Isn't it obvious? The country is one big housing ponzi scheme and the bankers sit at the top. It's one of the few things bringing any money in and they will throw you, me and everyone else under the bus to keep the illusion of prosperity going. An Englishman's home is his cash cow.

Akabula
In response to your question;
Yes that's what I'm suggesting. Why should it be that inherently a human is forced into labour (non political sort)?
Has capitalism become the press gang of humanity?
I heard rhetoric like 'there is not price for life' yet there clearly is since health car have budgets.

So why can't humans decide to have a low cost life if chosen?
After all the following applies;

Firstly that, if everyone had the same (absolute equality) then everyone would be average.
I'd suggest that all those egos that require their lot to be bigger just for the sakes of feeling more adequate wouldn't be happy. Some people feel the need to be superior, as pathetic as that sounds.
Let people have very little and then everyone is happy.

Secondly, it's an ultimate fact that the value of workers diminish over time, and it's only pure luck and I'd suggest poor judgement that says technology makes up for the loss of jobs as the singularity progresses.
There will come a time where labour is worthless through technology so why not allow a percentage to 'drop out'?

The only real effect is we then need to regulate birth rates, but then really is it so bad to say no more than 2 or 3?

Capitalism works perfectly well on paper. When humans are added it fails, that's why every generations collapses financially because human greed (aka opportunism) leads to irregularities.
If we are set on being the topless dancer of vice over virtue then we have to have stop gaps or else we continually have short falls.

You, as all are welcome to come up with a viable alternative

Capitalism is down to competition and that leads to thriving greed and irregularities based on the harvest syndrome of humanity.

I never mentioned socialism.
So is pointing out capitalism's faults an inherent believer of socialism by default?
I see week in week out that plastic maggot cameron finger point at socialism as though it a free for all.
So we are 100% capitalism are we?
I'm sure the voting public would love to know that come voting time regarding the NHS.
Are China a fully socialist state also?
Bollox.

It was keys ionise that bailed out capitalism like it always does, but my point wasn't about socialism.
If we are to find a working medium then we can't pigeon hole.
The two have their faults, socialism is about people working for the collective but needing regulation at the top to stop tyranny and capitalism is about allowing the minority to sacrifice the majority within a finite economy with euphemisms such as 'ambition'
I didn't even tackle that in my suggestion.
I simply pointed the I'll of capitalism on contemporary's culture.

Perhaps you'd like to enlighten us which system you would favour dusty.

If all you wanted to say is capitalism isn't perfect you took a heck of a long winded way of going about it.

@dustybin
Why do you insist in littering your argument with stuff like I dont preach nor do I feel the need for power, I suggest simply from how I see things.
WTF are you getting at.

And what does this mean?
Yes that's what I'm suggesting. Why should it be that inherently a human is forced into labour (non political sort)?
Has capitalism become the press gang of humanity?
I heard rhetoric like 'there is not price for life' yet there clearly is since health car have budgets

Was the point of the thread not about value?

Does Pandora ever reply to people in the posts he starts?  It's like he doesn't have the mental capacity to engage.

What happened to opinion on this thread?
Is absence tasset agreement?
I never expected it to be that easy.

Private enterprise wants a surplus in employment to pressure wages.
The private sector never employed anyone for the good of the community they employ them soley when they make more from their work than they have to pay them.

The richest private company in the world never invented a thing. Apple took the inventions funded mostly by the public sector and profited from them.
The infrastructure and networks that business grow within where built by the taxpayer.
The private sector is like the spoilt b4stard character out of viz. it wants everything it's own way and phuck the consequences.
Well look at the consequences of kowtowing to enterprise. Every fooker is in debt and most capitalist nations are broke with huge deficits with the family silver sold off to cliches.
Ironic that the biggest growth comes from the last vestiges of socialism.

Apple never invented a thing?
I think you'll find most national debt is due to social programs or public service entitlements, the bankrupt cities in the US are generally all left wing strongholds like detroit. And most of the west is now far from capitalistic, they are nanny state politically correct positive discrimination panderers to the left.

The overspend of public funds didn't just vanish.
They ended up in the pockets of the private companies who overcharged and under performed.

What have apple invented then?

From recollection, weren't the areas like Detroit heavily indebted to the car industry which was largely state subsidised?
The car is a big ticket item, second only to the home, most buy them on tick.
Just like in Greece that were suppled luxury items on promises of payment and speculation, when things start to topple the whole house of cards come down.

Thats as much a story about living within ones means as it is a failed state funded privately listed set of corporations failing.
Ofc when you are nuts deep in the finacial sector who thrive on selling and repackaging other's debts then building sectors on the supply of such items will likely happen.
You won't hear me defend trade union thugs, its simply the other side of the human greed coin.
On Venezuela bog roll, its the first I've heard of it, but it seems something of an exceptionalist story to me.
Whether you struggle to wipe ones arse or live a whole life in servitude to those making more out of you than you do and lying about it then things are pretty desperate, but Im sure there will be something available to wipe their arses on.
We have our very own 'race to the bottom' going on over here with s hit filling every possible gap and a flooding of worthless tat, wasting resources and energy all to create vehicles to make a profit from and employ ppl......
Which brings back to the original question, why then don't we simply pay small amounts to those who don't wish to continue the facade?

Whether you struggle to wipe ones arse or live a whole life in servitude to those making more out of you than you do and lying about it then things are pretty desperate

Well no, a life of squalor, starvation, actual government oppression and no toilet paper is NOT the same as a relatively comfortable life where someone else has more than you. You're comparing bare survival vs mere envy.



why then don't we simply pay small amounts to those who don't wish to continue the facade?

socialism offers a similar proposition, a small amount to those willing to continue the facade (everyone else gets sent to the camps).

Its just like Wells's Morlocks farming the Eloi by giving them what they believe they want, while literally sacrificing them because they are weak.

interesting that you bring up debt, after the crisis brought about by the community reinvestment act and its subsequent ramifications we now see obama pushing a new snake oil for the poor, student loans.

Labour wanted 50% of people to go to university, even if the degrees were worthless.  Sounds like "prizes for all" to me, and an attempt to move away from elitism.  How you equate that with Tory ideology is baffling.