I've been meeting a lot of anger at 'the system' recently with some unbridled hatred of the conservative party on offer. Considering they were elected by a democratic system, however imperfect, this anger got me thinking - always a dangerous thing.
Why the anger? It seems directed at 'the system'. I personally don't think the system is an entity. There is just the cumulative effect of individuals making individual decisions. The system has not compelled investment bankers to be given huge salaries and bonuses - it is those individual people demanding silly amounts of money, and other individuals deciding to say OK to their demands.
Example from personal experience - new system introduced where we worked, we didn't initially have the knowledge needed. Management responded, way too late, by employing a contractor with this specialised knowledge at reputedly 2k per day. By the time the guy came aboard I had already done the needed design work, which was promptly grabbed by the contractor. Management had 'covered themselves' by employing the guy despite his extortionate demands and with no reference to us - he obviously must be an expert if he can demand this much money and pure greed on the contractors part to demand that much. This goes on a lot in IT, contractors claim they can perform miracles in telling the time, then promptly demand to borrow your watch when they arrive. It's down to the individuals involved to show a bit of moral courage.
Why the anger? A lot of the angry people are on low wages or benefits. There seems to be an implicit belief that they should be offered jobs with 'decent wages'. There seems to be a belief that the 'right to work' implies a right to be employed at a rate not necessarily related to the value of that work. There seems a total disconnection in their minds to the idea that their work is creating wealth; and that the rate of pay is related to that wealth creation, not to their desire for a good lifestyle.
Why the anger? The anger directed at the government implies that it's all their fault that everyone hasn't got everything they desire. The politicians seem to think they're the most important people around, but I think it's pretty obvious that governments don't create wealth efficiently if at all. It's the people exercising their right to work that create wealth, especially the ones who do their own thing - not relying on others to provide a job for them. The only thing government can do is redistribute the wealth that others create. That's always going to annoy the wealth creators, seeing their hard work going to benefit others isn't going to be motivating. In extremes it can deter individuals from bothering to create wealth at all. In my own case I saw my standard of living eroded by tax increases, price increases in state controlled facilities, state sponsored inflation with low rates of interest. My solution? I stopped working and now rely on a small private pension. I know of quite a few others who've done the same - highly skilled workers with many decades of experience removing themselves from contributing to society because it's just not worth it.
Something that often seems ignored is that companies are commercial operations. They're not charities. The current flooding has caused adverse comment about insurance companies, but it is blindingly obvious that if these companies take in less money than they give out they will very quickly go bust.
Comment on the banks going 'bust' a while ago. They lent money to people who may not be able to repay the loans. The end came when people lost confidence in the way the banks were lending/operating. They weren't broke, they didn't run out of money, the sky didn't fall in - it was just a loss of confidence. The people borrowing the money wanted to borrow it. The banks wanted to lend it. The regulators (i.e. governments) wanted more money in the system to generate growth. Just that nobody stood up and said it wasn't a good idea because for each individual involved it WAS a good idea.
Ah you say, but what about the fat cats raking off the profits from these companies - the shareholders? In the past there were just a few individual shareholders for each company. Nowadays with share ownership schemes many more individuals have small holdings in companies - often the ones they work for. Many more individuals hold shares via pension schemes, ISA share saving schemes and other investments type companies. Personally speaking I would always go for a savings scheme that offers the higher returns. I don't have the sort of money that allows me to make fine moral judgements about how these returns are generated. I think this applies to most 'ordinary' people with investments. Result is that instead of a few shareholders who are rich enough to forego a few quid in return for moral considerations, the small individuals, pensions companies and investment firms will all put in a chairman and board who promise to maximise the investors returns! The irony of this is that a typical employee with his sharesave holdings and options wants good conditions and a considerate employer while wearing his employee hat, and is doubtless voting for employees terms and conditions to be slaughtered while wearing their shareholder hat. I know I've done it! Going back to wealth in the hands of the responsible rich (see blog title) may just be a better idea that it first appears.
I really don't know, but I do wonder how many people would still turn up for work if they could be just as financially well off without working. Or even just financially comfortable when not working. If people don't work, there's no wealth for the government to take and redistribute.
I have four kids, and with my hand on my heart I couldn't say to them that they should save up, put money into pensions and do all the right things. I've done that, paid hundreds of thousands in to the government and now, because I have modest savings and a small private pension, I get no help. I'm well below the poverty line in income terms. I've worked for and feel I deserve a decent standard of living for my retirement, but there are so many people 'in need' who don't contribute (some for good reason as well as some bad reasons) that I ain't going to get it.
So; those who shout 'FUCK THE TORIES' the loudest, or other meaningless abuse at any form of government, please consider those who create the wealth that the government (of any colour) relies on.
