PDA

View Full Version : Something quite sinister about the global financial crisis



Jeff Maginty
21st September 2013, 13:44
More and more I'm seeing mention in the media of how the gap between the rich (the 1%) and the rest of us (the 99%) is wider than ever. Even today I saw a tv news channel talking about how wages in Germany (supposedly the strongest economy in Europe) are really low with many jobs hardly paying enough to live on.

Seems to be the case that the global financial crisis of the last few years has actually been a bonanza for the rich, and a crisis only for the rest of us. Why are we tolerating this?

AtW
21st September 2013, 14:04
Why are we tolerating this?

Because you are a slave, Jeff. Like everyone else you were born into bondage. Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your mind.

Even now, in your room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work... when you go to church... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

bless 'em all
21st September 2013, 14:26
Because you are a slave, Jeff. Like everyone else you were born into bondage. Into a prison that you cannot taste or see or touch. A prison for your mind.

Even now, in your room. You can see it when you look out your window or when you turn on your television. You can feel it when you go to work... when you go to church... when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth.

Feck! We're in the Matrix!

scooterscot
21st September 2013, 14:35
Why are we tolerating this?

Because we admire the rich and want to be like them. No race more shallow than our species.

MarillionFan
21st September 2013, 14:59
Because we admire the rich and want to be like them. No race more shallow than our species.

The Ferangi are more shallow.:smokin

SantaClaus
21st September 2013, 20:00
More and more I'm seeing mention in the media of how the gap between the rich (the 1%) and the rest of us (the 99%) is wider than ever. Even today I saw a tv news channel talking about how wages in Germany (supposedly the strongest economy in Europe) are really low with many jobs hardly paying enough to live on.

Seems to be the case that the global financial crisis of the last few years has actually been a bonanza for the rich, and a crisis only for the rest of us. Why are we tolerating this?

This is the book for you:

The Creature from Jekyll Island : A Second Look at the Federal Reserve: G. Edward Griffin: 9780912986210: Amazon.com: Books (http://www.amazon.com/Creature-Jekyll-Island-Federal-Reserve/dp/0912986212)

BrilloPad
21st September 2013, 20:09
I believe the deperession of the 30s was caused by an imbalance between rich and poor. Its the only way the rich can be cut back to the right size.

It was due to happen again in 2008 but the rescue of the banks and QE have postponed the inevitable.

scooterscot
21st September 2013, 20:27
I believe the deperession of the 30s was caused by an imbalance between rich and poor. Its the only way the rich can be cut back to the right size.

It was due to happen again in 2008 but the rescue of the banks and QE have postponed the inevitable.

WHS -

Capitalism does not reward failure, unless you're a bank.

amcdonald
21st September 2013, 20:29
Blue pill or red pill ?

AtW
21st September 2013, 20:55
I believe the deperession of the 30s was caused by an imbalance between rich and poor. Its the only way the rich can be cut back to the right size.

WHS

In the 30s many ordinary poor people became stock owners and the value of shares was surging so fast that put in danger all the rich people whose wealth suddenly was not as high as before. The balance had to be restored, and the rest, as you know, is history.

AtW
21st September 2013, 20:56
Capitalism does not reward failure, unless you're a bank.

Or a politician.

jamesbrown
21st September 2013, 21:24
More and more I'm seeing mention in the media of how the gap between the rich (the 1%) and the rest of us (the 99%) is wider than ever. Even today I saw a tv news channel talking about how wages in Germany (supposedly the strongest economy in Europe) are really low with many jobs hardly paying enough to live on.

Seems to be the case that the global financial crisis of the last few years has actually been a bonanza for the rich, and a crisis only for the rest of us. Why are we tolerating this?

Welcome to QE. The rich have assets.

DodgyAgent
21st September 2013, 21:58
More and more I'm seeing mention in the media of how the gap between the rich (the 1%) and the rest of us (the 99%) is wider than ever. Even today I saw a tv news channel talking about how wages in Germany (supposedly the strongest economy in Europe) are really low with many jobs hardly paying enough to live on.

