Still so many points just get plain ignored.

That is one basic way the talkboards I know about, function.

e.g.

Without Labour, stuff would not be bought. So the better they're paid, the more they'd buy, and the more profits would be made.

While the point about Labour as a cost has been addressed, and justifies, tis one hasn't been.


Again, the point that people are under the illusion that buying/ consuming brings satisfaction.


or that the system finds ways to keep consuming going. My example was CDs, the introduction of which led people to buy what they already had all over again.

Or that fashion and fads are other ways to keep consuming going.

Or that shareholder strength is a driver for growth of consumption.

Or that if the poor cannot be lifted in a rich country now, what do the circumstances have to be when they will?

or why we had a 'trickle-down' theory and not a 'cascade-down' theory.

Or the connection between the introduction of Capitalism in Russia and China and the explosive emergence of a load of millionaires/billionaires.

Teri said advertising doesn't get people to buy more than they need or want.

Breathtaking.

If you all really think we don't know the importance of consuming to our society, and nobody has forced the point on us, tell us what you think the consequences would be if everyone no longer found mortgages, more clothes, cars, holidays, replacement kitchens, insurance, more food than for survival, drink, DIY, gardening stuff, the latest gadgets, if we no longer found them necessary for our happiness or satisfaction?

   Ivor