Brexit - or Article 50: the Phoenix!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hobbit said:
Why does capitalism need growth? If the idea is to make £100 from a product with a 20% net profit for reinvestment and share dividends, why do you need to make more next year?
Click to expand...
His point was regarding the use of increased population as a means to increase fiscal growth. It can never end well.
 
SocketRocket said:
Maybe the answer is to reduce demand.
Click to expand...
Unless done on a global level then this would most likely lead to shrinkage of the Economy and a localised recession.
I wouldn't overly worry though, Climate Change will bring about its own economic change on a Global scale. If you think immigration is bad now, just wait till the Sea Level rises and mass population migration starts 😂
 
Hobbit said:
Why does capitalism need growth? If the idea is to make £100 from a product with a 20% net profit for reinvestment and share dividends, why do you need to make more next year?
Click to expand...
chrisd said:
Add to that the alternative to capitalism isn't exactly a benefit to the average worker
Click to expand...
Totally agree!

UK's approach definitely seems tobe a 'gentle' form of capitalism! Where Profit is Ok. but within bounds!
 
Last edited:
Hobbit said:
Why does capitalism need growth? If the idea is to make £100 from a product with a 20% net profit for reinvestment and share dividends, why do you need to make more next year?
Click to expand...
Population growth requires Economic growth. However, once the Government outspends its incoming (deficit and debt), then population growth is required to offset the debt. A bit like a giant Ponzi scheme.
Now then, if we follow Malthus' predictions then we would inevitably run up against the finite limits of our planet. However, if we follow Marx' approach, the onset of automation would result in mass unemployment and therefore no one would have the money to spend on the goods produced. Either way, Capitalism in its current form is doomed (eventually) to eat itself.
The most likely possible solution is a period of global population shrinkage and the writing off of National debts. Capitalism could then be rebooted in a responsible way. Big corporations probably wouldn't like it though 😂

Note. Please forgive the overly concise nature of the post. I'm struggling to think whilst working from home....
 
bluewolf said:
Population growth requires Economic growth. However, once the Government outspends its incoming (deficit and debt), then population growth is required to offset the debt. A bit like a giant Ponzi scheme.
Now then, if we follow Malthus' predictions then we would inevitably run up against the finite limits of our planet. However, if we follow Marx' approach, the onset of automation would result in mass unemployment and therefore no one would have the money to spend on the goods produced. Either way, Capitalism in its current form is doomed (eventually) to eat itself.
The most likely possible solution is a period of global population shrinkage and the writing off of National debts. Capitalism could then be rebooted in a responsible way. Big corporations probably wouldn't like it though 😂

Note. Please forgive the overly concise nature of the post. I'm struggling to think whilst working from home....
Click to expand...

I don't doubt population growth needs economic growth but does that require a % profit growth? 10% 0f £100 = £10. 10% of £200 = £20. If there are only 100 shares requiring a 4% dividend, irrespective of population size, why would you need £20? Extra population will increase demand, which will require more investment, e.g. a bigger plant. The 10% 0f £200 will cover the increased cost. There's no need to chase a % profit growth. And profit growth has to be finite(capped) or there'll be inflation.

Does increased population become a vicious circle in terms of economics? More people require greater infrastructure spending, e.g. schools and hospitals. But if the people coming in are contributing £1bn but the cost of school and hospital places = £1.5bn... Mmm, not a discussion I want to pursue as this gets a little too close to a UKIP debate. Or does it? Is it just a fact that more people require more infrastructure but if their contribution is less than required, e.g. if a large percentage of them do low paid work...
 
Hobbit said:
I don't doubt population growth needs economic growth but does that require a % profit growth? 10% 0f £100 = £10. 10% of £200 = £20. If there are only 100 shares requiring a 4% dividend, irrespective of population size, why would you need £20? Extra population will increase demand, which will require more investment, e.g. a bigger plant. The 10% 0f £200 will cover the increased cost. There's no need to chase a % profit growth. And profit growth has to be finite(capped) or there'll be inflation.

Does increased population become a vicious circle in terms of economics? More people require greater infrastructure spending, e.g. schools and hospitals. But if the people coming in are contributing £1bn but the cost of school and hospital places = £1.5bn... Mmm, not a discussion I want to pursue as this gets a little too close to a UKIP debate. Or does it? Is it just a fact that more people require more infrastructure but if their contribution is less than required, e.g. if a large percentage of them do low paid work...
Click to expand...
Globalisation has put paid to that situation. Profit growth is now the holy grail. This results in further automation, more low skilled work, more unemployment, higher welfare costs, massive redistribution of money from the poorest to the wealthiest, more government debt, more immigration required (to offset the low birth rate now that both parents have to work), etc.