Seems to be the case that the global financial crisis of the last few years has actually been a bonanza for the rich, and a crisis only for the rest of us. Why are we tolerating this?
I think before you start playing that game you might like to look closely at where contractors earnings sit in the pecking order of wealth.

DodgyAgent
21st September 2013, 22:02
I believe the deperession of the 30s was caused by an imbalance between rich and poor. Its the only way the rich can be cut back to the right size.

It was due to happen again in 2008 but the rescue of the banks and QE have postponed the inevitable.

I hope you count yourself as rich.
I would thought that instead of allowing our envy to dictate policy we use our brains. Why not concentrate on making more people rich, and if we are to be poor then why not make them comfortable and give decent public services?

scooterscot
21st September 2013, 22:04
Why not concentrate on making more people rich, and if we are to be poor then why not make them comfortable and give decent public services?

If we did that then the rich would loose control over you. We don't want that.

KentPhilip
21st September 2013, 23:44
More and more I'm seeing mention in the media of how the gap between the rich (the 1%) and the rest of us (the 99%) is wider than ever. Even today I saw a tv news channel talking about how wages in Germany (supposedly the strongest economy in Europe) are really low with many jobs hardly paying enough to live on.

Seems to be the case that the global financial crisis of the last few years has actually been a bonanza for the rich, and a crisis only for the rest of us. Why are we tolerating this?

Since the "global financial crisis" the rich have not really been getting richer, at least not in the UK.
Rather most people in the UK have been getting poorer, harmed by money printing and socialist economic policy in the UK, whereas the Chinese have seen the west take a massive misstep and gone to town on their own (real) economic growth, making themselves massively rich in the process.

Doggy Styles
22nd September 2013, 10:36
Since the "global financial crisis" the rich have not really been getting richer, at least not in the UK.
Rather most people in the UK have been getting poorer, harmed by money printing and socialist economic policy in the UK, whereas the Chinese have seen the west take a massive misstep and gone to town on their own (real) economic growth, making themselves massively rich in the process.China is not as well off as many think. A large majority of Chinese are still very poor.

A lot of China's growth was driven by public spending (echos of the UK in the 2000s but on a much bigger scale), but for various reasons that growth is now slowing down.

Some serious commentators are foreseeing a crash, which won't be good news for anybody.

scooterscot
22nd September 2013, 11:53
Spot on... does this remind anyone we know chasing their million pound property portfolio?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B0OGRftqniY&feature=youtu.be&t

original PM
23rd September 2013, 07:36
You know what the biggest problem is - nobody knows

You speak to some people and China is great and America is screwed, you speak to other people and they tell you the exact opposite.

Then Germany is the financial powerhosue of Europe, then it's not.

It is just a game in my view the whole system supports itself because it exists and it cannot fail - as failure would lead to worldwide meltdown.

No one is going to call in anyone's national debt because we all know the money simple does not exists and never will..

Fooked I tell ya!

scooterscot
23rd September 2013, 08:02
You know what the biggest problem is - nobody knows

Isn't obvious? The media tries obfuscate with misleading rhetoric all the while the obviousness is there for all to see.

We've been spending beyond our means and now we're broke. That's no so much a problem as it is a reality. And the government seems hell bent on keeping capitalism following it's course.

sasguru
23rd September 2013, 08:14
What a bunch of losers inventing non-existent conspiracies to account for their failure in life.
If you want to get rich, or at least comfortable, it's not that hard if you've got a brain, take some risks, and are prepared to work hard - even better if you work smart.
I know many people who, from nothing, have got wealthy or just comfortable (i.e. not having to worry about financial issues provide you don't go over the top).
If you haven't done that as a contractor, in spite of your relatively large earning ability, take a long hard look at yourself, your spending patterns, your lack of investment strategy etc. etc. instead of whining about some elite conspiracy.

HTH.

Mich the Tester
23rd September 2013, 08:28
I think before you start playing that game you might like to look closely at where contractors earnings sit in the pecking order of wealth.


