Doctors, lawyers, teahcers, intellectuals, businessmen, journalists:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

I wouldn't disagree that the economy is unbalanced, but it's a peculiarly socialist idea that the way you rebalance it is by smashing the successful bit so it's a similar size to the less successful bit. Most people would suggest trying to boost the less successful bit so it gets nearer parity.

And please don't let's talk about 'the real economy'. It doesn't exist. It's not a thing. Anything that makes money is 'the economy'.

---

I think the problem is the direction of investment from the sector. Investment in fake money that no-one really understands or can control (like toxic debts) is surely not as 'real' as investing in, for example, a high-tech manufacturing plant that makes real things that won't suddenly evaporate overnight when a bubble of fantasy and speculation explodes.

Whether it is possible or practical to direct or encourage the financial sector to invest in such a way I don't know. Market-fetishist dogma says no and perhaps that is true, but I don't think the idea is to smash the sector, as for it to function in a better way overall. We have discussed before that TfL is an organisation that works pretty well on the whole for a collective rather than a private interest, and there are doubtless other examples to suggest that it may be possible to run things more rationally than the pure market permits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ash

I think the problem is the direction of investment from the sector. Investment in fake money that no-one really understands or can control (like toxic debts) is surely not as 'real' as investing in, for example, a high-tech manufacturing plant that makes real things that won't suddenly evaporate overnight when a bubble of fantasy and speculation explodes.

Whether it is possible or practical to direct or encourage the financial sector to invest in such a way I don't know. Market-fetishist dogma says no and perhaps that is true, but I don't think the idea is to smash the sector, as for it to function in a better way overall. We have discussed before that TfL is an organisation that works pretty well on the whole for a collective rather than a private interest, and there are doubtless other examples to suggest that it may be possible to run things more rationally than the pure market permits.

---

Make the trains run on time, that sort of thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ash

I think the problem is the direction of investment from the sector. Investment in fake money that no-one really understands or can control (like toxic debts) is surely not as 'real' as investing in, for example, a high-tech manufacturing plant that makes real things that won't suddenly evaporate overnight when a bubble of fantasy and speculation explodes.

Whether it is possible or practical to direct or encourage the financial sector to invest in such a way I don't know. Market-fetishist dogma says no and perhaps that is true, but I don't think the idea is to smash the sector, as for it to function in a better way overall. We have discussed before that TfL is an organisation that works pretty well on the whole for a collective rather than a private interest, and there are doubtless other examples to suggest that it may be possible to run things more rationally than the pure market permits.

---

Yeah. It has to be said that the track record for this sort of thing isn't great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redgunamo

Make the trains run on time, that sort of thing?

---

And more of them.

Now, for some reason I quite fancy invading Abyssinia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ash

And more of them.

Now, for some reason I quite fancy invading Abyssinia.

---

:nod: #****hole #MAbyssiniaGA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

Well, no, not really. I would point you at how many people are employed by the financial services sector. How many mouths it feeds, how many mortgages it pays, how much disposable income it creates that is spent on goods and services that in turn employ, feed, clothe and house millions.

That's who suffers. Everyone.

---

So it IS supposed to be successful for those other than the shareholders? I thought you said it wasnt.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Burney

Yeah. It has to be said that the track record for this sort of thing isn't great.

---

oooh....track record. Very good, b :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

So it IS supposed to be successful for those other than the shareholders? I thought you said it wasnt.....

---

I think it's more that the shareholders is everybody. Or, as the man said, everyone has a share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by redgunamo

I think it's more that the shareholders is everybody. Or, as the man said, everyone has a share.

---

Then we must all benefit, and we must all have a say.

Hence Corbyn is right.

Agreed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peter

So it IS supposed to be successful for those other than the shareholders? I thought you said it wasnt.....

---

No. Simply that what is good for business is good for everyone.