We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Pensions

1234568

Comments

  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    MFW_ASAP wrote: »
    The 'fruits' of the labour of the workers is money. If they work in a shoe factory, they may need a few pairs of shoes a year, but they can't eat shoes, they can't live in the shoes, they can't clothe themselves in the shoes, they can't drink the shoes, they can't watch the shoes for entertainment. They therefore exchange their shoe construction labour for money. Far from the 'depriving the workers from the fruits of their labour', the rich bloke is actually supplying the workers with the fruit of their labour 'money'.

    On the other hand, the JSA bloke IS depriving the workers from the fruits of their labour (money) via taxes that pay for his JSA.

    QED.

    In the sense that money is our medium of exchange then an individual may consider they are working for money.

    However in reality they are working so they can enjoy goods and services.
    Because of the complexity of society, direct barter is unrealistic although it probably was the method used when trading was first established.

    The distinction goods and services and money becomes very clear when prices rise and wages don't. People then quickly relate to the purchasing power of their labour rather the number of notes they receive.

    In the case of the JSA lad and the rich man son, neither have produced anything to 'exchange' but both have received good and services.
    The working people have had to work for less (real) reward than if neither had existed.
  • MFW_ASAP
    MFW_ASAP Posts: 1,458 Forumite
    CLAPTON wrote: »
    In the case of the JSA lad and the rich man son, neither have produced anything to 'exchange' but both have received good and services.
    The working people have had to work for less (real) reward than if neither had existed.

    The JSA lad produces nothing, the rich man produces wealth, just like the workers produce wealth. He just doesn't have to get his hands dirty in order to do it.

    It is unlikely the rich bloke has all his wealth stored as cash. His wealth will more than likely be held in the companies his father built that in turn create the wealth with in the first place. The companies the rich bloke owns pays the workers to produce the shoes. Without the rich blokes factory, the workers could not produce the shoes, and they would be claiming JSA.

    The rich bloke provides the environment for the employees to work in, the rich man provides the tools they use to machine the leather, the rich man provides the raw materials.

    Out of interest, where do managers lie in your world? They don't actually do manual labour, they therefore don't produce anything, are they therefore also a burden on the proletariat?
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    MFW_ASAP wrote: »
    A.



    Out of interest, where do managers lie in your world? They don't actually do manual labour, they therefore don't produce anything, are they therefore also a burden on the proletariat?

    Do note that my use of words like 'labour' or 'workers' or 'working people' or 'employed' were used to mean the same i.e. to distinguish between people economically active and the economically inactive and with no political meaning.

    In this context I make no distinction between a miner, a football player, a farmer, a banker, a utilities board member, a trader, a builder, a film star or musician etc
    but I do distinguish them all from children, the retire, SAHM, unemployed and generally the economically inactive.

    My use of the word 'burden' is without political meaning but seems to be widely used in the media and elsewhere to describe the consequences of the western european 'aging' population shift.


    As you have asked, the world has plenty of labour.

    To make wealth one needs 'ideas' people, entrepreneurs, technie people (depending upon the nature of the business) and most of all good managers as well as general workers.
  • CLAPTON wrote: »
    Do note that my use of words like 'labour' or 'workers' or 'working people' or 'employed' were used to mean the same i.e. to distinguish between people economically active and the economically inactive and with no political meaning......

    Well please, therefore answer a simple question. And please answer it directly. Without obfuscation.

    You are economically active as a self employed made-to-measure shoe maker.

    I am a rich old sod who was economically active, but saved some of my earnings.

    I am thinking of buying either (a) An imported television, or (b) a pair of hand-made shoes from Clapton Leather Ltd.

    Is there any difference to you whether I choose option (a) or (b)?
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Well please, therefore answer a simple question. And please answer it directly. Without obfuscation.

    You are economically active as a self employed made-to-measure shoe maker.

    I am a rich old sod who was economically active, but saved some of my earnings.

    I am thinking of buying either (a) An imported television, or (b) a pair of hand-made shoes from Clapton Leather Ltd.

    Is there any difference to you whether I choose option (a) or (b)?



    yes..............................
  • CLAPTON wrote: »
    yes..............................

    Wonderful. :wall:
    MFW_ASAP wrote: »
    No, I'm also thinking that Clapton is on a Devonian 'muddle' windup..... Bonkers.
    MFW_ASAP wrote: »
    Christ, this is the most circular argument I've ever had on MSE!
    Martin Luther King, Jr. Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
  • MFW_ASAP
    MFW_ASAP Posts: 1,458 Forumite
    Wonderful. :wall:

    Precisely.

    So now the rich, non-worker bloke is only a 'burden' if he buys imported goods? At least we're making progress. A bit.

    Let's not get started on the mark-up on the imported TV that goes towards a wage for the UK based importer and the UK-based manager and sales staff of the TV shop he bought it from, the showroom cleaner, the security guard and the owner of the building.
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Wonderful. :wall:



    what exactly is your view on making provision for the aging population?

    Hamish's with 10-20 -30 million new immigrants?
    booking keeping entries on a bank statement?
    let them starve?
  • MFW_ASAP
    MFW_ASAP Posts: 1,458 Forumite
    CLAPTON wrote: »
    what exactly is your view on making provision for the aging population?

    Hamish's with 10-20 -30 million new immigrants?
    booking keeping entries on a bank statement?
    let them starve?

    What exactly do you mean by 'provision' (see, I'm learning - I really don't need another 5 pages of confusion!)
  • CLAPTON
    CLAPTON Posts: 41,865 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    MFW_ASAP wrote: »
    What exactly do you mean by 'provision' (see, I'm learning - I really don't need another 5 pages of confusion!)

    pro·vi·sion (pr-vzhn)
    n.
    1. The act of supplying or fitting out.

    2. Something provided.

    3. A preparatory action or measure.

    4. provisions A stock of necessary supplies, especially food.

    5. A stipulation or qualification, especially a clause in a document or agreement.

    tr.v. pro·vi·sioned, pro·vi·sion·ing, pro·vi·sions
    To supply with provisions.



    item 3 on the list
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.