What a bunch of losers inventing non-existent conspiracies to account for their failure in life.
If you want to get rich, or at least comfortable, it's not that hard if you've got a brain, take some risks, and are prepared to work hard - even better if you work smart.
I know many people who, from nothing, have got wealthy or just comfortable (i.e. not having to worry about financial issues provide you don't go over the top).
If you haven't done that as a contractor, in spite of your relatively large earning ability, take a long hard look at yourself, your spending patterns, your lack of investment strategy etc. etc. instead of whining about some elite conspiracy.

HTH.

+1

original PM
23rd September 2013, 08:40
What a bunch of losers inventing non-existent conspiracies to account for their failure in life.
If you want to get rich, or at least comfortable, it's not that hard if you've got a brain, take some risks, and are prepared to work hard - even better if you work smart.
I know many people who, from nothing, have got wealthy or just comfortable (i.e. not having to worry about financial issues provide you don't go over the top).
If you haven't done that as a contractor, in spite of your relatively large earning ability, take a long hard look at yourself, your spending patterns, your lack of investment strategy etc. etc. instead of whining about some elite conspiracy.

HTH.

Think there is a bit of a misunderstanding here

We are not talking rich as in have a decent income maybe a few sideline businesses and so maybe assests worth a million quid or so.

We are talking rich as in more money than a medium sized country rich - and no offence guys that ain't you lot.

Once you have that sort of money and power the world is a completely different place

sasguru
23rd September 2013, 09:05
Think there is a bit of a misunderstanding here

We are not talking rich as in have a decent income maybe a few sideline businesses and so maybe assests worth a million quid or so.

We are talking rich as in more money than a medium sized country rich - and no offence guys that ain't you lot.

Once you have that sort of money and power the world is a completely different place

I get the difference - but there's nothing stopping you getting the really huge money, if you're that way inclined, is there?
Write a best-selling book, create a very successful software company and flog it for a few hundred million, climb the political ladder in a large corporate etc. etc..

As an aside, I happen to believe there's a law of diminishing returns with money i.e. the happiness derived stops or even declines after an amount which makes you comfortable, and varies from individual to individual.
And so, since I have reached that comfortable financial threshold for me, I concentrate on making myself rich in other ways than financial e.g. only working on stuff that interests and stimulates me, travelling to interesting places etc.

DimPrawn
23rd September 2013, 09:12
What a bunch of losers inventing non-existent conspiracies to account for their failure in life.
If you want to get rich, or at least comfortable, it's not that hard if you've got a brain, take some risks, and are prepared to work hard - even better if you work smart.
I know many people who, from nothing, have got wealthy or just comfortable (i.e. not having to worry about financial issues provide you don't go over the top).
If you haven't done that as a contractor, in spite of your relatively large earning ability, take a long hard look at yourself, your spending patterns, your lack of investment strategy etc. etc. instead of whining about some elite conspiracy.

HTH.

It's not often I say this but....


WSGS

DodgyAgent
23rd September 2013, 10:02
Isn't obvious? The media tries obfuscate with misleading rhetoric all the while the obviousness is there for all to see.

We've been spending beyond our means and now we're broke. That's no so much a problem as it is a reality. And the government seems hell bent on keeping capitalism following it's course.

What do you suggest?

vetran
23rd September 2013, 10:14
It's not often I say this but....

WSGS

indeed we lucky few should be able to make enough that it doesn't affect us.

However let me tell you a story:
I was at a leaving do on Friday night, one of the reasons suggested why it wasn't attended as heavily as expected was it was near pay day. I found this quite weird, that pay day was of any consequence when I was spending my discretionary 'going out money' , but to many its a lurch from one payday to the next a life of quiet desperation and deprivation.

The majority of the world are being milked to pay for that extra 0.00001 cent on a dividend.

doodab
23rd September 2013, 10:18
As an aside, I happen to believe there's a law of diminishing returns with money i.e. the happiness derived stops or even declines after an amount which makes you comfortable, and varies from individual to individual.

When you are poor, you are (in general) miserable. As you get less poor, you get less miserable, so it's not unreasonable to assume that the more you have, the happier you get, but this doesn't seem to be the case, in fact people who find themselves suddenly rich seem to settle down to much the same level of happiness they had before.

I think the important thing is not to be poor. After that is achieved, increased happiness comes from other things.

