He's right though. The whole mantra of neoliberal economics since Thatcher, Friedmann and Hayek etc brought it in has been to deregulate the financial markets. Hence why 1986 is known as the 'Big Bang' for the City; as the London Stock Exchange was heavily deregulated.Why are you attempting to join in the debate when all you're capable of contributing is to disagree with someone?... whilst failing to offer any kind of reasoned response or structured counter argument?
When I look at how I grew up and became aware of my surroundings (mid to late 60's) and on my street there were 3 corner shops - one at each end and one in the middle. And a Co-op down the hill where my mum did the shopping and collected the dividend stamps. It was early to mid 70's that the supermarkets arrived and the corner shops started to go one by one. Successful independent businesses began to be taken over by larger - but still local - businesses or entrepreneurs. Come Thatcher and regional businesses were then being taken over by national companies. And of course the wicked witch of Grantham flogged all that we as the people owned off to the highest bidder via share issues... Zoom on another decade or 3 and the national companies have been bought by the global companies.
So for capitalism to survive it has to keep evolving not only new products (think of vinyl to cassettes to CD to digital or Betamax to video to DVD to Blue Ray) but also in corporations getting bigger and bigger and cornering markets.
So once a corporation is global, where can they go? They can't gain any more ground. And once technology has ran out of new products to flog us (Apple spring to mind) or the public gets wise and refuses to follow the hype and advertising and doesn't bother buying the emperor's new clothes which these products are, then we will see a change in the capitalist system.
It's sheep we're up against
I think he should be force-fed raw veal until the delirium passes.Thank god Morrissey came along to rescue you!
whats the definition of socialism you are using? its not one i recognise
Which is still bollocks.Well I've already explained in my reply that you've quoted why/how I believe the banks, corps and wealthy elite operate in an economic system that (for them at least) is more akin to a form of socialism than free market capitalism.
There’s no debate to be had. You’re talking bollocks.
Pretty well spot on there Chippy.Eventually, yes, it's unsustainable.
But it's got 100 years or so left to run imo. Maybe 200. What makes its demise inevitable is that eventually there will no longer be any need - in fact no room - for any human endeavour. No work humans can do will be of any value to anyone. And therefore no-one will voluntarily pay anyone else to do anything. No-one will be able to earn any money by doing work.
Before that point is finally reached, we'll need a different method of wealth redistribution, since the number of "have's" will be so vastly outnumbered by the "have not's" that the whole system will break down.
Wow, well you've certainly won that debate with you're eloquent and well structured response, I bow to your clearly superior intelligence and obvious expertise on the topic.