[petejh]

The tin solder that holds everything together in every electronic component you own, including the device on which you just typed the post on this thread, was probably sourced from a corrupt and possibly tyrannical state (Indonesia or Myamar), by possibly exploited youth labour, possibly working for a corrupt state-owned company (PT Timah), creating damage to the environment by dredging the tin-loaded sand from the shallow seabed and deltas, possibly processed in a coal-fired processing facility in an autocratic state that persecutes and murders its minorities and political enemies (China). Meanwhile we all depend for our standard of living on manufacturing powered by the oil and gas of Saudi, Russia, and likely this year also Venezuela and Iran.
When the world transitions away from hydrocarbons we'll all rely on metals that come or are processed in large part from Russia, China and various autocratic or plain old corrupt states. As Terresa might have said there's no magic metal tree.     

If the barrier to acting in the world was people throwing around labels of 'hypocrisy' and 'other bad things going on' then you wouldn't be able to operate in the world. Everyone would stay curled up safely in bed where they couldn't do anything that hurt anyone else. I think there are varying degrees of malicious intent and also varying degrees of malicious negligence to be considered.


BTW Matt I've worked on various of the RFA ships - all the 'Forts', and three of the 'Tides'. You can thank Doylo and the other exploited chimney cleaners for the nice clean engine vents.

[Oldmanmatt]

Just access or did you ever embark, bitd?
Very good points, by the way.
Bit busy, being ill but not having Covid, but I also tend to think there has been a general ignoring of how far the world has improved. Long way to go, but the trend is promising. So, as I said, find the good, move it forward as much as you can.
Try to keep the “Old man shouting at the clouds” thing to a minimum, because that will kill you and actually doesn’t help. I do it too, but it really doesn’t achieve anything.

[petejh]

Just access over the last ten or so years. Would have enjoyed a nice cruise bitd while the RFA did all the work! I enjoy visiting the ships it's always interesting.

[BrutusTheBear]

Just access or did you ever embark, bitd?
Very good points, by the way.
Bit busy, being ill but not having Covid, but I also tend to think there has been a general ignoring of how far the world has improved. Long way to go, but the trend is promising. So, as I said, find the good, move it forward as much as you can.
Try to keep the “Old man shouting at the clouds” thing to a minimum, because that will kill you and actually doesn’t help. I do it too, but it really doesn’t achieve anything.

IDK where to start with this.  I'm sure fellow environmentalists that lurk hereabouts will be pleased to hear the world has improved and we've just been ignoring that fact.  I'm also sure they know we have a long way to go and plenty of time to achieve it.  The politics thread is dead, how can we be optimists when confronted with the truth?  Maybe rename it 'Middle Age Ostriches Collectively Bury Their Heads in the Sand'.  I hope you can sense that I am writing this in good humour and despite having a very despairing world view I am generally quite a happy human being.  Probably the least happy period of my life involved a settling for/ a letting go of the values and the beliefs I hold.  Stop shouting at the clouds is the worst thing I could personally do.  I do what I can within my own life to support others, I seek to do work that does likewise, I don't accept things the way that they are, I seek change and I tell people what I think even it may be unpopular, that's what keeps me ticking OMM. 

The government were told what the consequences of their austerity measures would be they carried on anyway, Ian Duncan Smith even used these words towards sick and disabled people 'work your way out of poverty'.  The lack of outrage is unbelievable.  I sometimes wonder whether people whom are 'comfortable' actually understand the everyday reality of life for those at the bottom in this country or whether it's just easier/less painful not to think about it. 

Things are about to get a whole lot worse for a lot of people, once again they know what the outcomes will be but will they seek to protect citizens first or profits?

[danm]

It's important to take a global view not a local one. By almost any metric you choose, globally the lot of the average human has been improving steadily since WW2. Austerity and Brexit are both shit but relatively unimportant in the overall scheme of things (despite some of the personal impacts of either being terrible for some individuals). The looming impact of climate change will be a different ball game, I agree.

