Percentage of the UK economy based in the City of London (figure quoted by David Cameron, so I must be absolutely sure that this is correct!) - 13%. The 13 sounds an ominous number. For readers outside the UK, the City of London is the UK equivalent of Wall Street in New York, home of the financial elite, international scam merchants (ever wonder that Nick Leeson's only mistake was getting found out, while dozens of others did exactly the same things and got away with it?), irresponsible gamblers and bailed-out bankers by the dozen.
Percentage of the UK population living below the (official) poverty line - 22%. That figure took a lot of finding, scouting round google. The two major political parties share the same dislike of that figure becoming public knowledge. In certain parts of the country (Tyneside, Humberside, Merseyside, parts of the West Midlands, and certain corners of London) that figure I suspect is far higher.
Economic system in place (and invariably offered as the (IMHO totally phoney) solution since the phrase first appeared around 1980) - trickle-down economics.
Meaning the 13% of created wealth creates jobs which trickles down into other jobs, meaning there is work for the people at the bottom. Given the increasing concentration of wealth in the hands of the few, you begin to wonder whether maidservants and butlers, as in the Victorian days, are going to be needed in great numbers (with the appropriate degree of condescending attitudes towards them) in the not-too-distant future. But I digress.
Definition of "trickle" (quoted from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/trickle without permission):
v.intr.
1. To flow or fall in drops or in a thin stream.
2. To move or proceed slowly or bit by bit:
v.tr.
To cause to trickle.
n.
1. The act or condition of trickling.
2. A slow, small, or irregular quantity that moves,
proceeds, or occurs intermittently
In a thin stream? Slowly?? A small or irregular quantity??? That occurs intermittently????
You want to sell me this as a working economic solution for the mass of the population?????
Only 22% of the UK population living with this appalling nonsense are living below the poverty line? How many more soon will be? It sounds (and is!) the road to poverty for the masses - frankly! Back to the Victorian era again!
Trickle-down we definitely do not need. Any other water-related images?
Flood-down economics maybe? Sounds uncomfortable (excess can be as bad as penury in its way).
Selected (Non-Biblical, I am not wasting my time with religious nonsense) definition of "flood" (quoted from http://www.thefreedictionary.com/flood without permission)
n.
1. An overflowing of water onto land that is normally
dry.
2. A flood tide.
3. An abundant flow or outpouring.
v.intr.
1. To become inundated or submerged.
2. To pour forth; overflow.
The third noun definition sounds like it. The first verb definition absolutely not!
What else. OK walk down to the Main (not now - unless getting soaking wet is your preference, the thunder will follow shortly).
Well it flows, forever and a day. No full quotes from the above dictionary for "flow", there are 21 definitions! Number 4 (v.intr) sounds good though:
To proceed steadily and easily.
Which sounds the sort of life that would suit me personally, and many others (I believe), at least economically.
A couple of final comments on this section (part 2 will follow). I am not here advocating failed systems like Communism (though frankly I think that the current version of capitalism imprisons large numbers of people in a cycle of debt, poverty and either unemployment or its twin brother, underemployment, and is scarcely much better). What we are discussing is making capitalism work for the masses, for the good of society as a whole - which is palpably not happening!
As regular readers will also know, I am a pragmatist, not an idealist. And what pragmatically does not work needs replacing by something that does!
No comments:
Post a Comment