Conservative MP Mark Field, who represents the City of London, admitted that a lot of people feel “the rules of capitalism are skewed against us”.

Yeah, and who skewed the rules? Him and people like him.

Not that the Tories are the only ones to blame. Their Lib Dem partners have also failed to do anything to stop crony-capitalism. Neither did the Labour party: when they were in power too, the salaries of directors went up faster than anyone else’s salaries.

The political elite are all part of the 1%. They are all in it together. It’s time for us, the 99%, to all be together too.

On the plus side… he mentions global capitalism. The “system” has a name.

On the minus, he seems to believe that “all of a sudden” the rules of capitalism are skwed against most people.

He then adds “Otherwise, (if we had financial regulation), this country would be in a hell of a lot of trouble”.

Neil: “You mean unlike not being in trouble now”. LOL!

@ 1

“The political elite are all part of the 1%. They are all in it together. It’s time for us, the 99%, to all be together too.”

So let’s say the 99% get together at the next election, put aside their differences in the name of taking control back from the political elite, and all vote for a new People’s Party or whatever, therefore electing… a new political elite!

This is the problem with sweeping statements, and the idea that one’s role in society automatically defines them as a human being. It kinda leads to you creating rules that mean you can’t possibly win the game. When you say that the 99% should “all be together too”, it’s not at all clear what you’re actually calling for, or what your game plan is.

Andrew Neil is to be congratulated for doing such an excellent hatchet job.

It was so good and so completely devastating that I began to feel a bit sorry for Mark Field MP defending a demonstrably bum brief. That said, the challenging issue is what to do about the soaring pay of directors when few policy makers believe that statutory intervention is a practical option.

@5 – It’ll be used to attack the salaries of people like council heads, who could get two or three times as much – easily – in the private sector though. The Tories /love/ driving away talented people from those positions…

@5

I think the pay of some local authority chief executives and chief officers has reached ridiculous levels, especially so when it exceeds the pay of the prime minister. Part of the problem, I suspect, is that some councillors believe that unless they give in to pressures to hike pay, the chief execs or chief officers will take opportunities to drop the controlling party or the cabinet members for policy areas in the proverbial. In other words, it’s a form of blackmail. Another part of the problem is the quality of elected councillors.

@3 Chaise Guevara: So let’s say the 99% get together at the next election, put aside their differences in the name of taking control back from the political elite, and all vote for a new People’s Party or whatever, therefore electing… a new political elite!

No, the point would be to change the rules.

There are issues that need fixing: economic justice, and real democracy. There would be no point in just fixing the economic justice issue, without fixing the democracy issue, because the 1% would over time simply claw back their old privileges.

The situation we’re in now is that society is run for the benefit of the 1% not the 99%. Now, in a democracy, society would be run for the 99%, because they are the majority, and they’d ensure that their own interest prevails. But this hasn’t happened, therefore Britain by definition can’t be a democracy, or at least not a complete one.

(I’ve written in more detail about real democracy and economic justice).

When you say that the 99% should “all be together too”, it’s not at all clear what you’re actually calling for, or what your game plan is.

Here’s how I see the next 4 years might play out (obviously it won’t go exactly this way):

2012: Across Scotland, the first Pirate councillors are elected. In Edinburgh, Pirates do particularly well, emulating the Berlin Pirates’ 9% success the previous year.

2013: Pirates and Greens realise that with Pirates on c. 5% and Greens on c. 8%, if they run as a joint list, they’ll do better in next years’ Euros. This makes particular sense given that Greens and Pirates sit together in the European Parliament.

2014: Euro election. In the UK, UKIP are the largest party. The Green/Pirate list gets 13% of the vote and 11 seats. The first UK Pirates are elected to the European Parliament. On the 700th anniversary of Bannockburn, Scotland votes to stay in the UK.

2015: General election. The Pirates, Greens, UKIP and Lib Dems run on a joint Real Democracy slate. The Tories get 27%, Labour 25%, Others 5%, and Real Democracy 43%, winning 80% of the seats. Real Democracy quickly introduce STV, get money out of politics, recall elections, and referendums. Their work done, they then call a new general election.

(I’ve hypothesised a similar scenario in the past).

After watching all the horrible things that happened this past years i think that capitalism has already paid off everything. You can see how many people suffer and only those who are on top are prospering. this system is somewhat not for the people but only for the elite. it’s disappointing, really.

@7 – Unrealistic. The Tories will prod Scotland repeatedly and get it to leave. Stopped reading there.

@6 – We grossly underpay our elected politicians at Westminster, encouraging only the independently wealthy or the political fanatics to stand. The PM’s pay being used as a benchmark for anything is risible.

Very poor headline Sunny – that he admits that people feel something is not the same as admitting that something is true and you have clearly misrepresented on this point.

@9: “We grossly underpay our elected politicians at Westminster, encouraging only the independently wealthy or the political fanatics to stand. The PM’s pay being used as a benchmark for anything is risible.”

On MPs’ pay, compare Chris Dillow in 2009:

“It’s insufficiently appreciated just how well paid MPs are. Their annual salary is £64,766. According to the IFS, a single person on this income is in the top 3% of earners. If he has a partner earning £30,000 a year, this couple is also in the top 3% of household incomes. . . . ”
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2009/05/its-insufficiently-appreciated-just-how-well-paid-mps-are-their-annual-salary-is-64766-according-to-the-ifs-a-single-pe.html

For what they do, their capabilities and integrity, back bench MPs are overpaid IMO.

In the last Parliament, more than half of MPs were guilty of over-claiming expenses.

A public opinion poll in 2009 found that estate agents and politicians are among least trusted professions.