[BrutusTheBear]

It's important to take a global view not a local one. By almost any metric you choose, globally the lot of the average human has been improving steadily since WW2. Austerity and Brexit are both shit but relatively unimportant in the overall scheme of things (despite some of the personal impacts of either being terrible for some individuals). The looming impact of climate change will be a different ball game, I agree.

'Some of the personal impacts of either being terrible for some individuals.'     I don't buy the global trends/ averages argument at all, the amount of wealth in this country is obscene and the personal impacts of the decisions made by those with the most are far beyond 'terrible' for some individuals.  These aren't necessary causalities of progress they're potentially our friends, family, members of our communities etc.. whom have died because of the callous removal of resources and our states victimization of those with little.  It's criminal, murderous, a cull by stealth but heh living standards generally globally are improving so who gives a shit.  I quoted a figure from a research study that lasted for 4 years this has been going on for much longer than those 4 years and we have had a pandemic that has disproportionately hit the poorest since. Once again the apathy, the ability to hide from the truth and lack of outrage astounds me.

[galpinos]

Re P&O,

The AVERAGE wage for the replacement staff is £5.50. How is this possible with a minimum wage of £6.56 (over 18)/£8.91 (over23)? Do they get round it via the apprentice wage route or is it some off-shore gubbins?

It also makes me think, if P&O can't make the business work and are doing this, what do all the other operators pay their employees? Is me boycotting P&O for the family Font trip just putting money in the hands of another awful company? Do I have to sell a kidney for the chunnel?

(in 1996, as a 16yo stacking shelves in Tesco I was on £4.50hr with double time on Sundays which adjusted for inflation would be £9hr/18hr today)

[Wellsy]

It's offshore related business apparently

That they admitted they knowingly broke the law is disgraceful. People should be prosecuted for that.

[spidermonkey09]

(in 1996, as a 16yo stacking shelves in Tesco I was on £4.50hr with double time on Sundays which adjusted for inflation would be £9hr/18hr today)

This got me thinking. In approx 2006 (13/14 years old) I was on 4 quid an hour working for the local greengrocers at the weekends. Can't remember what my friends were earning in comparable jobs, but looking back it feels like slave labour!

[webbo]

Most of the times when I have traveled with P&O on the Hull Rotterdam route. Majority of the the staff working in the restaurants and cleaning the cabins are from the Philippines. This probably how they get round the shit pay.

[Oldmanmatt]

You will pick up more detail through here:
https://www.nautilusint.org/?_cldee=YnVsbGV0aW5kaXN0cmlidXRpb25saXN0QG5hdXRpbHVzaW50Lm9yZw%3d%3d&recipientid=contact-91ae962243a2e911a98d000d3ab9ad32-a9f42573117344bebba890c15dc78fc5&esid=4434b7ea-03aa-ec11-983f-0022489d0dfb&_cldee=YnVsbGV0aW5kaXN0cmlidXRpb25saXN0QG5hdXRpbHVzaW50Lm9yZw%3d%3d&recipientid=contact-91ae962243a2e911a98d000d3ab9ad32-a9f42573117344bebba890c15dc78fc5&esid=4434b7ea-03aa-ec11-983f-0022489d0dfb




Also, I used the Sky News calculator today to workout the Budget’s impact on our family.
We will pay £12 less per year.
There’s no way this will help anybody earning less than us.
If I added £10k to our supposed income, we saved closer to £300, so…

[Oldmanmatt]

https://www.nautilusint.org/

Not sure what I did with that link above.

[BrutusTheBear]

You can watch the full 2 hours of Parliamentary committee including taking evidence from the CEO of P & O on pootube if you're so inclined.  £300k a year plus incentives is the going rate for being a full scale **** apparently.  More cost effective and less hassle to break the law and pay the dues. 

