Forum home Road cycling forum Campaign

Soapbox defenders of Capitalism-attention

Gary AskwithGary Askwith Posts: 1,835
edited December 1969 in Campaign
I am interested in how much of an influence your concern in defending and maintaining the Capitalist status quo is influenced by how much of a personal financial vested interest you have 'invested the system' as it were

One (admittedly) crude indication could be the level of your current salary[}:)]

I believe it would be quite illuminating and entertaining, for the purposes of discussion, if we could have an indication of your salary and occupation
Such accusations of vested interests could swiftly be refuted and apologies willingly given if those suspicions were found to be baseless...

I would be Grateful if the following regular soapbox defenders of capitalism/free markets ( some more defensive than others I acknowledge) would please participate by stating your Occupation and salary ( to the nearest 5K or even 10K will do)

Patrick
Spire
Joe Sacco
Simoncp
Mjones
Smokin joe
Bonj ( whatever current moniker)
Ankev

I know you are going to say; gentlemen never ask such things, well sorry I am no gentleman and I don't believe you are either!
On the basis that I would never ask anything I am not prepared to do myself I will start the ball rolling

Lab Technician 20K (19.6 actually)

Come on boys what are you afraid of[;)]
All feel free to join in![:)]




Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....

Economic Growth; as dead as a Yangtze River dolphin....
«1345678

Posts

  • UnkrautUnkraut Posts: 1,103
    Since I am not sure such information will be forthcoming, anyone not willing to divulge the salacious details could perhaps indicate whether they would be better or worse off if say they were to become a teacher, at a salary level after some progression in level of responsibility.

    Taking my own advice, I earn a tad less than my sister who has been a teacher for years. Not rich, but not poor!
  • spirespire Posts: 4,077
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Gary Askwith</i>

    please participate by stating your Occupation and salary ( to the nearest 5K or even 10K will do)

    Patrick
    Spire
    Joe Sacco
    Simoncp
    Mjones
    Smokin joe
    Bonj ( whatever current moniker)
    Ankev


    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Would nearest œ100k be OK? [;)][:D]
  • BcpBcp Posts: 1,163
    Actually I'd prefer to know how much redcogs earns (and he really must have cashed in moving from Whitby to somewhere drear on the east coast of Scotland) and anything about cuddy duck - the most anonymous (and grimly sardonic) 'Advanced Member' the forum must have...
  • SmeggersSmeggers Posts: 1,019
    If your asking that, then you need to know the entire demographic, surely? Age being a big one?

    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
  • UnkrautUnkraut Posts: 1,103
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by B</i>

    Actually I'd prefer to know how much redcogs earns ...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    You're itching to know if there is any investment income from dividends etc. [;)]
  • software developer, œnot enough.
  • Good grief - he'll be asking how many houses we own next.
  • ankev1ankev1 Posts: 3,686
    What an odd request. But as you ask, Gary, I earn less than 5k a year more than you but fortunately this gets bumped up by an 8k pension from my previous job. Then I suppose you have to add however much investments earn and I never bother to work that out because it automatically gets ploughed back in.

    Now what on earth has that to do with anyone's views on capitalism?
  • papercorn2000papercorn2000 Posts: 4,517
    You deluded fools, 'tis but a list being made in order that the "redistribution" is made easier come the revolution![:D]

    God told me to skin you alive.
    http://www.ekroadclub.co.uk/
    God told me to skin you alive.
    http://www.ekroadclub.co.uk/
  • ankev1ankev1 Posts: 3,686
    Actually, what would be more interesting to know would be what the forum's avowed lefties and radicals earn as every penny is gained under the system which is dedicated to keeping them down. For instance, I'd hate to think of Gillan suffering under the burden of more then 30k a year.
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by ankev1</i>

    I'd hate to think of Gillan suffering under the burden of more then 30k a year.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    So would gillan.[;)]
  • SmeggersSmeggers Posts: 1,019
    From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.

    It just so happens I NEED a 5 bedroom house, a Porsche and some ponies :)


    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
  • So why don't you start with your own salary then Gary?

    My own salary has gone down considerably since the police started harrassing my girls.
    Nobody ever got laid because they were using Shimano
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Smokin Joe</i>

    So why don't you start with your own salary then Gary?