DimPrawn
23rd September 2013, 10:20
indeed we lucky few should be able to make enough that it doesn't affect us.

However let me tell you a story:
I was at a leaving do on Friday night, one of the reasons suggested why it wasn't attended as heavily as expected was it was near pay day. I found this quite weird, that pay day was of any consequence when I was spending my discretionary 'going out money' , but to many its a lurch from one payday to the next a life of quiet desperation and deprivation.

The majority of the world are being milked to pay for that extra 0.00001 cent on a dividend.

Next time there's a leaving do, email a link to Cash Lady.

Payday lender rapped for advertising £1,000 loans for 'a night out' (http://www.lovemoney.com/news/credit-cards-current-accounts-and-loans/loans/21498/payday-lender-rapped-for-advertising-1000-loans-for-a-night-out)

sasguru
23rd September 2013, 10:25
When you are poor, you are (in general) miserable. As you get less poor, you get less miserable, so it's not unreasonable to assume that the more you have, the happier you get, but this doesn't seem to be the case, in fact people who find themselves suddenly rich seem to settle down to much the same level of happiness they had before.

I think the important thing is not to be poor. After that is achieved, increased happiness comes from other things.

Yes that is roughly what I said :wink
Interestingly psychological research seems to suggest that people's happiness levels are genetic and roughly fixed.
For example paraplegics who get wheelchair-bound later in life, contrary to all expectations, after about 5 years report similar life satisfaction ratings to before their accident.
It's only recently that researchers have approached this happiness topic, strangely.

DimPrawn
23rd September 2013, 10:38
Yes that is roughly what I said :wink
Interestingly psychological research seems to suggest that people's happiness levels are genetic and roughly fixed.
For example paraplegics who get wheelchair-bound later in life, contrary to all expectations, after about 5 years report similar life satisfaction ratings to before their accident.
It's only recently that researchers have approached this happiness topic, strangely.

So are you always going to be a miserable git then?

sasguru
23rd September 2013, 10:40
So are you always going to be a miserable git then?

I'm quite happy, just cretins irritate me - when they're not making me laugh that is.

scooterscot
23rd September 2013, 11:12
What do you suggest?

First is recognising / identifying the problem.

The solution will not be pretty no matter the direction we look, it's either a sharp painful correction (we've not had it yet) or a long drawn out correction lasting decades.

scooterscot
23rd September 2013, 11:17
What a bunch of losers inventing non-existent conspiracies to account for their failure in life.
If you want to get rich, or at least comfortable, it's not that hard if you've got a brain, take some risks, and are prepared to work hard - even better if you work smart.
I know many people who, from nothing, have got wealthy or just comfortable (i.e. not having to worry about financial issues provide you don't go over the top).
If you haven't done that as a contractor, in spite of your relatively large earning ability, take a long hard look at yourself, your spending patterns, your lack of investment strategy etc. etc. instead of whining about some elite conspiracy.

HTH.

I don't think anyone would argue with that. However I'm uncertain this whether the place we now find ourselves in it more through the lack of foresight than effort. Why was it necessary for so many young people to go into higher education in media studies only to end up stacking shelves in Tesco? It seems to me too few considered the needs of industry when considering their future career & likely earning potential.

sasguru
23rd September 2013, 11:31
Why was it necessary for so many young people to go into higher education in media studies only to end up stacking shelves in Tesco?.

Are there that many media studies grads stacking shelves in Tesco? Got any proof of that? Or is it some Daily mail cliché you've lifted whole? :rolleyes: From my limited experience of Tescos I doubt the shelf-stackers have a CSE, unless of course they're Eastern EUropean.

scooterscot
23rd September 2013, 11:38
Are there that many media studies grads stacking shelves in Tesco? Got any proof of that? Or is it some Daily mail cliché you've lifted whole? :rolleyes: From my limited experience of Tescos I doubt the shelf-stackers have a CSE, unless of course they're Eastern EUropean.

It is a generalisation of course. But I full well know that as an an under graduate 126 began the course on the first year, 24 of us graduated!

vetran
23rd September 2013, 11:40
Are there that many media studies grads stacking shelves in Tesco? Got any proof of that? Or is it some Daily mail cliché you've lifted whole? :rolleyes: From my limited experience of Tescos I doubt the shelf-stackers have a CSE, unless of course they're Eastern EUropean.


