Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
okaycuckoo

Spiked Article On Vince Cable's Speech

Recommended Posts

I listened to most of the speech, and agreed with most of it - copy here (the funny haha stuff at the beginning was actually well delivered!):

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/22/vince-cable-full-speech

Next day the Telegraph had a comment on EVERY page denouncing Cable as as marxist. I were not happy, and flicked through for a dose of Ambrose gloom.

Now Spiked has come up with an interesting take on Cable's views - I reckon it makes too many assumptions, but I do respect the libertarian thrust:

The latest debate was prompted by a few choice remarks in Cable’s speech. He attacked bankers as ‘spivs and gamblers’ and argued that ‘capitalism takes no prisoners and kills competition’. This led the director-general of the Confederation of British Industry, Richard Lambert, jokingly to invite Cable to outline his alternative to capitalism at a CBI conference. Cable responded by saying that his comments should not be seen as ‘an outburst of Marxism’.

Cable seems blithely unaware that the great battle between capitalism and socialism is no more. The idea that There Is No Alternative to the market is almost universally accepted. But his desperate desire to curb the volatility of the market while imposing austerity fits in well with the prevailing preoccupations of today’s elite.

In popular debate, this is often reflected in the discussion of ‘greedy bankers’, in which caricatured investment bankers are unfavourably compared to mainstream business. Oliver Stone’s Wall Street: Money Never Sleeps, just released in America and out soon in Britain, is just one example of this trend. By constructing a caricatured image of ‘greed’, it implicitly makes a popular case for restraint and curbs on consumption. Vince Cable is only one peculiar example of perhaps the most peculiar trend of these times: the emergence of a new, misanthropic form of anti-capitalism. Rather than attempting to replace the market economy with something better, his goal, and the goal of many others, is to promote a restrained form of capitalism. But this new form of capitalism is even worse than the original: the proponents of the ‘new economics’ are all too eager to curb growth and development while imposing austerity on the mass of the population.

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/9656/

My objection to this is that it equates the bankers with capitalism, and assumes that banking practices are not a fraud on the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I listened to most of the speech, and agreed with most of it - copy here (the funny haha stuff at the beginning was actually well delivered!):

http://www.guardian....ble-full-speech

My objection to this is that it equates the bankers with capitalism, and assumes that banking practices are not a fraud on the market.

Cable

"But what do we do when there is less government money?"

You make sure house prices stay affordable for the average Govt worker - you Govt 'dick' brains!

And severely penalise anyone with more than one main residence!

You make sure the banks and house-selling spivs can't rig the housing market - dummies!

(But then 90%+ of Govt members were involved in fraudulant housing practices over the last decade+ & were caught with yer pants down - so what chance of any of the above being carried out? They also have their covert Vi's in place (in Govt) to make sure no laws go thru which interefere with the spivving of the housing market)

Edited by erranta

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And severely penalise anyone with more than one main residence!

What's the point? They just shift it into someone else's name. LVT and banking reform fix most problems... make it very hard to get rich in banking (why should there be rich bankers any more than there should be rich public sector workers? - it's essentially a parasitic industry).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And severely penalise anyone with more than one main residence!

Can you also send out the guidelines on residence size please, I don't want to be severely penalised when you are setting these rules up. And clarify whether my wife can own a residence at the same time as me without incurring "severe punishment".

Perhaps that the same time you can issue the guidelines on grocery purchase size. I'm taking it that car size limitation will be a given?

I'm sure it will all be fine once we have these measures in place, with severe punishment of course, for our own good.

Edited by bogbrush

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A decent analysis by Spiked, I like the way they stand at the sidelines just making astute observations about the economy and it's main actors.

The journalist is bang on about the middle classes' obsession with greedy bankers and subsequent support for austerity as the antidote. It's a rather clumsy all or nothing aproach, rather than defending the good bits of capitalism proponents are unwittingly arguing for lower standards of living across the board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cable

"But what do we do when there is less government money?"

You make sure house prices stay affordable for the average Govt worker - you Govt 'dick' brains!

And severely penalise anyone with more than one main residence!

You make sure the banks and house-selling spivs can't rig the housing market - dummies!

(But then 90%+ of Govt members were involved in fraudulant housing practices over the last decade+ & were caught with yer pants down - so what chance of any of the above being carried out? They also have their covert Vi's in place (in Govt) to make sure no laws go thru which interefere with the spivving of the housing market)

I find it interesting how you think the vi's/government can "make sure no laws go thru which interefere with the spivving of the housing market".

At best, they could attempt to keep the market stable but there is no way they can somehow make BTL profitable in the short or medium term. Prices are already high.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 145 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • 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.