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    He did!
  • Joe SaccoJoe Sacco Posts: 4,907
    Salaries are not as important as bonuses to higher earners, but I guess you wouldn't know that...
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Patrick Stevens</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Smokin Joe</i>

    So why don't you start with your own salary then Gary?

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    He did!
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
    So he did. apologies.

    Nobody ever got laid because they were using Shimano
  • redcogsredcogs Posts: 3,232
    i'm a 56 year old 'house parent' these days. Two young kids to deal with and a house to keep spick n span. Mrs redcogs is the earner of our little unit, and she has a low paid local authority job.

    My income is less than œ4000 a year pension from a former occupation (from which i was 'unfairly dismissed', for trade union activity in the 1980s).

    We are lucky enough to own redcogs heights, the insurance company stepped in and paid the outstanding mortgage following the onset of a heart condition just over 5 years ago, a detail that explains and enabled a move from Huddersfield (not Whitby) to Banff 6 months since.

    The benefits agencies (family tax credit and DLA) help out along the way.

    i don't claim to be in poverty - in fact, i'm lucky, being enviably time rich, but we do not have a luxurious life style. Nor do i crave one. We eat well, we are adequately clothed, and we try to ensure the kids don't miss out on too much.

    i'm very aware that there are many many working people around who struggle far more than we do - a deplorable fact in a nation of absolutely fabulous wealth and resources.

    <font size="1">please look up to the stars.. </font id="size1"><font size="6"><font color="red">***</font id="red"></font id="size6">
    <font size="1">please look up to the stars.. </font id="size1"><font size="6"><font color="red">***</font id="red"></font id="size6">
  • Joe SaccoJoe Sacco Posts: 4,907
    So you are in a better position than a lot of people then redcogs, loads of people couldn't dream of owning their house outright, yet you say it is wrong for people to be richer than others.

    Where do you personally draw the line, just above what you have?
  • spirespire Posts: 4,077
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by redcogs</i>



    1. We are lucky enough to own redcogs heights

    2. The benefits agencies (family tax credit and DLA) help out along the way.


    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    1. How can you justify such wealth while others are homeless?

    2. And their money comes from the taxes paid by the capitalist scum you despise.

    Don't you think your position is somewhat hypocritical?
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by spire</i>
    their money comes from the taxes paid by the capitalist scum you despise.

    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    Would it be simpler if I sent my tax cheque next month directly to Redders Towers?
  • redcogsredcogs Posts: 3,232
    You lot make me laugh, always behaving like a pack of circling wolves, and always failing to understand basics.

    There is a difference between owning possessions like dishwashers and televisions on the one hand and owning factories or chemical plants on the other. One type of possession carries no income with it, but adds to the joy or convenience of life. The other type does carry income, and any rational system would ensure that society owned those, in order that everyone should benefit from any improvements in productivity, rather than just a tiny minority of exploiters of other peoples labour.

    Not so difficult to grasp is it?

    <font size="1">please look up to the stars.. </font id="size1"><font size="6"><font color="red">***</font id="red"></font id="size6">
    <font size="1">please look up to the stars.. </font id="size1"><font size="6"><font color="red">***</font id="red"></font id="size6">
  • Flying_MonkeyFlying_Monkey Posts: 8,708
    Don't worry, redcogs, they are just trying to offload their own guilt onto others... it's just displacement activity. I believe the NT has Jesus say something about taking the beam out of your own eye rather than pointing out the mote in another's. He had a point.

    Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
    That I got no cerebellum
    Gonna get my Ph.D.
    I'm a teenage lobotomy

    Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
    That I got no cerebellum
  • spirespire Posts: 4,077
    Lefty rules never apply to the lefties who make them or espouse them:

    redcogs - property
    gillan - inheritance
    Abbott & Harman - grammar schools
    Healey - private medicine etc.

    And there's always a 'reason' why this is not hypocrisy (usually because it's a 'personal matter' and therefore exempt from the rules).
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by redcogs</i>

    One type of possession carries no income with it, but adds to the joy or convenience of life. The other type does carry income, and any rational system would ensure that society owned those, in order that everyone should benefit from any improvements in productivity, rather than just a tiny minority of exploiters of other peoples labour.

