GideonDrew777 [2019-06-22 00:52:15 +0000 UTC]

In fact, that was one of the few subjects he didn't spout nonsense about.  (That and Charles Dickens.)  I admit that his ideas are impractical, a throwback to William Cobbett, but has any other economic system proved less ridiculous?  Our current system, consolidating absolute wealth and power in the hands of a micrscopicly small ruling class, is so preposterous (and so unjust) that future ages will look back at us as a pack of damned fools for having given it our allegiance. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

menapia [2017-09-14 21:51:41 +0000 UTC]

Eh, he did have a few good points, like it's good for as many people to have control of their lives and a bit of independence via ownership of property and he was right about the threat of state run communism.  

Chain companies have a limited beneficial effect on a community true you do get the wage packets for the locals but a lot of the profits will be kicked upstairs to headquarters and they can depress the market for smaller local businesses.  Also if they have their own in house arrangements re: suppliers they might not be giving much custom to more local suppliers. 

# check out the term "Doughnut Syndrome" back when we did our Land law term one of our lecturers once worked for the county planning dept. 

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

shadono [2016-05-01 21:07:41 +0000 UTC]

These days novelists take a second place to the showbiz luvvies in sharing with us the wisdom of their political insights. 
In the words of Homer Simpson -  "Rock stars - is there anything they don't know?"

👍: 0 ⏩: 1