Boards
This Telegraph article by David Thomas
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/10377807/Well-never-have-it-so-good-again.html
he's basically having a conversation about Thatcher/Reaganomics/Neo-liberal capitalism while doing a little sideways finger waving at Blair & the BBC
but it's hmmm interesting to hear a middle class Telegraph scribe thump a 99% tub
thoughts?
Also, how do we solve a problem like obscene concentration of wealth ?
Die Hard 4?
" In 1993, Clare and I moved with our two young daughters to Chichester in West Sussex, seeking a better quality of life and state education with fewer black children around." /marckee
Public hangings for all mill owners.
I couldn't really get past the first few paragraphs.
I can only assume this article is aimed at people who emigrated 30 years ago or something, given it's like social analysis 101.
Well except for that fact that he's measuring things the wrong way. This idea that the middle classes are in trouble is really just the elastic snapping back after the effects of WWII on class and society's structure, I reckon.
But as one commenter pointed out, even if the middle classes can't afford homes etc, we do all have access to a lot more technology, etc. We may not have loads of money comparative to the generation before but we have completely different costs. We spend more frivolously but at the same time we can get away with spending less. If you want to read a book you can almost certainly buy it for 1p + postage on Amazon.
Dunno, I think the issue is about realining thoughts. Or you need a proper fucking revolution to bring down the 'ruling classes'. I'm up for that too.
if you get through the whole article he makes some salient points about the 1%'s trickle-up effect
and how it effects us all
how he manages to do with while being anti-bbc and a tad xenophobic is quite something
If you assume that the upper classes can only come from the aristocracy,
then I guess that he is middle class, yes. By any other measure he has always, throughout his life, been part of the 1%.
I don't think he realises just how much it's the 'fault' of his generation that this problem persists, for subscribing to the neo-liberal pursuit of wealth and abusing their position to transfer wealth from all of those below them, whether in age or class, to themselves.
It's impossible not to talk about the decline in social mobility over the last 20 years
without directly implicating Blair. It's under his tenure that social divisions in the UK spiralled out of control - and his policies actively fuelled it.
I thought the article pretty good myself. Although I do find myself confused by the idea that we should be automatically entitled to a better lot/more wealth than our parents had. Why is this always inherently assumed?
Capitalism, growth, prosperity, progress
Not sure I agree with you about Blair being more responsible for ruining social mobility than say Thatcher
In either case it's neoliberal corporate capitalism that has sucked up wealth