we’re getting so close to achieving a Utopian society for all, another 100 years is all it might take.

😆

CFH – more ridiculousness from you

Tandemjeremy
Fortunatly we have a mixed model

(economy)

When board member’s can award themselves multimillion pound bonuses while the workforce get no rise. when 1% of the population control 21% of the wealth, when a privatised bank shares several billions in bonuses amongst a couple of hundred people then I would like our economy to be a bit more mixed

😆 @ Cobb Douglas being discredited. Discussed for sure, because of its widespread use. Much like gravity, reproduction and death; mature subjects that still offer cause for academic conversation.

Trailmonkey, TJ, tell me how may socialist systems have benefited the entire human race in the same way I mentioned in the last past of the previous page?

None. They’ve all failed. Pedalling the ‘fair for all, peace and love’ balls is lovely and makes you seem like real care bears (I bet somewhere along the line its even bagged you a hairy arm-pitted smelly hippy chick or two). But the reality is, capitalism has fuelled enormous growth and development for the entire human race. Get over it, and start making a contribution.

Anyway, I’m going to stop posting here now. The adverts on the right (Halfords, Facebook, Apple etc.) are causing me spend money which is in turn powering servers, making rich richer, poor poorer, warming the planet, cooling the planet, killing children, flooding, melting ice caps, desertification, stopping the Gulf stream, and increasing horse fly rape simultaneously. I’m glad you hippies convinced me as such, and also hope you stop posting for the same reasons (although I doubt you will, because its fine for lefties to be enormous hypocrites, right?).

So where would you be without education? Healthcare? Roads? Policing? all paid for out of taxation. Socialism has not failed in the social democratic model – it has given us such boons as universal healthcare, universal education and so on.

A mixed economy is what we need with redistribution from the greedy to the needy.

You completely fail to make the case BTW for the state sector being to big – you merely assert it is without rationale. Germany seems to manage to have a large state sector with higher taxation than us.

Like all lassie faire capitalists you actually have no argument that stands up so spend you time attacking and ridiculing those who point out the fallacies in your arguments. A classic example of the poverty of your thought in your postings here. Calling me a hypocrite. I hope you are never old and ill and needing care. ‘cos that is what I do and what your precious capitalism can never do – provide universal care for the old ill and needy. have

Why this benkitcher he talk nonsense? Is rubbish…

Anyway, I’m going to stop posting here now

Ah, come back please, we were having a right laugh! 😀

in your world I shouldlive in a mud hut to not be a hypocrite Presumably you should live in a world free of state provision to also not be a hypocrit ? It is a stupid argument given we live in a mixed economy and can be used either way. As for your utopian view that

Capitalism is actually quite philanthropic in its concept

would be right up there with me claiming that the [so called] socialist/communist states were noted for their human rights and freedoms. It is absolutely ridiculous thing to say. As for still not entirely fair you are correct but if you think it will redress this due to its philanthropic tendencies then you are deluded and no scholar of history.

Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned and operated for a private profit

Philanthropy is the effort or inclination to increase the well-being of humankind.

Tell me, TJ, is there anything in your mud hut made by any brand considered as “capitalist”? I assume so. Or do you do all your shopping at some ethnic-tofu-knitting commune powered by fermented mung beans?

Oh dear he’s go out of his bed again…

Nurse!

Yes, I’m afraid he’s soiled himself. 🙁

Elf – I told you not to bother me unless it was important! I’ll just get another pad for him. I am a national elf service nurse so he can fit it himself – after all these capitalists want to stand on their own two feet

Does that mean its the trickle down theory?

Ah, come back please, we were having a right laugh!

Oh **** it you’re right, this is fun.

lassie faire capitalists

Oh! Laissez-faire. Gotcha 😉

Ok TJ, the OECD says total tax revenue as a percentage of GDP for Germany in 2008 was 36.2% and put Britain at 36.6%. The International Monetary fund put PPP corrected GDP per cap. dead level for the UK and Germany. So we’re very equal you’re right, right up until you see that we’ve 3x the state deby of Germany and have a deficit twice as large. We’re keeping up with the Jones by maxing out our credit cards and buying our 42″ LCD health service at Brighthouse. We’re just not being productive enough, plain and simple.

How do you propose we continue funding all these services without making some cuts and trying to increase our exports? Really?

And before you go playing Robin Hood with the redistribution of wealth bollocks again, take a look at the 2009 CIA GINI co-efficient data below. We’re very much one of the World leaders in terms of maintaining a relatively small income gap (conceded, Germany have us pipped).

