Boris Eulogies The Super-Rich

[1929crash]

The Mayor of London has gone off the deep end, but people will forgive him because he is only being Boris.

The great thing about being Mayor of London is you get to meet all sorts. It is my duty to stick up for every put-upon minority in the city – from the homeless to Irish travellers to ex-gang members to disgraced former MPs. After five years of slog, I have a fair idea where everyone is coming from.

But there is one minority that I still behold with a benign bewilderment, and that is the very, very rich. I mean people who have so much money they can fly by private jet, and who have gin palaces moored in Puerto Banus, and who give their kids McLaren supercars for their 18th birthdays and scour the pages of the FT’s “How to Spend It” magazine for jewel-encrusted Cartier collars for their dogs.

I suspect that the answer, as Solon pointed out to Croesus, is not really, frankly; or no happier than the man with just enough to live on. If that is the case, and it really is true that having stupendous sums of money is very far from the same as being happy, then surely we should stop bashing the rich.

Nor, of course, is that the end of their contribution to the wider good. These types of people are always the first target of the charity fund-raisers, whether they are looking for a new church roof or a children’s cancer ward. These are the people who put bread on the tables of families who – if the rich didn’t invest in supercars and employ eau de cologne-dabbers – might otherwise find themselves without a breadwinner. And yet they are brow-beaten and bullied and threatened with new taxes, by everyone from the Archbishop of Canterbury to Nick Clegg.

The rich are resented, not so much for being rich, but for getting ever richer than the middle classes – and the trouble is that the gap is growing the whole time, and especially has done over the past 20 years. It is hard to say exactly why this is, but I will hazard a guess. Of all the self-made super-rich tycoons I have met, most belong to the following three fairly exclusive categories of human being:

http://libertyblitzkrieg.com/2013/11/26/londons-mayor-says-we-should-thank-the-super-rich-calls-them-tax-heroes-and-compares-to-the-homeless-and-irish-travelers/

[billybong]

Nor, of course, is that the end of their contribution to the wider good. These types of people are always the first target of the charity fund-raisers, whether they are looking for a new church roof or a children’s cancer ward

That's just not true.

The first target of charity fund raisers are the likes of supermarket shoppers. Standing at the door or at the check out etc. Different charities on rotation - day in day out. Some fast food places even have charity boxes as a permanent feature fitted into their counters.

At any rate don't expect him to talk sense or indulge in any sort of meaningful analysis of any problem. He's like most UK politicians and journalists just making claims about stuff without any facts or figures to support the claims.

Edited November 27, 2013 by billybong

[Unsafe As Houses]

I'm baffled as to why Boris is apparently popular. Act datt, look daft and get away with odd comments, odd policies and numerous gaffes.

[gimble]

Jesus. I've never read such guff. This argument that the super rich create jobs with their spending habits makes me rage! The more people and resources that are occupied in meeting the petty and frivolous needs of a tiny minority, the fewer people and the less resources there are to meet the more basic needs of everyone else. Anyone who can't see that is an idiot. You can employ a 20 people and make 1 Bently or you can employ 20 people and make 40 Ford Fiestas. Which of those arrangements provides the most overall utility do you think? Also the idea that mega rich 'entrepeneurs' have created all their wealth independently and for themselves is self serving nonsense. Like Richard Branson somehow single handedly designed and constructed a bunch of passenger aircraft, mined and refined the oil to fuel them and then flew them himself. These people are nothing without everyone else that THEY rely on. That's why, at the very least, they should pay their damned taxes.

[Tonkers]

IRISH TRAVELLERS? IS HE SCORING WITH PAUL FLOWERS?

[R K]

Solon also urged humility and suggested that becoming rich was down to luck. Not one's IQ or skill.

Boris seems to be getting confused (scarily) with those people in the 1930s who measured people's heads.

He's an increasingly dangerous (and deluded) buffoon.

His Thatcher lecture in full here, replete with references to Gordon Gekko (he fails to mention Gekko was a criminal as well as a financier Boris so admires) and how people with high IQs inevitably rise to the top, which I think Adolf also suggested.

http://www.cps.org.uk/files/factsheets/original/131127181634-BorisJohnsonMargaretThatcherlecture.pdf

Edited November 28, 2013 by R K

[1929crash]

Jesus. I've never read such guff. This argument that the super rich create jobs with their spending habits makes me rage! The more people and resources that are occupied in meeting the petty and frivolous needs of a tiny minority, the fewer people and the less resources there are to meet the more basic needs of everyone else. Anyone who can't see that is an idiot. You can employ a 20 people and make 1 Bently or you can employ 20 people and make 40 Ford Fiestas. Which of those arrangements provides the most overall utility do you think? Also the idea that mega rich 'entrepeneurs' have created all their wealth independently and for themselves is self serving nonsense. Like Richard Branson somehow single handedly designed and constructed a bunch of passenger aircraft, mined and refined the oil to fuel them and then flew them himself. These people are nothing without everyone else that THEY rely on. That's why, at the very least, they should pay their damned taxes.

Good post.

[Eddie_George]

I guess at least with the video below he could argue that opened his mouth without thinking......

Maybe someone else writes his speeches and he hadn't seen it beforehand.

[1929crash]

I guess at least with the video below he could argue that opened his mouth without thinking......

Maybe someone else writes his speeches and he hadn't seen it beforehand.

let's face it. Boris has a good turn of phrase, but his writing is not so good as to justify a quarter of a million quid for something hashed up before the Andrew Marr show.

Edited November 28, 2013 by 1929crash

[okaycuckoo]

Solon also urged humility and suggested that becoming rich was down to luck. Not one's IQ or skill.

Boris seems to be getting confused (scarily) with those people in the 1930s who measured people's heads.

He's an increasingly dangerous (and deluded) buffoon.

His Thatcher lecture in full here, replete with references to Gordon Gekko (he fails to mention Gekko was a criminal as well as a financier Boris so admires) and how people with high IQs inevitably rise to the top, which I think Adolf also suggested.

http://www.cps.org.u...cherlecture.pdf

Empire of the Square Mile - soft power indeed.

Here's early English thinking on Solon - or, Solon his follie, A politique discourse touching the reformation of common-weales conquered, declined or corrupted (1594) - freedom for us, slavery for the enemy:

http://www.jstor.org...=21103012710797

Edited November 28, 2013 by okaycuckoo

[Executive Sadman]

I'm baffled as to why Boris is apparently popular. Act datt, look daft and get away with odd comments, odd policies and numerous gaffes.

BBC likes him, thus the average spoon fed London voter likes him. Plus, it helps when the opposition is Red Ken.

[1929crash]

BBC likes him, thus the average spoon fed London voter likes him. Plus, it helps when the opposition is Red Ken.

Or Tessa Jowell in 2016. But Galloway may make the difference.