Election Year or Fear!

[MadAmster]

The crux of it, IMO, is that we are prisoners of the shareholding faction. They want ever more in dividends which means they want companies to sell more and more goods and services. With birth rates falling, we actually need less goods to be made and sold, less services are needed because there's less people. The demands of the shareholders is why we keep getting high immigration levels we don't really need.

Int greed grand?

[swaledale]

The crux of it, IMO, is that we are prisoners of the shareholding faction. They want ever more in dividends which means they want companies to sell more and more goods and services. With birth rates falling, we actually need less goods to be made and sold, less services are needed because there's less people. The demands of the shareholders is why we keep getting high immigration levels we don't really need.

Int greed grand?

The flaw in that argument is that whilst its true a falling population would suggest less demand, the fact is that even if the population was falling, which its not, the acquisition of "stuff" per person has risen and people want brand new and of course the latest. So the market continues to grow, encouraged of course by slick marketing and a built in obsolescence.

It is of course a complicated equation, but even with the technological advances made over the last 50 years of my life and the millions of jobs that have disappeared, there is a shortage of labour at all skill levels, but particularly at higher skill levels which are the areas the UK is having to recruit from overseas.

Whilst it is true that shareholders expect a decent rate of return on their investment. The significant increase in the numbers of the very wealthy and despite improvement in overall living standards a widening of the gap in income and assets suggests that capitalism is benefiting only a small proportion of the worlds population to a greater extent than one would expect.

That means the system is ****ed, because its unsustainable and the outcome will inevitably be a reset, be that a world wide economic crash, a world war or revolution.

[Trickytreesreds]

The crux of it, IMO, is that we are prisoners of the shareholding faction. They want ever more in dividends which means they want companies to sell more and more goods and services. With birth rates falling, we actually need less goods to be made and sold, less services are needed because there's less people. The demands of the shareholders is why we keep getting high immigration levels we don't really need.

Int greed grand?

I think the China and the USSR and Easter Europe/ Cuba etc went down this road. You need less and nothing more than you need will be provided.
It didn't seem to work out very well

[Geoff Parkstone]

That analysis is intriguing MA - as s far as the domestic economy is concerned it's likely true: we do not need to consume more but vast marketing budgets exist to convince us that we do, in order to avoid contracting demand.

But most significant brands/quoted businesses are globalized where the consumer marketplace is still expanding although much of that demand is perhaps unable to afford the goods.

This does place Mother Capitalism in a difficult position, and one of its biggest challenges is to attain sustained growth where the richer first world demand should be tailing off and poorer third world demand continuing to rise. (Terms used loosely).

A flaw in the model? The model seems to require infinite demand - but that demand needs to be one which maintains price integrity.

Dividend demands? Well suppliers of capital are an integral stakeholder in the system and rightly deserve a return on the capital which they put at risk of loss. Of course that return should be proportionate but it cannot be denied. Don't forget here that the rapacious shareholder is significantly likely, ultimately, to be you and I via our pensions - and we all like to see those rise as you yourself noted elsethread.

[MadAmster]

If only dividends were paid out in a proportionate manner.

Look at the water companies. Billions paid out in dividends over the past couple of decades. A backlog of maintenance and repairs roughly equal in cost to the dividends paid out.

Had they spent the money on remedial and maintenance work, there would be little to no raw sewage being pumped into rivers and seas.

[ramAnag]

If only dividends were paid out in a proportionate manner.

Look at the water companies. Billions paid out in dividends over the past couple of decades. A backlog of maintenance and repairs roughly equal in cost to the dividends paid out.

Had they spent the money on remedial and maintenance work, there would be little to no raw sewage being pumped into rivers and seas.

The privatisation of water - by Thatcher 35 years ago - was always unpopular and haven’t those who opposed it all those years ago, on the basis that such an important national resource shouldn’t ever have been placed in the hands of a few, been proved right?

Fortunately I believe - GP will correct me if I’m wrong - less than 10% is related to UK pension funds.
Unfortunately the vast majority is in the hands of rich foreign businessmen and will cost a fortune to reclaim.

[Andy_Faber]

The privatisation of water - by Thatcher 35 years ago - was always unpopular and haven’t those who opposed it all those years ago, on the basis that such an important national resource shouldn’t ever have been placed in the hands of a few, been proved right?

Fortunately I believe - GP will correct me if I’m wrong - less than 10% is related to UK pension funds.
Unfortunately the vast majority is in the hands of rich foreign businessmen and will cost a fortune to reclaim.

IMO you/one should look at it the other way before declaring clean hands - not ‘how much of shares are in my pension’ but ‘how much of my pension is in shares’

[Geoff Parkstone]

The privatisation of water - by Thatcher 35 years ago - was always unpopular and haven’t those who opposed it all those years ago, on the basis that such an important national resource shouldn’t ever have been placed in the hands of a few, been proved right?

Fortunately I believe - GP will correct me if I’m wrong - less than 10% is related to UK pension funds.
Unfortunately the vast majority is in the hands of rich foreign businessmen and will cost a fortune to reclaim.

Under 10% on average might be a fair guess for pension fund direct investment in water companies, including overseas pension funds. However as pension fund managers invest indirectly through "funds of funds" and hedge funds, who knows that the exposure truly is.

Consider yourself lucky that you didn't work in a university rA, as the Universities Soperannuation fund are in for about 20% of Thames Water I believe.

[Geoff Parkstone]

About 50% in my case - although, by design, about 1% in UK equities. The US election outcome might be important!

[ramAnag]

About 50% in my case - although, by design, about 1% in UK equities. The US election outcome might be important!

Assuming, for the sake of your pension, you’d prefer a Harris victory, GP?

Let’s hope Kamala can emulate Badenoch’s infinitely less important victory and see off Trump this week.