Look, I think insinuating that you three live in mud huts is about as realistic as saying I think private health care is a winner. CFH is right, we do currently have a mixed model which is working very very well, and our argument concerns the fringes of the system which perfect it. The NHS, educational system, emergency services etc. are all things we should be proud of and pleased to have, but we cannot maintain them if we continue to increase our debt and deficit. We HAVE TO increase our productivity as country, put emphasis on economic and private sector growth whilst obviously trying to protect those valuable services.

To that end, and just to re-emphasise, how do you propose we close the ever increasing trade deficit whilst maintaining pre-2010 expenditure?

No one is arguing that we must not go for growth – merely stating the obvious fact that putting another million on the dole queue will not do this. The answer is to increase revenue not decrease spending. Stop wasting enormous sums on failed privatisation projects. Make the rich pay their fair share of tax

Germany – remember they pay for a large part of their healthcare on top of the tax take so if you compare like with like they are considerably higher taxation.

Yes we need to produce more and export more. The main enemy of this has been the pound that has been overvalued for decades along with the scorched earth policy of Thatcher governments who destroyed our manufacturing base and wasted the north sea oil money on paying for the millions out of work.

From where we are now? We need policies to give us the well trained workforce. We need to stimulate demand. weo not get this from massive cuts in spending – the opposite will happen. We need a government prepared to go for growth with policies to do so. Growth under Labour was higher than under the tories, unemployment lower. this has been the pattern for decades. Osbournes policies will reduce demand and growth and increase unemployment

the obvious fact that putting another million on the dole queue will not do this

Can you provide any links to where this is being discussed, it’s not a number I can find.

Make the rich pay their fair share of tax

We have a 50% top rate, is that not enough? Germany’s highest tax band is 45% (although haven’t looked at comparative take home of people on say £200,000+).

Its there if you want to see it. At least a million more unemployed as a result of these economically illterate cuts. There is broad agreement amongst economists on this. Some are more optomistic that others about the amount of new jobs that will be created but the tory prediction is for employmnet rises at a rate that has never ever happened in teh UK

Research by the accountants PricewaterhouseCoopers today shows spending cuts due to be announced later this month will trigger a wave of redundancies in public service organisations and the private sector businesses that rely on contracts in the state sector.

Nearly 1 million could face unemployment due to public sector cuts, the report said.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/oct/13/unemployment-claimants-expected-to-rise

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development has calculated that the impact of the government’s spending cuts, and the imminent rise in VAT, on the nation’s workforce will be greater than officially estimated. Research by CIPD has found that around 900,000 jobs will be lost from the private sector, with another 725,000 jobs expected to be cut across the public sector.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/nov/02/one-point-six-million-jobs-cuts

Government spending cuts will push UK unemployment up from 2.5m to almost 3m, a report has warned. The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) also said that there was little prospect of real wage growth until at least 2015.

The body’s chief economic adviser, John Philpott said unemployment would rise to 2.95m in the second half of 2012, and remain close to that level until 2015.

http://www.newstatesman.com/2010/06/unemployment-spending-2015

And before you go playing Robin Hood with the redistribution of wealth bollocks again

Weren’t you arguing capitalism was philanthropic? Surely it is in the greater good that we all eat, have clean water etc Why has your super system not delivered this?

We have a 50% top rate, is that not enough?

Depends really. On the one hand we have people with more money than they can ever spend who can indulge in things like multi million pound second/third/fourth homes, tax evasion, non dom status and behave like Rooney. Even if we take say 75% tax they would still be multimillion and multi billionaires so they won’t exactly fall into the poverty trap. On the other hand you have people losing their houses, jobs, starving etc . Now who do you think has the greater need ? The mulit millionaire who needs another yacht or poor people?

We’re very much one of the World leaders in terms of maintaining a relatively small income gap[/Quote]
92/134 – not quite a world leader as we ar enot in the top 30 % – two above Egypt for example and below guiding lights like Pakistan- where the government agreed to an International Monetary Fund Standby Arrangement in November 2008-, Ethiopia- which the CIA guide describes as apoverty-stricken economy , and Albania – a state planned economy. In this country the reason it is fairer is not down to examples of philanthropic capitalism but to do with redistributive taxes.
CFH
{quote] of course they would not but no one would die from poverty [dirty water, no food, lack of health care etc] that is the point of sharing it around
Worked well in Russia, didn’t it. Oh, hang on..[/Quote]
What are you trying to say? It would literally be impossible do this as there is not enough to go round or are you just admitting that you don’t actually give a sh1t enough to act?

