

Globalisation forces down the price of labour irrespective of the costs of living in a particular country.

In an expensive country like Britain globalisation's downwards pressure upon wages means that in many parts of the country a low or average waged worker will never own their own home.

I'm not bothered about the ultra wealthy because every few generations a black sheep pops up who blows the family fortune back into general circulation; mostly into the pockets of drug dealers.

Look at all the stately homes in Britain and how very few are still owned by the family which built them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Frank Hovis said:

I am entirely with @wherebee on this in that the problem is globalisation.

Globalisation forces down the price of labour irrespective of the costs of living in a particular country.

In an expensive country like Britain globalisation's downwards pressure upon wages means that in many parts of the country a low or average waged worker will never own their own home.

I'm not bothered about the ultra wealthy because every few generations a black sheep pops up who blows the family fortune back into general circulation; mostly into the pockets of drug dealers.

Look at all the stately homes in Britain and how very few are still owned by the family which built them.

I dont think its Globalisation as such, just China, whove played the West on trade since 2000.

China is bent. Until China became a player, more countries trading more resulted in, roughly, more demand, balancing.

Combine that with gormless central banks getting independence and fucking on on asset prices/real estate lending.

The the gormless fuck headedness that was the GE way and that fraud Welsch, which create the fucked in the head corporate polices since the late 80s, which resulted failure of the companies.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frank Hovis said:

I am entirely with @wherebee ...

Look at all the stately homes in Britain and how very few are still owned by the family which built them.

That had more to do with the cumulative effects of the two world wars.

The promise of improved housing and social conditions, which was broken after WWI, was paid for partly by higher death duty. This meant a lot of estaes were broken up and the stately homes were unsustainable, many being signed over to the National Trust.

WWII was a war the elites didn't have control over and many of the sons of the elite were fighting alongside the common man making them less inclined to fuck them over come the peace. Life for the common man got significantly better with pay, rights, pensions, conditions, housing and health care all improving.

It took the elites less than three decades to regroup and regain control and since the 70s the wealth gap has been wideing. Slowly but surely all the hard won gains are being reversed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, GBDamo said:

That had more to do with the cumulative effects of the two world wars.

The promise of improved housing and social conditions, which was broken after WWI, was paid for partly by higher death duty. This meant a lot of estaes were broken up and the stately homes were unsustainable, many being signed over to the National Trust.

WWII was a war the elites didn't have control over and many of the sons of the elite were fighting alongside the common man making them less inclined to fuck them over come the peace. Life for the common man got significantly better with pay, rights, pensions, conditions, housing and health care all improving.

It took the elites less than three decades to regroup and regain control and since the 70s the wealth gap has been wideing. Slowly but surely all the hard won gains are being reversed.

It was that certainly but it continues afterwards: Jamie Blandford, Marquis of Bristol, Hans Rausing, the Gettys, one of the Bismarcks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gottfried_von_Bismarck 

And earlier the third Marquess of Bute whose family essentially created the port and city of Cardiff whilst he spent his life pouring the money away.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Crichton-Stuart,_3rd_Marquess_of_Bute

It's always going to happen: generations working like Trojans to build up the family wealth followed by a dissolute waster who goes "I'm rich!" and simply indulges themself.  Thus far it's been primarily men doing this because men have inherited the bulk of the money.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been saying for a long time that SJWs and their ilk are the useful idiots of the rich, bankers etc.

So much to complain about e.g people coming out of "University" with tens of thousands of pounds of debt and no chance of buying a house and all they protest about is problems that were overcome decades ago.

All the elite need do is put out some support statement or change their Facebook avatar and they're given a free pass. They're laughing all the way to the bank.

Meanwhile white working class people are seen as the problem.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nippy said:

I think the important thing is, rather like how sport is only enjoyable when opponents are reasonably matched, we should only trade with countries that have similar levels of technology; education; welfare standards for the workforce , animals, and the environment; and respect for the rule of law.  