Brought back memories of the sharp suited Rolex wearing HR consultant that was rolled out in front of us, by the County Council, when the Youth Service got smashed.  Sharp suit but nothing but darkness behind the eyes!

Excellent stuff from Gary Stevenson on Times Radio explaining in very simple terms why we have high inflation, where all the COVID money ended up and why the government's response to 'the cost of living crisis' is a fucking joke.  >

[petejh]

I don't buy the global trends/ averages argument at all, the amount of wealth in this country is obscene and the personal impacts of the decisions made by those with the most are far beyond 'terrible' for some individuals.

Made me think of this:

Charlie Munger was born in 1924. The richest man in the world that year was John D. Rockefeller, whose net worth equaled about 3% of GDP, which would be something like $700 billion in today’s world.

Seven hundred billion dollars.

OK.

But make a short list of things that did not exist in Rockefeller’s day:

Sunscreen.
Advil.
Tylenol.
Antibiotics.
Chemotherapy.
Flu, tetanus, measles, smallpox, and countless other vaccines.
Insulin for diabetes.
Blood pressure medication.
Fresh produce in the winter.
TVs.
Microwaves.
Overseas phone calls.
Jets.

To say nothing of computers, iPhones, or Google Maps.

If you’re honest with yourself I don’t think you would trade Rockefeller’s $700 billion in the early 1900s for an average life in 2022.

But that’s hard to admit, because all the insane luxuries Rockefeller didn’t have are now considered basic necessities. Everything works like that. All luxuries become necessities in due time. It’s why “everything’s amazing and no one’s happy,” as Louis C.K. says.

https://www.collaborativefund.com/blog/low-expectations/


I don't think 'everything's amazing'. But I do think a huge number of people are unhappy and a lot of that unhappiness comes from unrealistically high expectations and peer comparison. Life isn't fair, essential for happiness to remember that.

[teestub]

Gotta agree with Brutus on this one, it’s great that global average living standards are increasing obviously, but this shouldn’t be used as an excuse for the consistent failings of communities in our country, or the increasing inequality that feeds into this.

[duncan]

Interesting thesis Pete. What you seem to be saying is we should compare ourselves with people who lived in 1924, even though this is quite hard, but we shouldn't compare ourselves with people who live in 2022, even though this is painfully easy.

[SA Chris]

Gotta agree with Brutus on this one, it’s great that global average living standards are increasing obviously, but this shouldn’t be used as an excuse for the consistent failings of communities in our country, or the increasing inequality that feeds into this.

...and if the increases in standards do lead / contribute significantly to complete environmental meltdown, famine and death then they probably weren't worth it.

[Oldmanmatt]

I don't buy the global trends/ averages argument at all, the amount of wealth in this country is obscene and the personal impacts of the decisions made by those with the most are far beyond 'terrible' for some individuals.

Made me think of this:

Charlie Munger was born in 1924. The richest man in the world that year was John D. Rockefeller, whose net worth equaled about 3% of GDP, which would be something like $700 billion in today’s world.

Seven hundred billion dollars.

OK.

But make a short list of things that did not exist in Rockefeller’s day:

Sunscreen.
Advil.
Tylenol.
Antibiotics.
Chemotherapy.
Flu, tetanus, measles, smallpox, and countless other vaccines.
Insulin for diabetes.
Blood pressure medication.
Fresh produce in the winter.
TVs.
Microwaves.
Overseas phone calls.
Jets.

To say nothing of computers, iPhones, or Google Maps.

If you’re honest with yourself I don’t think you would trade Rockefeller’s $700 billion in the early 1900s for an average life in 2022.

But that’s hard to admit, because all the insane luxuries Rockefeller didn’t have are now considered basic necessities. Everything works like that. All luxuries become necessities in due time. It’s why “everything’s amazing and no one’s happy,” as Louis C.K. says.

https://www.collaborativefund.com/blog/low-expectations/


I don't think 'everything's amazing'. But I do think a huge number of people are unhappy and a lot of that unhappiness comes from unrealistically high expectations and peer comparison. Life isn't fair, essential for happiness to remember that.