Its there if you want to see it. At least a million more unemployed as a result of these economically illterate cuts.

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development has calculated that the impact of the government’s spending cuts, and the imminent rise in VAT, on the nation’s workforce will be greater than officially estimated. Research by CIPD has found that around 900,000 jobs will be lost from the private sector, with another 725,000 jobs expected to be cut across the public sector.

Government spending cuts will push UK unemployment up from 2.5m to almost 3m, a report has warned. The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD) also said that there was little prospect of real wage growth until at least 2015.

The body’s chief economic adviser, John Philpott said unemployment would rise to 2.95m in the second half of 2012, and remain close to that level until 2015.
[/quote]

Thanks for the links (quotes nested just to make this post clearer). Based on the above, perhaps we’re just debating definitions. Yes, there are predicted job losses of one million plus, but in each case total unemployment is expected to rise by around half that as economic growth creates jobs. An extra half million out of work is a huge number, but no-one is saying ‘at least a million more unemployed’.

The PwC report even seems to offer the possibility that joblessness may fall over the period – though they are by no means clear and a table of forecast unemployment would have been useful.

Almost half a million private sector jobs could be lost as a result – as great an impact as on the public sector – with nearly a million job losses in total,although this could be mitigated by increased labour market flexibility on wages and hours worked, which was a feature of the 2008-9 recession. On the other hand, evidence from the 1993-99 fiscal consolidation showed a net rise of around 1.2 million in private sector employment during those years.

For sure,the situation we’re in is horrendous. Will economic growth be able to pull us out of the slump even without public sector spending increasing at the rate it has done over the past few years? I both hope and believe so.

Now who do you think has the greater need ? The mulit millionaire who needs another yacht or poor people?

Yes, the poor person has a greater need of ‘extra’ money than does Rooney (or any other person with that level of wealth – or even of lesser wealth), but probably a lot of stretched ‘middle class’ families do to. What is the state to do? Provide equality of opportunity (and what this is is of course open to debate)? Certainly. Provide a minimum standard of living, not just existing (this covering NHS, police, social care, etc – with overlap with equality of opportunity provision – and also open to definitional debate)? Certainly. Redistribute wealth by taking more than 50% of someone’s income? Well, without having thought on it, that just seems wrong to me, a line crossed.

Regarding income distribution, where are people getting the figures from? I couldn’t find any that were even reasonably up to date.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/rankorderguide.html

Would not class it as brilliant but it is OK. Given authors it is not the most neutral thing you will ever read nor as bad as you may suspect/fear.

Thanks for link Junkyard (must admit to a slightly surprised look as the screen loaded!), an incredible amount of information.

Also, whatever our disagreements on UK policy, how scary is America right now? Loosely following the Guardian liveblog and googling some of the candidates to see their views… Sharron Angle >.< ?!

American politicians – what gets me is how thick they can be and what stupid positions they can take. Palin was just incredible

Would not class it as brilliant but it is OK. Given authors it is not the most neutral thing you will ever read nor as bad as you may suspect/fear.

Yip, just to clarify for anyone who doesn’t ant to follow the link, we’re 92/134 where 134 is the BEST scenario (Sweden, who’d a guessed?!). I can’t be arsed to work out the percentiles on that data, but we’re up there in the .25-.35 index rating (just) which is keeping fine company.

TJ as you say, growth is required and making people jobless, on the face of it, isn’t going to make that happen. The loss of ‘1 million’ jobs is indeed a frightening proposition, and I can’t begin to understand the stress people with families and houses which need paying for will go through when losing their jobs. But I do not for one moment believe the overall unemployed figure will rise by that much; as we established, these people are good workers, used to working with tight budgets and they will find their vocations in the private sector. Its uncomfortable but true.

Once the boat has stopped rocking, hopefully we’ll be able to return to proportionate growth and improvement in public services.

Weren’t you arguing capitalism was philanthropic? Surely it is in the greater good that we all eat, have clean water etc Why has your super system not delivered this?

Junkyard, just to address this separately, my ‘super system’ has been doing this for some time now.

