The best of capitalism is over

jcafcwjcafcw Posts: 11,282
Forum Member
✭✭
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/07/capitalism-rich-poor-2060-populations-technology-human-rights-inequality

Well according to the OECD.

It seems we are seeing the best now in advanced countries and the rest will peak by 2060.

They are predicting near-stagnation in advanced economies and World Growth pegged to 3%. They seem to feel the only way to have any growth is to increase inequality.

They also claim that we will be four times richer, more productive, globalised and educated.

There is some assuming going on here but there does seem to a bleak, although contrary, picture painted.

I wonder how close their predictions will be to the truth.
«13

Comments

  • TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    The inequality is a result of constant government/central bank interference in markets and poor monetary policy, not Capitalism. That article is shite. Almost as shite as another article that popped up on CIF, below.

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/08/the-age-of-entitlement-how-wealth-breeds-narcissism
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,232
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Inequality relies on those on the wrong end of inequality accepting that it's their own fault.

    Which depends on selling those so affected the principles of individualism.

    Young people have grown up with social media and are adept at using it, which I think will be a real challenge to the commercial media and it’s ability to convince people that they are the authors of their own fate and poverty.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 9,720
    Forum Member
    A lot can happen in 46 years.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 5,186
    Forum Member
    I doubt it.

    Capitalism never really begun.

    There's no alternative, I think.
  • paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    Peter_CJ wrote: »
    Young people have grown up with social media and are adept at using it, which I think will be a real challenge to the commercial media and it’s ability to convince people that they are the authors of their own fate and poverty.

    You people are adept at using social media and turning it into a career and an opportunity - be that with the Arab Spring or by using Twitter as a means of targeting disaster relief


    Technology is disruptive and so predictions made based on the current status quo invariably fail.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,232
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You people are adept at using social media and turning it into a career and an opportunity - be that with the Arab Spring or by using Twitter as a means of targeting disaster relief


    Technology is disruptive and so predictions made based on the current status quo invariably fail.

    Technology is disruptive to the status quo because it drives change.

    The outlook for large numbers of young people in Britain is bleak, and I can't see them accepting that for much longer.

    Most people want a job, a home, a family, and enough money to finance such things.

    Any Government in a democracy that fails to respond to that will be in trouble in the future.

    Trickle down wealth from the top of the golden Thatcherite mountain is grossly inadequate for financing the basic needs and wants of the majority, and something has to change.

    Thatcherism has been propped up by the State for far too long - it doesn't work for the majority.
  • paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    Peter_CJ wrote: »
    The outlook for large numbers of young people in Britain is bleak, and I can't see them accepting that for much longer.

    I tend towards optimism
    Most people want a job, a home, a family, and enough money to finance such things.

    Any Government in a democracy that fails to respond to that will be in trouble in the future.

    True
    Trickle down wealth from the top of the golden Thatcherite mountain is grossly inadequate for financing the basic needs and wants of the majority, and something has to change..

    What is changing is that the opportunities offered by new technology are increasing and the barriers to adoption going down. Technology is opening up opportunities for the young. It is also making it ridiculously cheap to start an enterprise, and if you need extra money then there are things like kickstarter and indigogo. Granted not everyone wants to do this or is able, but for those that do the rewards are potentially great, and it is no longer restricted to the very wealthy. Even those from fairly modest means are able to turn this into a career.
  • David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You have to laugh at articles like this...

    In the year 2060 the vast majority - if not all - of the UK population will have a considerably higher standard of living than is the case now. It'll be similar to how today's population can look back on the living standards of 1968 and see huge differences - and how the population in 1968 reflected in exactly the same way on the living standards available in 1922. By 2060 today's standards will be viewed as severe and limited and the people living today as made of stern stuff to be able to survive it all.

    Ensuring that the basic standards of living continue to improve for all is the goal - and capitalism, for all its faults, survives because that is being achieved. Tackling inequality is a political goal - tackling living standards is a humanitarian one.
  • RedunitedRedunited Posts: 1,103
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    By 2060 capitalism might cease to exist ,first contact with a extra terrestrial civilisation may happen by then. NO WAR, NO POVERTY,NO DISEASES. Unless we nuke ourselves and become extinct.
  • GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    Peter_CJ wrote: »
    Inequality relies on those on the wrong end of inequality accepting that it's their own fault.