My Grandfather was born between the wars in Coventry, about 100 years ago. His father had been gassed in the trenches and could only manage night watchman work at the factory. His mother took in laundry to make ends meet. They never did. They lived in one room, with one bed. My grandfather was one of 13 brothers and sisters. Two died of (now) preventable diseases, before the age of 5. He was the youngest and by the outbreak of WW2, the only one not in the Army, Married or “in service”. He was evacuated to Buckfastleigh. While there, his entire neighbourhood in Coventry, was utterly destroyed (parents survived). He never returned to Coventry. Lodged with his custodian family and laboured on the farm, until he was old enough to enlist in the Navy (ironically finishing training a few days before VE day).
He died, well medicated and cared for, surrounded by his children (and several of his many grandchildren and even a few of his great grandchildren) in clean, calm, NHS hospital.

It is an objective fact, that life has improved for almost everybody, dramatically, over the last 100 years. This is not the same as saying that either equity or equality have been achieved; or even that there is not a vast challenge ahead to improve things for a huge number of people. Both here and globally.

Personally, I’m incredibly aware of the issues (I have been both poor, homeless and utterly broke myself) and my partner works day in and day out with some of the most vulnerable/at risk kids, in the “worst” school, Torbay has to offer (and this place has some of the most deprived areas in the UK and ranks 4th for violent crime in the UK).

I agree with Brutus, that there is still massive injustice and a mountain of inequality, that still causes incredible suffering and that it is entirely unnecessary, largely the fault of ignorance, blind adherence to ideology and arrogance amongst the political classes and the wealthier population (principle difference being, I think both Left and Right are equally guilty of these things).

However, ignoring the manifest improvements, that have spread out from the “Western” world, globally; is daft.
It could certainly move faster. Different story.

Ask me about my Romanian family’s progression from subsistance farming, living in 19th century conditions, to (clearly) UK middle class standards now, over the last 20 years (shit, MIL hires a local kid to milk the cow these days. Pure posh that is, by Romanian standards).

There is much reason to be hopeful. As much because the “Government” have always been as they are now and yet “we” usually  move in the right direction as a society (globally, some bits quicker than others).
Part of me thinks the Ukrainian situation will boost the movement away from Oil ans Gas dependence and (hopefully) push, a much more connected, world even further away from the lure of dictators and kings.
Ultimately, steering 6 Billion cantankerous individuals is a slow process. Even herding the 68 Million on this island, is a thankless task and these fuckers at least all speak the same language (sort of).

[danm]

To be clear, I wasn't making excuses, just pointing out the global perspective but the point seemed to be missed in all the outrage. Not that surprising really as at a local level, yes, it is fucking outrageous that we've allowed ourselves to be ruled by such a bunch of charlatans who will drive many into absolute poverty.

I know what absolute poverty is, my parents had to choose between feeding the family or putting the heating on. In winter I'd break the ice on my bedside glass of water in the morning before getting dressed for school. At school my nickname was "Wing Commander Middleton" because the fashion was for skinny ties and shirt collars but as my clothes all came for jumble sales or church charity boxes I looked like I was in the Bee Gees with huge flappy collars. One reason I've always secretly hated disco, sorry Grimer! So don't get me wrong, my version of hell has a special room set aside for Sunak and chums. Still, despite their endeavours, in general humanity is better off than in 1950, for now. I'm more angered by the lack of progress on reducing emissions than I am on reducing inequality because unfortunately the former will have way more global impact than the latter.

[Oldmanmatt]

It’s not just selective editing is it?
There are so many clips, at different points; seemingly every public moment of the NATO conference and Johnson is (seemingly) being, pointedly, ignored and shunned.