The outstanding and most recent example of the benefit to human kind of capitalism is China. Don’t get me wrong, its no Nirvana, but take a look at the number of people living below the $1/day threshold since China’s emergence as an industrial power. Between 1970 and 2006, the number of people in south Asia living on less than $1/day (in PPP adjusted dollars) fell by 86%. A turnaround of that magnitude in that time scale is nothing short of miraculous, and you hope for the people of southern and eastern Asia the growth and transformations continue to enable people to increase their living standards at such an incredible rate. You also hope that Africa will soon start to get its act together and join in 😐

I don’t mean to make any of this personal chaps, it just riles me when people won’t see that capitalism has been an enormous enabler for the human race over the past few hundred years. Its a great means of organising and incentivising our efforts as a race to better ourselves. Inequalities are a problem, they cause jealously and hinder productivity, though I believe personal gain should be allowed but controlled and made transparent. I think we’re converging on that point all the time and the current direction of our efforts is positive and constructive.

All in, glass half full. Carry on!

TJ as you say, growth is required and making people jobless, on the face of it, isn’t going to make that happen. The loss of ‘1 million’ jobs is indeed a frightening proposition,………. But I do not for one moment believe the overall unemployed figure will rise by that much; as we established, these people are good workers, used to working with tight budgets and they will find their vocations in the private sector. Its uncomfortable but true.

For this to happen jobs will have to be created at a rate unprecedented in peacetime – not just not just a bit more than a lot more

the net rise in unemployment will be a million is my bet. Far more than a million will lose their jobs. Far less jobs will be created than the tories think

We will revisit this I am sure – but when the disaster unfolds in a years time I will say “told you so” – or happily eat my hat 🙂

getting back to the original post

TandemJeremy – Member
American politicians – what gets me is how thick they can be and what stupid positions they can take. Palin was just incredible

sounds like Harriet would fit right in…

We will revisit this I am sure – but when the disaster unfolds in a years time I will say “told you so” – or happily eat my hat

I want to see the hat. Please upload a picture.

To confirm your “disaster” is

the net rise in unemployment will be a million is my bet. Far more than a million will lose their jobs. Far less jobs will be created than the tories think

can you confirm the statistic that will be used as the measure and which month in 2011 (Oct or Nov?)

Will you film the eating and upload on Youtube?

Im sure you will remember for me.

But I do not for one moment believe the overall unemployed figure will rise by that much;

Right, so if the real figure is only a tenth of that, then we’re only talking about 100,000 redundancies – perfectly acceptable.

Once the boat has stopped rocking

Here’s the news, the boat is still rocking from the last time your lot decided that mass unemployment was the acceptable price to pay for recovery. I just love the irony of Tory MP’s bemoaning the rise of benefit culture when it was their predecessors’ policies that instigated the benefit dependancy that exists today.

Inequalities are a problem, they cause jealously and hinder productivity,

I must agree, it’s hard to be productive when you’re poorly educated, hungry, disillusioned, alienated, victimised, brutalised and marginalised and you’d probably be jealous of those that aren’t.

I’m still not sure to make out if you’re a harmless but effective troll, or genuinely but massively naive.

I want to see the hat. Please upload a picture.

Will you film the eating and upload on Youtube?

It will cause rotational injury. And possibly wind.

Trailmonkey;

You know, you typify what’s wrong with the average voter. You have NO IDEA how to form an opinion of your own or an argument to support it; you just cling to your titbits of cynicism (taken from whichever side of the fence your contemporaries tell you to) and regurgitate them with an arrogance so as to suggest you’ve conjured them in your own feeble mind.

TJ and Junkyard have provided some quality conversation points in this thread, and supported them with data and perspective which has been fun to consider and counter (after all, all we’re here to do is chew the fat). But you’re just a bigot churning out the same tired old crap, and I refuse to lower my conversational standards to your remedial level. You’re an embarrassment to your argument.

TJ; Can you make it a top hat please? Eating a capitalist icon would be a sweet irony 😆

TandemJeremy – Member
Im sure you will remember for me.

but to ensure that for you we get it right, from the ONS

Labour market statistics
October 2010
Date: 13 October 2010
Coverage: United Kingdom Theme: Labour Market
For June to August 2010:
The employment rate was 70.7 per cent and there were 29.16 million employed people.
The unemployment rate was 7.7 per cent and there were 2.45 million unemployed people.

can we review the statistics on the 19th Oct 2011, for your prediction to be correct >3.45 million unemployed people

I am keen to clarify your statement and would like to ensure that everyone understands that you absolutely 100% believe in everything you say (and what exactly you are saying).