You would never make the grade, you have to be nice to people.

At my local Tesco there is a Teacher, two teaching assistants and few other professionals.

They also used to employ a lady with BA honours I know.

Why?

Because they provide flexible working (they want employees in the evening when hubby can look after the kids) and not too bad a pay packet. They like well qualified employees and strive to get the best for their senior staff.

arrogant feckwitt.

doodab
23rd September 2013, 11:40
It is a generalisation of course. But I full well know that as an an under graduate 126 began the course on the first year, 24 of us graduated!

You did media studies?

sasguru
23rd September 2013, 11:43
You did media studies?

Would explain a lot. Also an FE institution that has that level of failure rate can't have been top drawer.

Old Hack
23rd September 2013, 11:43
30 started my comp science degree and 9 finished.

Drop out isn't failure. Lots couldn't simply deal with it intellectually, despite having the necessary A levels.

BrilloPad
23rd September 2013, 11:43
30 started my comp science degree and 9 finished.

Were you among them? :laugh Sorry I could not resist.....

scooterscot
23rd September 2013, 11:45
You did media studies?

No. I din't do it.

Old Hack
23rd September 2013, 11:46
Were you among them? :laugh Sorry I could not resist.....

No, narrowly missed a first as it happens. I think people study Maths and Physics and think it would be a piece of piss to program a computer properly. All they end up being good at is writing ickle scripts, not systems.

scooterscot
23rd September 2013, 11:50
Drop out isn't failure. Lots couldn't simply deal with it intellectually, despite having the necessary A levels.

Exactly. I remember some people just being baffled in a lecture and just saying 'that's it I've had enough!' and walk out never to be seen or heard from again!

Each until his or our own.

GazCol
23rd September 2013, 11:56
It's quite ironic to see this thread on a board for contractors, where even the lowest paid amongst us is likely to be earning £200 a day for at least 130 days of the year.

It's already been mentioned, but I don't think the median poster here can be accused, by the majority of society, of being anything other than rich.

vetran
23rd September 2013, 12:13
It's quite ironic to see this thread on a board for contractors, where even the lowest paid amongst us is likely to be earning £200 a day for at least 130 days of the year.

It's already been mentioned, but I don't think the median poster here can be accused, by the majority of society, of being anything other than rich.

Actually I tend to define rich as someone who doesn't need to work.

By all means we are well off (with what we earn we can live a comfortable life) and some of us are even wealthy (have enough resources we could live off them for the rest of our life). However there is a world of difference between us being able to afford to go to expensive restaurants a few times a month and the truly rich who could buy the restaurant out of pocket change.

We are a long way away from earning £12K and struggling to pay the rent but we are still not the ones receiving the wealth the workers are being milked for.

This is the trick governments & socialists manage they convince people the ones with more money than the poorest are rich and should be punished by taxation while the super rich rob the poor blind.

DodgyAgent
23rd September 2013, 12:19
First is recognising / identifying the problem.

The solution will not be pretty no matter the direction we look, it's either a sharp painful correction (we've not had it yet) or a long drawn out correction lasting decades.

It hardly needs someone with the intellect of Einstein to work out what the problem is does it?

Just for you here is a brief explanation of what the problem is::


We are bust

GazCol
23rd September 2013, 12:21
Actually I tend to define rich as someone who doesn't need to work.

By all means we are well off (with what we earn we can live a comfortable life) and some of us are even wealthy (have enough resources we could live off them for the rest of our life). However there is a world of difference between us being able to afford to go to expensive restaurants a few times a month and the truly rich who could buy the restaurant out of pocket change.

We are a long way away from earning £12K and struggling to pay the rent but we are still not the ones receiving the wealth the workers are being milked for.

This is the trick governments & socialists manage they convince people the ones with more money than the poorest are rich and should be punished by taxation while the super rich rob the poor blind.

