Let's see now, what is Shaw's latest whimsical notion? Explain to us all Shaw how does someone "sit at home doing nothing except soaking up other people's money"? What makes it "other people's money"? Who are these "other people"? I am absolutely fascinated to learn.

As far as I am aware the concept runs as follows:

1: Individual has an idea that he believes would be a commercial success.
2: He starts up a business in a small way and confirms that he has a viable concern.
3: Demand for what he produces increases, but he cannot expand his business on his own because he does not have the necessary free capital. He can go into debt by going to a bank, or he can look for people who would be willing to invest capital in his business in return for a share of the business.
4: He goes for the latter because that shares the risk without burdening the business with debt. In return for their investment the shareholders in the enterprise can see the value of their investment grow in terms of trading figures and with increased assets and they, depending upon how the board of directors decide get a share of the profits.
5: Of course it can all go "pear-shaped" and the venture could crash, in which case the assets of the business are realised, sold off and the proceeds shared out amongst the Inland Revenue, the listed creditors and shareholders in that order.

OK then Shaw where does "other people's money" come into the equation?

Just love the way you middle-class socialists worship at the alter of irresponsibility, where there appears to be only rights and no obligations.

Tell me Shaw, Stu, Carroll what percentage of you yearly income do you give to charity?

By the way very few people, if any at all, in the UK these days "change nappies", most would not even know how to fold one. What is in common use today are these "Pampers" things - from a father of four who both cooked for the family and changed their nappies, soaked and washed them back in the day when they were nappies.