I’m happy to put up a half decent bottle of singe malt to aid the wake for all the jobs lost should you be right on the folowing conditions:

1. we get to see the hat (in the next couple of days, the hat to be a real one that would fit your head) you will eat if wrong
2. you video the eating and post it on Youtube

see you next year

might take more than a year for the whole one million extra unemployed Remind me in a year.

Yip, just to clarify for anyone who doesn’t ant to follow the link, we’re 92/134 where 134 is the BEST

if you cant work that out from me saying the top 30% you probablty wont understand the statistics and might think we are amongst the best in the world 😉

A turnaround of that magnitude in that time scale is nothing short of miraculous

you are aiming very low indeed if you think it is miracolous that people now earn a dollar a day- given the world wealth that is pitifull but yes it is an improvement. How much profit per day do you think the investing west are making as a result of this miracle?

‘m still not sure to make out if you’re a harmless but effective troll, or genuinely but massively naive

+1 I suspect the later
EDIT: given above post I retract. You are a pompous arrogant fool over sure of your own grasp of things – we are all morons if we disagree for example- who makes outlandish claims you cannot support and then attempt to justify them- usually poorly. There was no need for that attack on trail monkey and it reflects quite poorly on you . 😳

Angle believes that the U.S. should withdraw from the United Nations, saying it is a bastion of liberal ideology and “the umpire on fraudulent science such as global warming.”[70]

she would be a hit on here and find some friends for sure

TandemJeremy – Member
might take more than a year for the whole one million extra unemployed Remind me in a year.

don’t doubt yourself, you were so adamant!

TandemJeremy – Member
Its there if you want to see it. At least a million more unemployed as a result of these economically illterate cuts.

TandemJeremy – Member

TJ as you say, growth is required and making people jobless, on the face of it, isn’t going to make that happen. The loss of ‘1 million’ jobs is indeed a frightening proposition,………. But I do not for one moment believe the overall unemployed figure will rise by that much; as we established, these people are good workers, used to working with tight budgets and they will find their vocations in the private sector. Its uncomfortable but true.

For this to happen jobs will have to be created at a rate unprecedented in peacetime – not just not just a bit more than a lot more

the net rise in unemployment will be a million is my bet. Far more than a million will lose their jobs. Far less jobs will be created than the tories think

We will revisit this I am sure – but when the disaster unfolds in a years time I will say “told you so” – or happily eat my hat

TandemJeremy – Member
Markie – or we could simply increase tax a very small amount like say Germany or the Netherlands

That article is a load of pish that has time and time again been proven to be false. For the private sector to create jobs at the rate Osbourne predicts is unprecedented. It simply will not happen. Instead what most economists believe will happen is that demand will fall and there will be a decrease in jobs in the private sector along with a decrease in tax revenues. Double dip recession anyone? An extra million on the dole queues in a year

it’s not like you to back down on an important issue of principle

Hardly an issue of principle is it 🙂

I am wondering which hat. I am rather fond of my fedora – although being felt its probably the most digestible. Synthetic wool beanie might be rather unpleasant.

However the one thing you have missed is I did not say in those bits you quote “” a year” for the unemployment to rise by a million. However it will be clear to all that the policies are a disaster in a year – thats what I actually post.

Edit – bollx you edited and found it 🙂

have we cleared up the German tax issue yet? I want to now whether I made a mistake dumping the German girlfriend 20 years ago

Germany – remember they pay for a large part of their healthcare on top of the tax take so if you compare like with like they are considerably higher taxation.

or

or we could simply increase tax a very small amount like say Germany or the Netherlands

or

Germany taxes small amount more than the UK – then you pay for some of your healthcare on top of taxation not out of it. a good few % of gdp more if you compare like with like

TandemJeremy – Member
Hardly an issue of principle is it

from your use of language I thought it was 😉

however before I get accused of being an “intellectual coward” again I’ll stop pressing on the issue (and German tax rates)

I don’t mean to make any of this personal chaps, it just riles me when people won’t see that capitalism has been an enormous enabler for the human race over the past few hundred years.

Indeed, but it has taken socialism to make it relatively friendly for people.

Remind me in a year. it will be interesting to see. “clearly a disaster (the cuts) and massive increase in unemployment – many hundreds of thousands” Quote that at me in a years time.

Sloppy language from me on the german tax rates

it’s not like you to back down on an important issue of principle

He said, as you quoted : “the net rise in unemployment will be a million is my bet”

Do you understand what “is my bet” means ? It suggests an inclination to believe, not a cast-iron certainty.