    Not so difficult to grasp is it?

    <font size="1">please look up to the stars.. </font id="size1"><font size="6"><font color="red">***</font id="red"></font id="size6">
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    No, not at all, especially with houses. One can get a reasonable income by renting them out, so obviously such an asset should be owned by the state so everyone can benefit from the rental income.
  • SmeggersSmeggers Posts: 1,019
    Its easy for us capitalists to deride Mr Cogs and his land-owning ways...

    As has been said before, it is impossible to live at all in western society without some degree of self-preservation. The hypocracy lies in if your views are further left-field than society allows.

    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
    <font size="1">Hickory Dickory Dock,
    A baby elephant ran up the clock,
    The clock is being repaired</font id="size1">
  • redcogsredcogs Posts: 3,232
    Arguing for a change of rules spire, is not the same as imposing them on others, which could usually only be achieved once the rule change has been widely accepted.

    i don't imagine that you need to be fearful just yet.

    <font size="1">please look up to the stars.. </font id="size1"><font size="6"><font color="red">***</font id="red"></font id="size6">
    <font size="1">please look up to the stars.. </font id="size1"><font size="6"><font color="red">***</font id="red"></font id="size6">
  • Flying_MonkeyFlying_Monkey Posts: 8,708
    There's very few of us for whom this society is our personal or collective utopia. It is therefore not surprising for any here that our ideals do not correspond to the reality that we are forced to deal with. Does this mean that people should give up their dreams, stop arguing for something better (from whatever political position), and just 'know their place' in conventional society?

    Of course not. What a load of censored .

    And BTW, some of the more personal attacks here are factually wrong. Spire, in particular, and others, also seem not to understand the political theory to which redcogs subscribes anyway - whether out of genuine ignorance or spite. There is not one simple generic 'lefty' ideology but many different ways of thinking, just as there are on the right. The denial of all private property comes from Proudhonist anarchism, whereas redcogs is a Marxist. Marxists are concerned with the ownership of the means of production. A house is not a means of production. It is therefore not hypocritical for a Marxist to own a house. Nor is it hyprocritical for a Marxist to claim state benefits, in fact this is exactly the kind of redistributive activity that the state would do more of in a Marxist society.

    It would be rather like accusing a traditional shire Tory of being a neo-liberal, spire - I am sure you get the difference. Anyway, it all comes across as being rather childish and nasty. I am sure you will remedy this by putting your personal lifestyle details up for analysis by all and sundry though...

    Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
    That I got no cerebellum
    Gonna get my Ph.D.
    I'm a teenage lobotomy

    Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
    That I got no cerebellum
  • <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Flying_Monkey</i>

    A house is not a means of production.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    I've got clients who own a lot of them and have substantial incomes from them. So, as long as they stick to this and don't invest in a business, that's ok with the comrades then?
  • ankev1ankev1 Posts: 3,686
    Hang on a minute FM, when has a left wing state ever dished out property into private ownership? All that ever seems to happen is collectivisation i.e. ownership by the state. I know the stock answer is that there never has been a socialist state but surely at least one of them should have done something a little be Marxist at least once?
  • Flying_MonkeyFlying_Monkey Posts: 8,708
    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Patrick Stevens</i>

    <blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Flying_Monkey</i>

    A house is not a means of production.
    <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    I've got clients who own a lot of them and have substantial incomes from them. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

    That's still not the same thing, Patrick. It's unearned income, sure, but it is not based on the appropriation of the labour of others. That is the fundamental basis for Marxism, that 1. people should get the benefit of their labour, not have it appropriated by bosses; and 2. that the means of production should be shared.

    After that, there's a whole range of options for how one organises such a society, just as there's a whole range of policies for orgnanising capitalism. State collectivisation of all private property isn't a necessary part of a Marxist society any more than total privatisation of all state assets is a necessary part of a Capitalist one.

    Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
    That I got no cerebellum
    Gonna get my Ph.D.
    I'm a teenage lobotomy

    Now I guess I'll have to tell 'em
    That I got no cerebellum
Sign In or Register to comment.