Benifit Britian

I think this is a widespread problem.

Probably plenty of politicians cashing in on this as well. They are not known to be shy in that regard.

 

been bugging me for a while - tell me, how do you 'turf a tree'?

 

There is a big difference between capitalism and greed, this is lost on many people.
Capitalism is all about getting paid fairly for the work you do.
Greed is about screwing everyone else to make more money...
it's true greedy people can exploit capitalism but its the greed at fault not the system.

 

there is a machine or tool if you like called a turfer kind of like a winch. you use it for pulling trees over or anything else for that matter

 

thanks, you mean Tirfor winch, i guess.

i'd not heard of that before, I'd assumed 'turfing trees' was some sort of Finm euphemism/perversion/back country hobby.

 

i am in to anything that involves putting a noose round it.

 

Capitalism is taking money from lots of people and giving it to one or very few people. There is no return circuit in this system.

 

Its an Economic model not a governmental system, this is where taxation comes in. If the system is run well and people pay their fair share then the more money you earn the more goes back into the system to pay for the services. i.e. the 'evil capitalists' and their money grabbing buisneses pay for the welfare system...

 

There is a term that used to be used years ago and applied to certain flavours of capitalism. It was called "The Principle of Enlightened Self-Interest". I haven't heard it mentioned in a long, long time.

The meaning of this term I suspect is self-explanatory, even if the practicalities are beyond anyone's reach these days.

 

I don't think that this is so at all.
Capitalism isn't all about getting paid fairly for the work you do.
Capitalism is all about the employment of capital, and favouring that employment above all else.
It recognises that the employment of capital comes with risk and seeks to reward that risk.
It's about investing the minimum and getting out the maximum. This is termed efficiency.
You don't seek to reward people fairly, you seek to reward them at the minimum possible to get the outcome you want. That outcome will be measured in motivation, because high motivation should ensure low staff turnover (a cost) and higher productivity at the quality level you are aiming for. Capitalism wouldn't want you paying people any more than that - nothing to do with fairness.
The motor of the whole thing is reward - or greed if you prefer.
Fairness is injected into the system by taxation - which capitalists don't generally like. But it's an external injection.

Please note: I am not making any value judgements here, or saying that capitalism is wrong. I'm just saying how it is.
The system is inherently unfair in that it favours people who have a lot of capital to begin with. If you have resources available, you put them to work - instead of doing work yourself. If you make the right bets, they will pay off handsomely for you. If you have no capital at all, you will find the system ensures that you have a very difficult time setting up on your own and putting your own ideas into practice through your own hard work.

 

Indeed. A productive business enterprise requires two principal inputs, capital and labour. The capitalist concept is that it is the owners of the capital who should control the enterprise and keep the profits for themselves. The socialist concept is that it is the workers providing the labour who should control the enterprise through democratic means, and benefit from the profits via taxation.

Most people veer vaguely between the two positions, depending on their own personal circumstances and perhaps on their underlying psychological dispositions.

In one sense the history of the last 150 years has been that of many attempts to reconcile capitalism with democracy - ideas which are deeply incompatible.

 

When it comes to benefit claimants, there is an elaborate system designed to sort the wheat from the chaff. DSS staff, and above them Social Security Tribunals, and above them Upper Tier Tribunals exist for the purpose of distinguishing the genuine from the fake, the truly needy from the liars and frauds.

Most of the time they get it right. But the people operating the system are human beings and they are unlikely ever to achieve perfection. Occasionally a genuine claimant loses an appeal and leaves a tribunal in tears, not knowing how they will eat; and occasionally a fraudster persuades a tribunal to believe them, and gets given money for old rope.

Critics of this state of affairs resort to the "magic wand" school of policy making - in some magical but unspecified way they want all the deserving cases to get benefits but none of the undeserving cases. Well, that's what everyone wants, but wishing cannot make it so. If it were possible to achieve perfection, it would have been done already.

 

Ever considered a world without borders?

 

nope, when independence comes i will personally add another 5ft to the wall

 

You've already built a metaphorical wall. A physical wall will only appease your own insecurities. Save the money and tart up Paisley instead. No wall is needed.

 

paisley deffo needs a wall built round it.
not true a lot of paisley is v.nice up by the observatory for starters.

 

Walls are built to keep people in. Not out.

 

I'm sure the Palestinians would agree with you.