Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bogbrush

  1. Consuming resources you don't have, nor have any prospect of having, but leaving obligations to others to make good on the use is nasty, selfish and cruel. I wouldn't call that religious - that's just a bit of silliness by the OP to make a political point - but I would call it very wrong.
  2. In my long experience working for and running businesses I've come across many types of people, but the ones that I've learned to identify and rid myself of in responsible positions are those who focus not on achieving something, but on a process. Sure, processes are important ways to control results, but if people cease to understand why things work the way they do, and you put them in positions of responsibility for results, you will have trouble. So it is with political leaders. Increasingly the political class is derived from the political profession. Very few have any real experience of doing anything themselves and it's unsurprising then that they have no sight of (not even lose sight of) the point of the exercise. Blair was a classic example; someone told him having an eductaed population would be good for competitiveness (correct), so he thought getting 50% into university would be good. He missed the bit out where you wondered what they were being taught, and to what standard. This guy looks to be more of the same. France - like the rest of us - cannot compete against the emergent economies full of hungry, aggressive people, and in the long run doing it off the credit card won't last. But he has no clue what that means, so taxing and hiring feels like him to be a correct action within the process of ramping GDP (a dangerous and mis-directing measure if ever there was one!). Oh dear.
  3. As you say on the other thread, this could be entertaining. It really is a great time to be selling popcorn.
  4. We can debate the wisdom or otherwise of debt reduction or stimulation, but teachers, for Gods sake? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18471239 In addition to "fixing the Eurozone economy", of course:) So it's more tax on whatever's left of wealth creation, in order to pump the state employed sector. If someone told me this was the answer to a lack of competitiveness I'd think it was a wind-up.
  5. Can you point out the bit of this that has anything to do with capitalism, or is it now just the automatic default to see bad behaviour and so label it?
  6. Rich people are cruel and evil and poor people are good and kind hearted. If everyone is happy can we close the thread now?
  7. Payday loans tell you everything you need to know about how stupid people are. No wonder they vote for parties that promise them all their stuff on credit from the future. If they can't visualise their position next week, what hope for their childrens position in 40 years?
  8. I learned to speak English from my parents. Did you wait to go to school?
  9. Why do you leap to compulsion? Why not just leave people alone ans stop telling them what they must or must not do?
  10. Fraud is when you falsely represent. If Injin says he is Douglas Adams then he's a fraud. If he says here's a copy I made of a book, he isn't.
  11. It's evolution. Goods are being provided for less, with greater convenience. This is good.
  12. So having almost 60% of my creation taken from me every year doesn't set me back? One flaw is that the state doesn't give me he option of just leaving my machines running, my supply is limited to my commercial customers needs, and then the state takes mst of the proceeds (if I take them out).
  13. This is an incredible thread. Competition is what has driven food prices to staggeringly low levels, and the same goes for cars, white goods, plane travel, etc. When did you last see your prices fall in a monopoly (think Council Tax....)? You're moaning about them presenting a printer cost in a way to pull wool over your eyes? What you need is more competition so you can better vote with your custom. Inded the refill pack mentioned looks to me like the result of...... competition.. In competing, businesses will do all sorts of things to gain advantage but in the long run the only thing that really shafts consumers is lack of competition. Some of your examples are probably more to do with oligopoly, and if there was a broader market businesses would need to attend closer to consumer demands for laity or whatever to survive.
  14. And that's the tightrope they must walk. Too far either way and they fall.
  15. Obviously this is the plan. Labour needs the credibility that comes to anyone who these guys criticise.
  16. The rate isn't 50%. For a business owner the top rate tax take of his pay is 58.5%. So this guy invests, takes risk and if it fails he loses 100% and if it wins he gets 41.5%. Yep, that's quite a lot of incentive to seek tax effective structures.
  17. I didnt suggest high street health, the high street is doomed irrespective of economic activity because it's an obsolete way of providing goods to people. The problem isn't this process. In any case, consumption isn't important, productivity is. And we are failing badly in that respect.
  18. Increasing the rate does increase avoidance. Denying that is stupid. On this scale, the contribution of higher rates is insignificant.
  19. Before people draw broader conclusions from these failures, remember that many of them are strategic failures who have been mismanaged. Thorntons is now capitalised at £6.7m (down from £200m in 1998/9) but all that reflects is their various disastrous decisions. Hotel Chocolate is doing fine. HMV is just not required any more, but people still buy music. Tesco slipped up and Sainsburys pleased customers better. those particular are all signs of health.
  20. Well bear in mind that I don't know what the application is, and I did supply alternatives. There's plenty of examples of businesses who invest in their own technology, but never mind. I sympathise, it must be frustrating.
  21. Personally, I think that taking stuff off one group of people and giving it to others who maybe aren't creating anything stinks, but it's an inevitable by-product of a system which allows all sorts of non-created stuff to be monopolised (stuff like resources, designs, ideas) and one in which a state sets up all sorts of restrictions and polices them. It's an awful system but I thinks it's one step less awful than denying people access to the methods to look after themselves, then expecting them to make do without. Oh, and to the person who said otherwise, I think Injin has made 39,000 posts consistently and clearly articulating a viable solution.
  22. It's far worse than that. Thousands of years of interaction and yet we still have people roaming around thinking that their labour has an intrinsic value and that costs create prices. By the way, if you show your software off to the World then I think you have to expect it to be copied. If I were you I'd use the software for whatever it's purpose is and keep it secret, or if you want to put it out there do some smart stuff like have it in some clever way useless without some smart release key that only you can issue. So-called intellectual property rights are nonsense and hold back wealth creation and progress. You end up with patents for stuff that really isnt very clever at all (I've seen them and been frustrated at their banality) and patents for stuff nobody even invented (like genes). Basically, absurd.
  23. A+ A small anecdotal, if I may. A while back I was talking to a buyer of a big customer of mine - a very large business. They were on about pricing methods and were totally into cost-plus modelling (where they have open book costing and all that nonsense I'd never do in a million years) whereas I kept saying that the price had nothing to do with the cost, except that if the two got too close I wouldn't be interested in supplying. After a bit she challenged me in an incredulous tone "So are you saying that if you reduced your costs you wouldn't reduce your price?" to which I replied, "no, why on earth would I? I'll reduce my price if it can be shown that it's the best choice I have - either because you can buy my service cheaper elsewhere, or you'll trade more effectively and give me more volume, or something else.". Of course I can only talk that way if I'm confident that the former scenario isn't easily available and we concluded the deal successfully for us both. The point is that it is shocking how many people do not understand the way price is found and so many continue to think that it's by adding up the costs, putting a bit on top for fun and there it is. It's shocking in GCSE level economics, but in professionals or grown ups it's beyond belief.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.