So, yes, it's a vicious circle 😂
 
SocketRocket said:
And the larger population create greater and greater demand for ever scarcer resources . It can never end up well.
Click to expand...
It can't, but it's a cycle we're currently locked in and I don't see a way out of it without fairly cataclysmic economic results.
We're in a race to the bottom and we're sucking in people from other countries to relatively strengthen us. If you think that things are bad now, just see what it's like in 20 years. It'll make your eyes water.
 
bluewolf said:
It can't, but it's a cycle we're currently locked in and I don't see a way out of it without fairly cataclysmic economic results.
We're in a race to the bottom and we're sucking in people from other countries to relatively strengthen us. If you think that things are bad now, just see what it's like in 20 years. It'll make your eyes water.
Click to expand...
No easy fix. Reducing immigration to levels that reduce population, discouraging large family size, higher taxation and better social care. The blip in the aging population will subside due to the current halt and subsequent fall in life expectancy. Start manufacturing more and purchase our own products. It will all probably end up in tears but hey ho ita nearly Chrimbo.
 
SocketRocket said:
No easy fix. Reducing immigration to levels that reduce population, discouraging large family size, higher taxation and better social care. The blip in the aging population will subside due to the current halt and subsequent fall in life expectancy. Start manufacturing more and purchase our own products. It will all probably end up in tears but hey ho ita nearly Chrimbo.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, almost every step you've listed above will see us crippled as an economy unless it's a Global movement.

The point regarding Life Expectancy is startling on its own. When investigated deeper it shows that life expectancy is significantly reducing in poorer areas, but rising in wealthier ones.

And, in order to be able to afford our own manufactured goods, we'd have to reduce wages by around 90%. Unfortunately, this would then mean that we still couldn't buy them as we'd all be saving every penny for our gruel.

In short, either we all start to come together Globally or we're fecked. Thank God we're in an economic and political partnership with all our nearest neighbours................

Ooooops.............
 
Just listening to the news .. arrrghh.. the cloak and dagger mating ritual at Westminister.. what a bloody charade.

My fiver still on the deal going thru.. all this is just posturing ..
 
bluewolf said:
Unfortunately, almost every step you've listed above will see us crippled as an economy unless it's a Global movement.

The point regarding Life Expectancy is startling on its own. When investigated deeper it shows that life expectancy is significantly reducing in poorer areas, but rising in wealthier ones.

And, in order to be able to afford our own manufactured goods, we'd have to reduce wages by around 90%. Unfortunately, this would then mean that we still couldn't buy them as we'd all be saving every penny for our gruel.

In short, either we all start to come together Globally or we're fecked. Thank God we're in an economic and political partnership with all our nearest neighbours................

Ooooops.............
Click to expand...

There's an interesting debate to be had about life expectancy. For example, one of the reasons for the drop is the reduced number of centenarians because of world war 1. Another reason is the flu in both 2016 and 2017 was worse than usual, and the winters harder.

Equally, there are those that said austerity is a reason not to be ignored. But if that is the case, why did expectancy continue to rise from 2008, that start of the crash, right the way through to 2016, 8 years later? Business conditions, closures and redundancies started climbing in Aug 2008 but were back to pre-Aug 2008 levels by Oct 2009. Employment is at its best number in over 40 years. Homelessness has risen year on year for the last 8 years, and by significant numbers too...

One thing's for sure, a different government is required. Whether thats Conservative or other I don't care. But a change is needed.
 
Last edited:
bluewolf said:
Unfortunately, almost every step you've listed above will see us crippled as an economy unless it's a Global movement.

The point regarding Life Expectancy is startling on its own. When investigated deeper it shows that life expectancy is significantly reducing in poorer areas, but rising in wealthier ones.

And, in order to be able to afford our own manufactured goods, we'd have to reduce wages by around 90%. Unfortunately, this would then mean that we still couldn't buy them as we'd all be saving every penny for our gruel.

In short, either we all start to come together Globally or we're fecked. Thank God we're in an economic and political partnership with all our nearest neighbours................

Ooooops.............
Click to expand...
The life expectancy situation is only starting its downward trend. , obesity, diabetes, heart and liver desease are the way forward and there are more in the proletariat than the Bullington Club.

I purchased a very nice pint of Doombar at £2.50 in a local hostilary today, a very good British steak from Lidl that didnt max out the bank card all while wearing my UK made Burbry coat and Clarks shoes. If it all loaded my wallet by 90% I didn't notice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tashyboy
Party holes at golf comps.
2
Replies
34
Views
1K
Pin-seeker
Pin-seeker
Don Barzini
Christmas 2025
14 15 16
Replies
319
Views
9K
kp17
kp17
Lucifer MorningStar
Best clubs of all time (Probably)
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
srixon 1
srixon 1
B
Ping 7 wood head shortage.
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
KenL
KenL
VVega
What age is your Seniors?
2
Replies
21
Views
1K
Arthur Wedge
Arthur Wedge
Top