31–40 of 52 posts
Then again "vulnerable" is an extremely popular word in the UK media this year, and nobody's ever precise about what it means, so maybe it's all meaningless, I don't know.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's also remarkable how efficient it is at creating wealth for people willing to forego some immediate gratification. My parents had over $1 million saved when they retired, and had never earned 6 figures in a year, combined. How? Investing a little every month in index funds in an IRA. Aside from that they also put two kids through college. But yes, if you decide to spend every dollar you earn, capitalism will happ…
The point is, most of the struggling working class do not have the spare cash to invest in anything.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really is remarkable how efficient capitalism is at ensuring that proles are born with nothing and die with nothing. Every tiny bit of surplus beyond maintenance of the body is siphoned away into the pockets of the capital class.
>It really is remarkable how efficient capitalism is at ensuring that proles are born with nothing and die with nothing. Compared to what?
This has traditionally been the position in Judaism, Christianity and Islam (and I think many tribal societies would greatly frown upon it).
would it mean that rents are not going to increase because people are not going to pay for it?
It could also mean that they cut back on vacations and other ancillary spending.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It really is remarkable how efficient capitalism is at ensuring that proles are born with nothing and die with nothing. Compared to what?
Who says he's comparing it to anything? Maybe the remark is not about contrasting capitialism to some other system, but more about comparing its purported benefits to its actual outcome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>It really is remarkable how efficient capitalism is at ensuring that proles are born with nothing and die with nothing. Compared to what?
Who says he's comparing it to anything? Maybe the remark is not about contrasting capitialism to some other system, but more about comparing its purported benefits to its actual outcome.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It really is remarkable how efficient capitalism is at ensuring that proles are born with nothing and die with nothing. Every tiny bit of surplus beyond maintenance of the body is siphoned away into the pockets of the capital class.
It's also remarkable how efficient it is at creating wealth for people willing to forego some immediate gratification. My parents had over $1 million saved when they retired, and had never earned 6 figures in a year, combined. How? Investing a little every month in index funds in an IRA. Aside from that they also put two kids through college. But yes, if you decide to spend every dollar you earn, capitalism will happ…
In Europe the tax system works very different, e.g in The Netherlands they would tax you ~1.2% on the return of your stock investment tax plus the other taxes that you would pay means that for middle class incomes saving 1 million is basically impossible.
I assume that GB works exactly the same.
I mean, that's $780 per year. I don't know what the, er, lowest hexile in the UK makes, but surely it's no better than $30k per year, right? And in fact probably much worse. So they'd struggle if they suddenly had expenses that were 2.5% of their income or more? That doesn't seem revelatory.
That's a feature of capitalism, not a bug. Can't leave money on the table.
It really is remarkable how efficient capitalism is at ensuring that proles are born with nothing and die with nothing. Every tiny bit of surplus beyond maintenance of the body is siphoned away into the pockets of the capital class.
Specifically, it's done an effective job on poor white, poor black men of Caribbean descent and poor Muslims (esp women) of Asian descent.
It's conspicuously failed to keep down poor Asians of Indian or Chinese descent and poor blacks of African descent.
Of course, there are some nay sayers who think that our brand of capitalism might not be the only reason for the persistence of poverty. There have, for example, been rumours that the cultural value of education correlates suspiciously well. Educational attainment definitely does (see ONS stats on same).
Fortunately, we all know that correlation is not causation. It follows, therefore, that no correlation is causation so it's probably capitalism. Unless it's racism. Yeah, it's probably racism.