Labour Party plots overthrow of capitalism

[wazzickle]

On that basis, we are partially communist in the UK. JLP are communist https://www.johnlewispartnership.co....ownership.html

This means that communism can exist within capitalism. And in this case very successfully.

I'm not disagreeing with you, just to be clear.

Right. I'm told that in Germany renting is far more popular than home ownership, for whatever set of reasons, and that it's pension funds who for the most part own all the homes, thus making it more of a 'circular economy', which resembles communism in a similar way to how you suggested above, rather than the richest creaming wealth off the poorest and stockpiling it. Money is meant to be spent, not saved.

[Smudger]

JLP Partners don't really own the business, though. They get shares as benefits in kind and part of their remuneration package, but cannot actually buy or sell them. I also understand that, while they get a voice and a say in what the company does with its money, they only get that over part of the capital and not that large a percentage... so the means of production are neither fully owned, nor fully controlled, by the workers.

Erm, yes they do. Who owns the rest if they don't? The money gets re-invested or paid out as bonuses. The only non-socialist part is that it's a percentage of salary, meaning those that earn more in the first place get more...

[peterb]

Money is meant to be spent, not saved.

Money is meant to be spent or invested, not saved.

Investing in companies enables them to grow and contribute more to the economy in the form of corporation tax and employers NI contributions.

And it would be a foolish person who didn't have some easy or instant access savings for those unexpected 'rainy day expenses'. Of course an investment is a form of saving, but the returns are unpredictable so they are long term rather than immediately available.

[Ttaskmaster]

Erm, yes they do. Who owns the rest if they don't?

The money is controlled by a trust, and it's that trust who actually, technically, in most senses of the word 'own' pretty much all the shares.

The money gets re-invested or paid out as bonuses.

Profit does, yes... and they reinvest before paying out to shareholder Partners.
But that doesn't make them owners. *I* could get shares in my company if I wanted to, but I'd have more ownership over those than JLPs do over theirs.
They do not actually have possession of it, they do not have control over it, they do not have direct and personal legal responsibility for it. If they leave the employ of the company, their share doesn't go with them, any more than they can sell their share off if ever they choose or buy more shares.

Each Partner does get a say in things, like who they vote to the regional and then Partnership Councils. This Partnership Council then decides who serves on the Partnership Board, and it's this Board who control the corporate side of the business.

[Galant]

Livingstone...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06znb2f

"My friend, Hugo Chavez"....

When challenged on facts: "I don’t know, I’m a retired pensioner, I don’t have staff providing the information".


https://twitter.com/bbcthisweek/stat...26998364184576
https://twitter.com/bbcthisweek/stat...28646956343296
https://twitter.com/bbcthisweek/stat...30124794118144

[ik9000]

Money is meant to be spent or invested, not saved.

Investing in companies enables them to grow and contribute more to the economy in the form of corporation tax and employers NI contributions.

And it would be a foolish person who didn't have some easy or instant access savings for those unexpected 'rainy day expenses'. Of course an investment is a form of saving, but the returns are unpredictable so they are long term rather than immediately available.

and yet those responsible people who did save when they need help from the state get told they have to cough up what little they have saved, while the reckless, feckless, careless and the like who have not been prudent or responsible get it for free. When that's the system you have to wonder why bother?

[ik9000]

I met Livingstone when he was mayor. Didn't think much of him then, still don't. That video reinforces why.

[wazzickle]

Money is meant to be spent or invested, not saved.

Investing in companies enables them to grow and contribute more to the economy in the form of corporation tax and employers NI contributions.

And it would be a foolish person who didn't have some easy or instant access savings for those unexpected 'rainy day expenses'. Of course an investment is a form of saving, but the returns are unpredictable so they are long term rather than immediately available.

Investing is spending, spending is investing.

[Ttaskmaster]

Investing is spending, spending is investing.

Spent - having been used and unable to be used again.
Invested - put (money) into financial schemes, shares, property, or a commercial venture with the expectation of achieving a profit.

We maintain assets. The money used to maintain those is spent, as in gone. Never to be seen again.
We spend it, because we've already invested in these assets and they need to work in order to return a profit.

Investment is CapEx.
Spend is OpEx.

[Corky34]

Spend(ing) - Give (money) to pay for goods, services, or so as to benefit someone or something.

[wazzickle]

Anyone else wanna pipe in with definitions?

[ik9000]

Anyone else wanna pipe in with definitions?

sure.