    Which depends on selling those so affected the principles of individualism.

    Young people have grown up with social media and are adept at using it, which I think will be a real challenge to the commercial media and it’s ability to convince people that they are the authors of their own fate and poverty.

    Very true.
  • GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    David Tee wrote: »
    You have to laugh at articles like this...

    In the year 2060 the vast majority - if not all - of the UK population will have a considerably higher standard of living than is the case now. It'll be similar to how today's population can look back on the living standards of 1968 and see huge differences - and how the population in 1968 reflected in exactly the same way on the living standards available in 1922. By 2060 today's standards will be viewed as severe and limited and the people living today as made of stern stuff to be able to survive it all.

    Ensuring that the basic standards of living continue to improve for all is the goal - and capitalism, for all its faults, survives because that is being achieved. Tackling inequality is a political goal - tackling living standards is a humanitarian one.

    Well, the gap between the richest and poorest in society is much greater now than it was then, and going by the number of species that have become extinct over those years because of our activities and that little matter of man destroying the planet he is living on you are far more optimistic than I..............

    2060 - a wasteland perhaps? Still, no doubt some will still make a profit out of misery.
  • BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Peter_CJ wrote: »
    Technology is disruptive to the status quo because it drives change.

    The outlook for large numbers of young people in Britain is bleak, and I can't see them accepting that for much longer.

    Most people want a job, a home, a family, and enough money to finance such things.

    Any Government in a democracy that fails to respond to that will be in trouble in the future.

    Trickle down wealth from the top of the golden Thatcherite mountain is grossly inadequate for financing the basic needs and wants of the majority, and something has to change.

    Thatcherism has been propped up by the State for far too long - it doesn't work for the majority.

    Actually, it does work for the majority.
  • GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    Actually, it does work for the majority.

    Trickle being the operative word, you mean?
  • David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Well, the gap between the richest and poorest in society is much greater now than it was then, and going by the number of species that have become extinct over those years because of our activities and that little matter of man destroying the planet he is living on you are far more optimistic than I..............

    2060 - a wasteland perhaps? Still, no doubt some will still make a profit out of misery.

    Evidence? I ask because I just read an article the other day that said that Inequality hasn't really changed that much since the early 80's.

    I'm an optimist - I think that total human population will stabilise in the second half of this century and begin a slow decline after that. As for destroying the planet, species etc. I'm convinced the penny will drop one day. Of course we'll get there a lot sooner if there is a profit to be made from such activity.
  • TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Peter_CJ wrote: »
    Technology is disruptive to the status quo because it drives change.

    The outlook for large numbers of young people in Britain is bleak, and I can't see them accepting that for much longer.

    Most people want a job, a home, a family, and enough money to finance such things.


    Any Government in a democracy that fails to respond to that will be in trouble in the future.

    Trickle down wealth from the top of the golden Thatcherite mountain is grossly inadequate for financing the basic needs and wants of the majority, and something has to change.

    Thatcherism has been propped up by the State for far too long - it doesn't work for the majority.

    Thankfully young people have the ability to do something about it due to technology. If they cannot get a job due to a skills gap, try a course in their local college or online for free. I have taken several MOOCs and they are excellent.

    People need to realise that their fate is not out of their own hands and they can improve their own lot if they really want to.
  • RichmondBlueRichmondBlue Posts: 21,279
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What usually happens is a good war. It concentrates the mind and thins out the population.
    Peace is over-rated, there's just too many of us. Please wait until I'm gone before you start though.
  • Fappy_McFapperFappy_McFapper Posts: 1,302
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    We don't live in a capitalist society, we live in a corporate one.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,232
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I tend towards optimism



    True



    What is changing is that the opportunities offered by new technology are increasing and the barriers to adoption going down. Technology is opening up opportunities for the young. It is also making it ridiculously cheap to start an enterprise, and if you need extra money then there are things like kickstarter and indigogo. Granted not everyone wants to do this or is able, but for those that do the rewards are potentially great, and it is no longer restricted to the very wealthy. Even those from fairly modest means are able to turn this into a career.


