Theresa May uses the Starbucks argument again

[stevie1957]

The protesters seem to be a mixed bunch; in the main they are not anti-capitalist per-say, but are against excessive corporate greed, which I think we all are; but amongst them is a silly element that are communists and want to do away with the capitalist system all together.

Correct. ...........

[RABBIDDOG]

The solution is get rid of the parasites,

 

To the gulag to be forgotten and frozen since they don't talk like us...

[Rich]

Theresa May, like most of the Tory Government Ministers, is a complete numpty who has a Degree in doing a lot of talking, but actually saying chuff all, some people class it as talking out of her tush

[RABBIDDOG]

Theresa May, like most of the Tory Government Ministers, is a complete numpty who has a Degree in doing a lot of talking, but actually saying chuff all, some people class it as talking out of her tush

 

I couldn't tell the difference between her and Ed Balls last night on QT, except her silly eye repulsions, but he matched that with his airs and graces looking sideways.

[L00b]

Furry thing on a branch spouting Loob for PM! Yeah!

Here's just a few reasons why, whilst very grateful for the accolade, I will respectfully decline:

• I'm too busy, professionally
  
• The trappings don't appeal at all
  
• I've already given enough of my time to a 'State' (national service)
  
• I can't elect, or be elected as, an MP, unless I change nationality...which isn't on the cards anytime soon
  
• I really wouldn't like being in the public eye
  
• I prefer the earnings potential (and, much more importantly, professional freedom) of an ad hoc adviser

Happy to recommend a few like-minded lifelong acquaintances, though

[stevie1957]

From what i've heard from the mouths of the protesters is that they are anti-capitalists, full stop.

 

Many remind me of the Socialist Worker / Communists you used to see frequenting the city centre.

 

In the late 1970s’ I went to an informal meeting of the socialist workers party in a back room of a pub in the Wicker. The vast majority of them were middle/upper class students (or ex-students in white collar jobs). Not very working class at all.

[Mister M]

In the late 1970s’ I went to an informal meeting of the socialist workers party in a back room of a pub in the Wicker. The vast majority of them were middle/upper class students (or ex-students in white collar jobs). Not very working class at all.

 

And I know quite a few two up two down Tories as well.

[stevie1957]

And I know quite a few two up two down Tories as well.

 

There was a man that lived on the old Kelvin (pre Kelvin flats) who used to vote Tory He admired Winston Churchill.

[Sierra]

In the late 1970s’ I went to an informal meeting of the socialist workers party in a back room of a pub in the Wicker. The vast majority of them were middle/upper class students (or ex-students in white collar jobs). Not very working class at all.

 

That's because the 'working class' are all out working.

 

epiphany, I love your threads. They almost always make me stop and think.

[TeaFan]

Last night's Question Time once again highlighted the pure ignorance and myopia of certain politicians when it comes to the true grievances of many protesters on both the left and right.

 

The absurdity of the Starbucks argument - that you are a hypocrite if you protest the current system whilst on a caffeine rush from a coffee purchased at Starbucks - is revealed when you observe that there are pro-capitalists speaking out against the very same system.

 

How can this be? Simply because free market capitalists, whether or not you agree with them ideologically, believe in the clear separation of state and private power as a primary means of protecting society from the failings of the market. The system we have today socialises the risk of large institutions, many of which are subsidised and granted numerous legal privileges by the State, and puts an unnecessary burden on the taxpayer to prop up poorly run businesses that would have failed and been liquidated into the marketplace under a free market capitalist system.

 

Pro-capitalists also agree that, if a bailout is to be made, it should be direct to the people affected - not the institutions who took the risk in the marketplace and FAILED.

 

So if you do defend capitalism, I question why you do not align yourself more with the key issues raised by the protesters, because they ultimately want the same parasitic elements removed from the system as anyone who believes in a fair and free market. Some of the protesters may take it a step further, but ask them what their true issues are with the current system and they will put aside their ideological differences.

 

Perhaps it's time to re-read Adam Smith and his negative views on what is now referred to as corporatism.

 

If I've read you right you are advocating a free market system with a publicly-funded safety net which compensates individuals who suffer from the behaviour of the more rapacious companies rather than compensating the companies themselves when it all goes belly up. Is that right?