[seankenny]

I've been thinking about these questions of growth and inequality for a while. My post-graduate diploma thesis was on growth and development in South Asia and my masters dissertation looked at how changes in the labour market, taxes, benefits and pensions combined to affected inequality in the UK over what a more excitable leftist might call "the period of neoliberal hell", aka the 70s to the 2010s. The modelling for the later involved a fairly deep dive into the evolution of the UK's tax system and its wealth and income distribution. Before you come at me with your hot takes on how not being able to forecast depressions mean economic models aren't worth shit, let me point out that human societies are very complex and even working out the effects of things that have already happened is hard! Even when those things are events that have happened repeatedly, such as raising or lowering taxes, or changing interest rates.

It's one of those things where the more I learn, the less certain I am, but some things remain quite clear.

For sure, the world is much better off than it was, which is obvious to anyone like Matt or myself who has relatives living outside the rich world. There are ways you could "not buy it", such as suggesting that the majority of outstanding growth happened mainly in China, but heck, that's still a lot of human beings living a better life. But I don't think we can be complacent and console ourselves with "we usually  move in the right direction as a society (globally, some bits quicker than others)" because this quite the full picture either. Lots of places just flatline, for years and years, or even go backwards.

Governments, or probably more likely elites in general, can fuck things up:



This graph shows averages rather than distributional effects, so the picture for most Indians and Nigerians is worse than it appears. But look, Nigerians are now back where they were in around 2009, a decade on and they still aren't making economic progress. And before you say - but does GDP growth really make people happier? - yes, there is good evidence that it really does, even though GDP itself is a crude measure.

Or governments/elites can really fuck things up, in the case of Pakistan as compared to Bangladesh, whose success is under-rated:




Or huge, horrible political or financial events can really really really fuck things up too, in this case the fall of the Soviet Union and the Asian Financial Crisis:



Apologies for those who are familiar with this stuff already.

The problem for many on the left is that these improvements occured within the "neoliberal era" from 1980 onwards. Sure, one could say "but it's people working in horrible sweatshops" and this is true. But... moving to a city and working in a factory is often much better than staying in a village. This kind of movement is a key part of societies getting richer, creating more inclusive and responsive political structures based around class interests rather than kinship or patronage, increasing rights for women etc. Compare the prospects of the great-grandchildren of Sicilians who moved to New York in 1910 as against those who stayed.

Even within the UK, there's a real problem with labelling the last 40 years as a write-off compared to the social democratic/welfare state heyday of 1950 - 1980. Those thirty years were just great if you were a white male worker, and yes, on average, there was a decline in income and wealth inequality:





But can you really say those were great years if you were a woman, non-white, gay? I think there is a more difficult relationship between the socialist left and liberalism than left-wingers like to admit (the further left, the more difficult the relationship). It's no surprise that they key driver of liberal reforms on race, homosexuality, prisons, etc was Roy Jenkins, a politician despised by the left who went on to found the SDP. As a pure rhetorical point, how can left wing parties win elections when they describe as hellish an era in which many voters have seen their outlook vastly improve?

I think something else that is under-appreciated is that from the late 70s/early 80s onwards there were two mutually reinforcing trends occuring. On the one hand, lower taxes on the well off, which were a choice. But also, a divergence in the labour market that saw the wages of more educated, skilled workers growing more quickly. Sure, unionisation played a part in this, but studies attempting to estimate a counterfactual in which unionisation rates remain high suggest that the same basic trend would have occured. What if the terrible inequality we experience now was in part baked-in because it flowed from technological changes that were occuring and out of any individual's control? You could embrace those changes as the US, Europe and Japan did, and suffer rising inequality, or you could fail to embrace them, as the USSR did, and... suffer even worse inequality. Sure, there are some countries that escaped this dynamic like the Netherlands, but maybe whatever they did is simply harder to do in a larger, more diverse country.

Do I have to add the disclaimer that austerity was a disaster and that our current rulers are clueless? I suspect I probably do.