I think not having to work is a good definition of who's rich and who isn't. It's one I use as I'm sure many others do - surely you've passed a contract at one time or another because you wanted an extra month on the bench. Not having to work continoulsly for the entire year and still being stable financially is a good barometer. Look at it the other way - what's the average retirement age for an employee in the UK, mid/late 60s? What's the average retirment age for a contractor? I'm guessing it's much, much lower.

Of course there is a difference between the rich and super rich, but the way some people have posted you'd think they're living just above the bread line.

Edit - I've lost my tangent a little bit with this post - essentially I mean the media labelling 99% of the population as poor and 1% as rich is laughable.

evilagent
23rd September 2013, 12:52
Naom Chomsky has some interesting ideas on the nature of wealth flows, and reasons for the impoverishment of the middle-classes.
Although he has a more global perspective, and US-centric, but his ideas may chime here in the UK about the growing chasm between rich and poor, global organisations and governments, etc.

Worth a google for some of his youtube lectures.

doodab
23rd September 2013, 13:00
the way some people have posted you'd think they're living just above the bread line.

Because they are closer to the bread line than the milk and honey line.

vetran
23rd September 2013, 13:13
I think not having to work is a good definition of who's rich and who isn't.

oops I did a SAS !

The Shocking Amount of Wealth and Power Held by 0.001% of the World Population | Alternet (http://www.alternet.org/economy/global-power-elite-exposed)

Also the media constantly aligns people in work in the UK with those in LEDCs. Live on a dollar a day!

d000hg
23rd September 2013, 13:24
More and more I'm seeing mention in the media of how the gap between the rich (the 1%) and the rest of us (the 99%) is wider than ever.Why are the rich the 1%, not the 10%?

And is this true? The poor (in the UK at least) can get free medical & dental treatment, free education for their children, a roof over their head, enough money for food and clothing, and even in many cases enough left over for the odd luxury.

It seems to me the poor are far richer in our country than 100 years ago.

vetran
23rd September 2013, 13:30
Why are the rich the 1%, not the 10%?

And is this true? The poor (in the UK at least) can get free medical & dental treatment, free education for their children, a roof over their head, enough money for food and clothing, and even in many cases enough left over for the odd luxury.

It seems to me the poor are far richer in our country than 100 years ago.

Depends on your definition of rich. UK is rich compared to LEDCs but <1% of people own most of the wealth in UK. Just as <1% of tax payers pay the significant amount of tax. Rich suggests you have more money than you need, not just more than most.

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/rich


currently yes UK people are richer better off than 100 years ago, however I suspect that will change. As the amount of significant tax payers dwindles then Benefits will become less generous. This is already happening but we are just borrowing to fund it. sooner or later even Wonga won't lend to us (though PFI was pretty close).

doodab
23rd September 2013, 14:30
<1% of people own most of the wealth in UK. Just as <1% of tax payers pay the significant amount of tax.

I smell unsubstantiated twaddle.

sasguru
23rd September 2013, 14:35
I smell unsubstantiated twaddle.

It's the usual suspect.

amcdonald
23rd September 2013, 14:45
It's the usual suspect.

Keyser Söze ?

vetran
23rd September 2013, 14:45
I smell unsubstantiated twaddle.

Indeed you do that is in the states.

UK: income inequalities - The Poverty Site (http://www.poverty.org.uk/09/index.shtml)

we have the richest tenth taking 31% of the annual income and the bottom tenth taking 1%.

and 40% of wealth

Richest 10% of UK households own 40% of wealth, ONS says | Money | The Guardian (http://www.theguardian.com/money/2012/dec/03/richest-10-uk-households-40-per-cent-wealth-ons)


However in the richest 1000 in the UK have raised their holdings by £35BN

Michael Meacher MP » Blog Archive » Richest 1,000 persons in UK have increased their wealth in last year by £35bn (http://www.michaelmeacher.info/weblog/2013/04/richest-1000-persons-in-uk-have-increased-their-wealth-in-last-year-by-35bn/)

which was my point, the smoke & mirrors suggest the top 10%, 20% are the problem but earning £60k is hardly being rich.

vetran
23rd September 2013, 14:47
Keyser Söze ?

The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist.

OUSQ