The difficulty would arise in how to police the regulations. Smuggling would become more lucrative and the black economy would emerge to take advantage. The sweat shops in Leicester are an example of how in the UK despite oversight and strict regulation the rules are broken in the desire for profit. 

6 minutes ago, GBDamo said:

 

It took the elites less than three decades to regroup and regain control and since the 70s the wealth gap has been wideing. Slowly but surely all the hard won gains are being reversed.

Surely it's a natural desire to hang on to any gains in wealth.  The hard won gains are being eroded because of our politicians soft heartedness with redistributive taxation. The Laffer curve shows how increased taxation results in a lower tax take as more effort will be put into paying less tax. I don't think the wealthy trying to erode the wealth gap is the cause but rather an effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The top 1% in this country pay 27% of all income taxes. They aren't the problem. The vast majority of people in this country will never be net contributors compared to what they take out, including nearly all women who are completely beholden to big daddy government via healthcare, child bennies, tax credits etc if they willing removing the man from their family unit, as most do.

The problem isn't the top 1%. The problem is socialism and globalism which prevents people joining the 1% and keeping them dependant on handouts, over 80% of families in this country claim one or more bennies. 

Sadly we live in a country where at least half the population (women) want more and more free shit without considering the true cost and a growing gimmigrant and benefit class who want more and more socialism. 

I reckon at this point we're more communist than the USSR was in its hay day.

Edited by gibbon
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, gibbon said:

The top 1% in this country pay 27% of all income taxes. They aren't the problem. The vast majority of people in this country will never be net contributors compared to what they take out, including nearly all women who are completely beholden to big daddy government via healthcare, child bennies, tax credits etc if they willing removing the man from their family unit, as most do.

The problem isn't the top 1%. The problem is socialism and globalism which prevents people joining the 1% and keeping them dependant on handouts, over 80% of families in this country claim one or more bennies. 

Sadly we live in a country where at least half the population (women) want more and more free shit without considering the true cost and a growing gimmigrant and benefit class who want more and more socialism. 

The bottom 99% pay 73% of all income taxes!

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, haroldshand said:

I have just been watching Grayson Perry and his take on American politics. He looks a prat in a dress, but I really warm to the bloke and I think he has a good head on him and does whatever he thinks is good for him, top man. His take on the US Democrats was interesting and mirrored my views, many were self entitled free loaders and some were genuine bottom of the food chain with little chance of escaping types, and shockingly many of the Clinton fans were the rich elite who make out they care as long as they are not affected in any way.

Much of the politics in the US  were not a million miles from the UK, where a sizable minority have all  the wealth and all the power and hide behind a mask of fake compassion for the struggling and the weak. I cannot work out their size, many go on about the "top 1%" with many saying in reality it is the top 5 to 10% that hold the cards, I personally think the number is approaching 20%.

Anyone else in the UK that works between 40 and 80 hours per week, has aspiration to better themselves are mostly wasting their time with politics now useless to them if they want change. What options are there now, how do you get change in reality?

I personally think it is now a path of hard protest and probable  violence, and will I be critical when that happens........................................................................

I think you have gone the wrong way. Instead of 1% I'd go for the top 0.01% holding all the power.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, haroldshand said:

where a sizable minority have all  the wealth and all the power and hide behind a mask of fake compassion for the struggling and the weak. I cannot work out their size, many go on about the "top 1%" with many saying in reality it is the top 5 to 10% that hold the cards, I personally think the number is approaching 20%.

I really believe that the reason many politicians of either/both US parties hate Donald Trump is because his honestly declared objective is to finish all that. No wonder they are terrified. Let's hope he succeeds.

About the "elite" though - don't forget that if you are a UK person posting on dosbods it's a reasonable bet that you are already in an elite. Maybe not "the " elite of 1% and such but on a global league table just imagine how far above some desperately poor Bangladeshi making a living collecting scrap from rubbish tips etc.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...