[seankenny]

I agree with Brutus, that there is still massive injustice and a mountain of inequality, that still causes incredible suffering and that it is entirely unnecessary, largely the fault of ignorance, blind adherence to ideology and arrogance amongst the political classes and the wealthier population (principle difference being, I think both Left and Right are equally guilty of these things).

The "plague on both your houses" approach doesn't square with reality. There are clear and measurable differences between our left and right parties when it comes to inequality, public services and the life chances of the less well-off.

There is much reason to be hopeful. As much because the “Government” have always been as they are now

There's a strong argument that this government are much worse on both strategic vision and day-to-day implementation than nearly every other government I've seen in my lifetime. To say "they're all the same" is the kind of cynical nonsense that gives really poor politicians the green light to do stupid shit.

[Oldmanmatt]

I agree with Brutus, that there is still massive injustice and a mountain of inequality, that still causes incredible suffering and that it is entirely unnecessary, largely the fault of ignorance, blind adherence to ideology and arrogance amongst the political classes and the wealthier population (principle difference being, I think both Left and Right are equally guilty of these things).

The "plague on both your houses" approach doesn't square with reality. There are clear and measurable differences between our left and right parties when it comes to inequality, public services and the life chances of the less well-off.

There is much reason to be hopeful. As much because the “Government” have always been as they are now

There's a strong argument that this government are much worse on both strategic vision and day-to-day implementation than nearly every other government I've seen in my lifetime. To say "they're all the same" is the kind of cynical nonsense that gives really poor politicians the green light to do stupid shit.

I dunno, this lot have been in power since 2010 (changing leaders doesn’t seem to have changed their underlying ideology) and allowing for the global collapse of ‘08 and the Pandemic (which probably gives similar figures for most Western nations over the last 2-3 years, even if ours are a degree worse than most); the current government appear to be on a par with Labour of the ‘70s. (Looking at the “clear patch” between global crap).
Thatcherism, meanwhile, appears to be vindicated…
Which pisses me right the fuck off.

Anyway, my gross oversimplifications aside; that was an excellent couple of posts, very much appreciated and informative. Cheers.

[TobyD]

I'd entirely agree Sean, there are many very good and conscientious, hardworking politicians, from all the main parties. The distinct issue with this government is that Boris Johnson has never been any of those things, has no interest in policy and can't even appear professional.

[seankenny]

Interesting thesis Pete. What you seem to be saying is we should compare ourselves with people who lived in 1924, even though this is quite hard, but we shouldn't compare ourselves with people who live in 2022, even though this is painfully easy.

I agree with this, of course it's a silly comparison purely made to justify ridiculous inequality.

But there's a serious philosophical point within Pete's post - it is actually quite hard to compare the differences in wealth over a long period. Obviously we are richer, in the simple sense that we can combine labour and capital to do more "stuff", whether that's build cars faster, create vaccines, whatever. But really poor people nowadays could have a mobile phone which no one had in 1975 or 1915, so isn't there some kind of logic in saying that even very poor person today is in some sense "richer" than a well off person from a century ago?

I don't really find this convincing, as on a personal level we can't go and live in 1920, but it's quite awkward to resolve. If we break things down into the service they provide, so "message services" go from runner/merchants > pony express > postal service with carriages > postal service with railways > telegraph > telephone > fax > mobile phone > smartphone then... maybe, but sometimes the quality is different.

Anyhow quite heroically someone tried to work out the change in the cost of light, which is essentially the same stuff throughout history (kinda): https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38650976

Nordhaus' writes: "The bottom line is simple: traditional price indexes of lighting vastly overstate the increase in lighting prices over the last two centuries, and the true rise in living standards in this sector has consequently been vastly understated."

Obviously if we constructed a price index that took this into account then the vast fortunes of the Gilded Age would shrink in their present value. I honestly don't know how much the statistical agencies do this, clearly they will be very aware of this issue and try to correct for it, but has this been done for the whole of the twentieth century or further back? I have no idea.

But I suspect if we did then Rockerfeller would still look really fucking wealthy.