    An unavoidable consequence of new technology will be that more jobs will be lost than created.

    Young millionaires like the founders of Facebook are few and far between.

    The wave in IT has flattened out, i.e. a lot of people who dreamed about making their fortunes are on the average wage if they're lucky. Skill shortages turn into surpluses after a few years due to the attraction of big money, which means the consequential over-supply in the market brings wages down.

    Plumbing, Double Glazing, Gas Fitting, IT, Driving Schools, Solar Energy, it's a never ending process.

    What do we see happening in some of Britain’s most successful iconic retail companies that have done well over the past 30 years - more self-service checkouts, more computerised stock control systems, and in some cases, computer points available in store so that customers can check for the availability of items.

    Internet sales have created demand for van drivers, but most will be on the minimum wage. Some companies are now using people who deliver in their own vehicles, more pin-money than a living wage. Inevitably, there are losers up and down the high streets of Britain.

    There are opportunities for selling on ebay and Amazon, but they are extremely competitive, which means profits are often small. It's the people running the platforms that make fortunes.

    Secure employment is becoming a thing of the past. Which of course gives employers the upper hand.

    This Government boasts of pushing people out of secure employment paying a living wage into insecure employment paying lower wages, it’s known as public servants to private service. Such retrograde action is seen as grist to the mill by Thatcherites. However, it often means that the State is required to subsidise the change to lower wages.

    Britain needs a more supportive and fertile environment for businesses, particularly in manufacturing, to create jobs and grow the economy, to generate funds for essential services like the NHS.

    Crops grow more readily on a farm than in a jungle.

    Modern-day politicians are generally clueless about fostering an environment for businesses to grow in, and privatisation lets them off the hook – they just throw all responsibility for growth into the laps of private enterprise. Which makes it difficult for Britain to compete with countries that are more supportive of their industries.

    One way forward would be to start a national house building program to create badly needed homes while providing training in new ways of construction so that there are jobs at the end of the training courses.

    Also, wherever and whenever possible to encourage and nurture the signs of re-shoring by various industries. Obviously this won’t suit everyone, but without a new outlook and approach, I don’t feel very optimistic about Britain providing a better life for young people.
  • solenoidsolenoid Posts: 15,495
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    A bloke down my road often pulls the inside of his pockets out when I pass him by. He is absolutely skint. This morning I saw him hoist a pair of red bloomers in his garden. You know what he's saying: "Capitalism is dead! Long live the revolution! Long live women's underwear!"
  • GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    solenoid wrote: »
    A bloke down my road often pulls the inside of his pockets out when I pass him by. He is absolutely skint. This morning I saw him hoist a pair of red bloomers in his garden. You know what he's saying: "Capitalism is dead! Long live the revolution! Long live women's underwear!"

    Or he's worried you're going to rob him..............

    As for the rest............what are you on about? :confused:
  • RobMilesRobMiles Posts: 1,224
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    A bit like Socialism then!
  • David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    RobMiles wrote: »
    A bit like Socialism then!

    ...which rather begs the question - when was the best of Socialism?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 14,922
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    David Tee wrote: »
    ...which rather begs the question - when was the best of Socialism?

    It's never been tried, not properly. The world doesn't permit it. (private money supply) Though GGP is better qualified than me to comment about it.

    Why do you, and many others, constantly rubbish socialism, or socialist views? Are your views based on theory?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,232
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Thankfully young people have the ability to do something about it due to technology. If they cannot get a job due to a skills gap, try a course in their local college or online for free. I have taken several MOOCs and they are excellent.

    People need to realise that their fate is not out of their own hands and they can improve their own lot if they really want to.

    Not much point if there is no job going - skills shortages are always grossly overstated to create the impression there is no shortage of jobs.

    Technology seeks to simplify and reduce the skills required, as with building websites, etc.

    FE budgets have been reduced over the past five years, which has received little attention as the Government have made much of the increase in apprenticeships - many of which are an excuse for cheap labour and of poor quality.
  • MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Funny how the answer to every problem in the world is more Government Spending... :D:D:D
Sign In or Register to comment.