ferrarilover wrote:London in 1989 was built entirely on banking and high finance. When the crash came and all the red braces and Porsche 911 brigade found themselves jobless, they didn't turn to crack cocaine and prostitution. London didn't become Baghdad, they simple picked themselves up, dusted themselves down and redoubled their efforts in another field. The north, despite being grim, is a perfectly viable place but for the sake of a little will to work.
It IS possible to graft (there's a northern phrase) your way out of trouble. This is a football forum, we have all seen Stoke City, no real talent, but a hell of a work rate, and that is what hard work and application, even in the absence of skill, can achieve.
Matt.
There's a flaw in this theory somewhere, since so many people work hard all their lives, yet remain in poverty. And if any such people become unemployed, they would not have red braces and porsches to help them bounce back.
No doubt some exceptional people can graft their way out of trouble and into a life of affluence. But it's not something everyone, or even anyone, can do. I recently heard somebody say that if you have talent and energy you can be a king, if you have only energy you can at least be a prince, but if you have talent without energy you will remain a pauper. But this still doesn't explain those energetic people who graft hard all their lives whilst remaining in poverty.
Obviously other factors must be involved, but it's easy to understand why, to such people, private enterprise would be regarded as a dog-eat-dog anti-social way of living and capitalism just another form of slavery. It is said that war, not necessity, is the mother of invention, but at what cost to society? Oh I forgot, Thatcher said there's no such thing as society. But could it be that co-operation, not competition, is ultimately the best way forward for humanity?