Unemployment will not be 3.45 million this time next year. It might well be well over 3 million though, whilst continuing to increase – the cuts will continue for several years. After all Tory (less draconian) government policies have pushed it above 3 million before.

But shame on you big_n_daft, if you think that if unemployment has increased by perhaps half a million in the next 12 months, it is somehow something to celebrate and a “victory” for you.

you are aiming very low indeed if you think it is miracolous that people now earn a dollar a day

Sorry Junkyard, the (as of 2008) revised figure of $1.25 for ‘poverty threshold’ would be more appropriate, you’re right.

I find it absolutely astounding however that such development is sneered at by you guys? Tell me, by what mechanism would you achieve such benefit? When will you achieve this? Which aid efforts could you refer me to which have achieved such a widespread and crucially stable positive effect?

I fully stand by my rant at trailmonkey. Look at that last post. Its pure working-mens-club propaganda, just pathetic. (though that’s not to say you don’t get the same from the other side, its just emotive guff which could just as easily be found on any page of the Mail and which I have no interest in discussing).

But shame on you big_n_daft, if you think that if unemployment has increased by perhaps half a million in the next 12 months, it is somehow something to celebrate and a “victory” for you.

no victory in it for me, please provide suitable quotes demonstrating how I rejoice at increases in unemployment. TBH If you aren’t prepared to stand beside your hyperbole that’s for the individual to reconcile with themselves.

as usual you can selectively quote

He said, as you quoted : “the net rise in unemployment will be a million is my bet”

or use my preferred method of a more expansive quote

For this to happen jobs will have to be created at a rate unprecedented in peacetime – not just not just a bit more than a lot more

the net rise in unemployment will be a million is my bet. Far more than a million will lose their jobs. Far less jobs will be created than the tories think

We will revisit this I am sure – but when the disaster unfolds in a years time I will say “told you so” – or happily eat my hat

whichever you feel more comfortable with 😉

Tell me, by what mechanism would you achieve such benefit?

redistribution of wealth from the [very]rich to the poor. Do you think they would be better off if we did this or worse off. You seem so good with the maths I will leave you to work that one out.
we have over 1000 biliionairres in the world and the 11th annual World Wealth Report from Merrill Lynch/Capgemini* finds the World’s High Net Worth (HNW) population growing to 9.5 million with their assets rising to $37.2 trillion.”

If we divided the wealth ]or income lets not get technical here] a lot of people would clearly be much better off.

You did not answer whether we got more than them from the “beneift” did you?

Its pure working-mens-club propaganda, just pathetic. (though that’s not to say you don’t get the same from the other side, its just emotive guff

Without meaning to patronise you I fell you need to develop some self awareness re emotive guff.

please provide suitable quotes demonstrating how I rejoice

You are clearly relishing at the thought of proving TJ wrong. So if it is not precisely the figure he gave you will presumably be very pleased.

“as usual you can selectively quote……….or use my preferred method of a more expansive quote”

I used your quote. If it wasn’t you preferred quote why did you use it ?

I actually quite agree with TJ, …. if this government is given a full term, then it is very possible that they will increase unemployment by a million. After all, the last time the Tories came to power they increased unemployment by 1.5 million in their first term.

I will be very happy to be proved wrong though.

You did not answer whether we got more than them from the “beneift” did you?

We’ll have leveraged more from the deal than they did without a doubt, but through their own tenacity the wealth gap between us and China, and the internal wealth gap in China has decreased.

From here;

We find that various measures of global inequality have declined (in the period 1970-2006) substantially and measures of global welfare increased by somewhere between 128% and 145%

(EDIT; I should qualify, if you read into the report you’ll find growth is centred in China, and Africa has actually detrimentally effected the figures)

I hear ya when you say redistribution of wealth would fix a lot of ills, but really, who’s going to go for that? Certainly not the chaps with the power to action it! Its a romantic notion, but what have you (and countless others) done apart from sit on the net and profess it to make it happen? Nothing, because you know it never will.

You must have missed my point that the capitalist structure (which provides for and can be synchronous with a socialist element) structures and incentivises labour force to create growth. There will be some doing better than others, and there has to be one bugger at the top too. But personal progression up that structure is almost a given, and those incremental rewards and victories for the individual are what we live for.

REAL, tangible benefit for people in Asia is the example I give, and it trumps your idealogical notion every single day as a viable method for increasing human well-being internationally and domestically.