4 ms·

1. Real income is adjusted for inflation. 2. Property prices have multiple other factors affecting them than just GDP. For instance, if you have a large increa

1. Real income is adjusted for inflation. 2. Property prices have multiple other factors affecting them than just GDP. For instance, if you have a large increase in population without enough new housing to account for it, then property prices naturally go up. I think that describes 21st century Britain quite well, don't you? 3. The economic dogma of blaming all problems on the rich is no different than blaming all problems on a certain ethnic group. It's just that it's not as easy to immediately recognize it as intellectually dishonest.

pjc50 8y ago
The population has increased from 59m to 66m in this period (https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/population https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/population), an increase of 11% which is hardly overwhelming.
- fortythirteen 8y ago
  Are most of those 7m moving to Brockenhurst? No, they're piling into London, and new domiciles aren't keeping up, so prices are skyrocketing and pushing up the "national average".
  - pjc50 8y ago
    London is something of a special case: https://londonist.com/2016/04/london-migration https://londonist.com/2016/04/london-migration I'd argue that the over-centralisation of the UK economy is a big part of the problem there; there should be as much investment in public transport in Manchester and Birmingham as there is in London.
giantsloth 8y ago
It’s extremely intellectually dishonest to compare people who live in extreme comfort and can afford tremendous amounts of power because of their money to people who are historically oppressed by law and culture because of their ethnicity. Edit: Also, who has said they hate the rich? Stop propping up silly YouTube strawmen for you to take down with your logic lording.
- fortythirteen 8y ago
  > people who live in extreme comfort and can afford tremendous amounts of power because of their money You do realize that the first half of your sentence is identical to a extreme nationalist argument against an ethnic group, don't you? All you would have to do is start it off with "The [insert ethnic group] are people who live in extreme comfort..."
  - pjc50 8y ago
    Money is not ethnicity.
  - fortythirteen 8y ago
    > Money is not ethnicity. It's the metric by which you stereotype people. You're just making my point for me.
  - giantsloth 8y ago
    Money objectively provides the means to purchase health services, legal services, investments, decent living spaces, etc. [Insert Ethnic Group] group does not objectively mean [insert stereotype]. I think you are most likely confusing the petite bourgeoisie (the vast majority of programmers) with the haute bourgeoisie (the monopolistic owners of our means of production, think Bezos). The petty bourgeoisie are well off, and look to emulate and think of themselves as similar to a haute bourgeoisie like Elon Musk, but they are not, your 200,000 a year salary is closer to your porters 30k salary and you often work alongside your workers/coworkers. Our owners of the means of production, such as Tim Cooke cornering the high end hardware market, do not work alongside their employees. They view workers in the abstract, as literal numbers on paper. It is much easier for say people like Zuckerberg and Schmidt to collude, because it’s a lot fewer people to coordinate. And this in fact happened with wage fixing in Silicon Valley between tech companies until they were caught. I don’t know what the answer is, and it’s especially fraught in a world economy where unionizing in the USA may mean that Google simply highers programmers in Eastern Europe instead. But I do know that government should be leveraged for the people and not for big business, that’s its point and that’s currently not the case.

pjc50 8y ago

The population has increased from 59m to 66m in this period (https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/population https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/population), an increase of 11% which is hardly overwhelming.

fortythirteen 8y ago
Are most of those 7m moving to Brockenhurst? No, they're piling into London, and new domiciles aren't keeping up, so prices are skyrocketing and pushing up the "national average".
- pjc50 8y ago
  London is something of a special case: https://londonist.com/2016/04/london-migration https://londonist.com/2016/04/london-migration I'd argue that the over-centralisation of the UK economy is a big part of the problem there; there should be as much investment in public transport in Manchester and Birmingham as there is in London.

giantsloth 8y ago

It’s extremely intellectually dishonest to compare people who live in extreme comfort and can afford tremendous amounts of power because of their money to people who are historically oppressed by law and culture because of their ethnicity. Edit: Also, who has said they hate the rich? Stop propping up silly YouTube strawmen for you to take down with your logic lording.

fortythirteen 8y ago
> people who live in extreme comfort and can afford tremendous amounts of power because of their money You do realize that the first half of your sentence is identical to a extreme nationalist argument against an ethnic group, don't you? All you would have to do is start it off with "The [insert ethnic group] are people who live in extreme comfort..."
- pjc50 8y ago
  Money is not ethnicity.
- fortythirteen 8y ago
  > Money is not ethnicity. It's the metric by which you stereotype people. You're just making my point for me.
- giantsloth 8y ago
  Money objectively provides the means to purchase health services, legal services, investments, decent living spaces, etc. [Insert Ethnic Group] group does not objectively mean [insert stereotype]. I think you are most likely confusing the petite bourgeoisie (the vast majority of programmers) with the haute bourgeoisie (the monopolistic owners of our means of production, think Bezos). The petty bourgeoisie are well off, and look to emulate and think of themselves as similar to a haute bourgeoisie like Elon Musk, but they are not, your 200,000 a year salary is closer to your porters 30k salary and you often work alongside your workers/coworkers. Our owners of the means of production, such as Tim Cooke cornering the high end hardware market, do not work alongside their employees. They view workers in the abstract, as literal numbers on paper. It is much easier for say people like Zuckerberg and Schmidt to collude, because it’s a lot fewer people to coordinate. And this in fact happened with wage fixing in Silicon Valley between tech companies until they were caught. I don’t know what the answer is, and it’s especially fraught in a world economy where unionizing in the USA may mean that Google simply highers programmers in Eastern Europe instead. But I do know that government should be leveraged for the people and not for big business, that’s its point and that’s currently not the case.