Hi, Both (or All, depending on whether you see three makes a crowd and I've had a 50% increase in readership)You’ll be aware by now that there's a somewhat parlous time ahead for the majority of the populace vis-a-vis the present monetary crisis that is hitting all developed countries; the populace in undeveloped countries have had this situation since, well, forever really, so I guess they don’t know the difference and thereby don’t count...so that’s alright then ("Ha, Doris! We'll make a Conservative voter out of you yet!"). One of my comforters that has taken the place of the thumb I suck at night in order to get to sleep in my present concerned state as to where the next penny is coming from, has been the knowledge, in the words of our past Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, that those in power ‘feel our pain’; that and the considered words of our present Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osbourne, when he told us....in all seriousness mind.... that we were, ‘all in this together’; bless.... I’ll bet all of the present government as well as all those millionaire supporters of theirs and the self-styled ‘captains of industry’ on wrecking bonuses all lie awake nights fretting over whether to use their remaining money to pay the gas bill, the rent or for the kids school meals.
So, it may come as surprise to some that the retailers, those folk who own the shops on our high street, had a bit of a moan about the drop in sales over Christmas and how they'd been hoping that the January/February sales might have allowed them to recoup a little of this ‘lost revenue’. This is, of course, a yearly bleat that we hear; never enough sold; never enough profit made; "Oh, woe, woe, thrice woe....! etc..."...move on.... Now, there are several things that come out of this and are worthy of comment (don’t worry, I’m only going to address three of them; relax) and they are below, however I would just like to say that our illustrious and gently scented Chancellor (he of the name Osbourne) confirmed much about his ability to be in his present post, together with his level of understanding of the people of this country and their plight, when he announced not long ago that a significant factor, in fact the overriding factor he quoted in the interview he gave, was that the British people had not spent so much money at Christmas ‘because of the weather’. So the fact that the money they'd put away into pension funds had been squandered by the city boys (that fuckin' arch bastard 'Cap'n Bob for one) that the banks were guilty of a level of robbery that would put the Brinks Mat gang to shame, that the level of unemployment was over 2 million and was set to rise significantly after the full impact of the shit we were in as a country was spelled out in the budget, and just how deep the cuts allied to that were going to be (and we all knew that wrist-slashing depth wasn’t even in it) that besides the fact their savings were reduced in value overnight and that every and all cost of living, food, water, gas, electric, VAT, fuel.....that it was ‘the weather’ which had stopped them spending. Hmmmm…..thanks for that, Georgie-Boy....
Disregarding the lunatic Osbourne’s statement just for a moment, with all my listed poo hitting the propeller at one-and-the-same-time, you’d think that shopping would be the last thing on most people’s minds, as indeed it was. Over the Christmas period, folk sort of cut back on the expenditure and, ergo, the shopkeepers complained about the lack of sales... Now, and as with every Christmastime (which starts in about September here in the good ole’ U of K...just as, when I went into the local M&S in January – 20th to be exact – they had the hanging boards, pop-up-cardboard cut-outs and frippery in place and pushing Easter) after the glut of gimmickry thrust at the populace is deemed to have sold insufficiently to fill-the till, the 'SALES' started, only this year there was an edge to it as the pre-sales-sales were pissy according to the sellers and manufacturers, and this (at last) brings me to the thrust of this chat.
What I fail to work out, just as I’ve yet to understand how a 250,000 ton steel warship can float or a 200 ton metal airplane can fly, is why the article in the shop, which before Christmas was worth £250, can, in the space of three days, now only be worth £75? OK, OK, I’m confused; let’s break it down.
The price is irrelevant, as is the article’s pedigree. It can be anything; a dress, a pair of shoes, a board game, a car, whatever. In all these things there’s either a fair price to pay for it or not. I mean, c’mon, EVERYONE involved in this article’s manufacture, sales, advertising, packaging, ALL of them will have costed in their profit margin; that’s the first thing they do. So, when VAT, the various profit levels, transport, shipping and storage costs have been worked out, accounted for and added together to give a retail price and the seller can offer that article, which they originally offered for £250, for £75 and, seemingly, still make a profit (a fair profit 'cos let's face it they never sell anything and not make a profit) then what's £250; daylight robbery, possibly? Is £250 a fair price to pay for this article and everyone make a reasonable living off'f its manufacture and sale or is the article overpriced and are you all a bunch of greedy buggers? Discuss. If and article priced at £250 can be sold for £75 and a profit still made then don't charge two-hundred-and-fifty quid for it; charge seventy-fuckin'-five!
I’m sure that no one involved in this article’s construction and eventual sale, in its elements of design and eventual arrival on the shelf, I’m sure none of them lost out, so how come, when it was £250 two days ago (one of which, Christmas Day no less, was not a day that calculations could have been gone in to and a realistic price arrived at for the 'SALE', so that means the 'SALE' price had been agreed several days before this....so...?...why wasn't it sold at that price then....? I'm getting confused.....sorry) I mean, how can a £250 article now be off the shelf, after just two days, for £75? That’s a loss of £175 on the original price! Now, I’m not a retail expert (“You don’t say, Doris?!”) but I don’t know of a high street shop, manufacturer or shipper that could withstand that sort of percentage loss for more than a week before going out of business. So, what this boils down to is that someone, somewhere is making a killing on everything we buy...ah, I'm catching on.....so that’s as in ‘everything’...so, taking the ‘SALE’ ideology to its natural conclusion, everything is overpriced and could be sold at a far more realistic price if only (as with most things in life) if there weren’t a queue of greedy fuckers in the line that is. In a fair democracy this would be the way forward...but we aren’t in a fair democracy in the UK; haven’t been for what seems like forever. The interviewed factory owners try and fool us into believing that they are all "just" making a living, "scraping by" and asking a fair price for their goods but, as with you, I guess, my sense of cynicism gallops to the fore with a “Yeah? Fair for who? Who’s making the profit on gold mined, cloth woven, steel manufactured…? Not the poor sods at the arse-end of the chain, that’s for sure."
Fairness would say; OK. People shied away from it when it was at its full price yet queue up to buy it in the sale...erm... Thinks; "This must give everyone involved in the article’s lifeline a very good idea of the article’s worth that would still allow us to make a fair profit. So, if we price the article at this sale level at the outset then we’d shift more ‘units’ wouldn’t we...and so our turnover would be the greater and we’d make more money, wouldn’t we? Then the manufacturing industries involved in the article’s creation (mine) would boast fuller employment because more units were being sold at a fair profit, wouldn’t they? The people that work in these industries (my workers) would have safer employment futures, wouldn’t they? So, they could earn more money than if they were having to be supported by the state or go on the streets begging or selling their bodies; they'd be making me more profit through the number of fair-priced articles I'd be selling....and if they were making more money they too would go out and buy other articles produced by other manufacturers, me included, as long as the price was fair....!!!!!!!"
Fuck me, I've solved the problems of the manufacturing world, unemployment and global poverty in one go; pay people a fair and living wage for their work and charge the people a fair price for the goods they buy......wha-hey!!!!................... Or am I missing something?
Bugger; yup, I am. First up is those involved at the final profit end of the mark-up chain i.e. US, the high street folk, together with the councils who charge the rent and rates for the premises being willing to take less in profit...(you know, buying only three bottles of scotch for the week rather than four; that sort of deprivation...?)Yup, the aggravating section from this, admittedly over simplification of the way manufacturing and fiscal policies are run globally at present, is our good old 21st century friend; greed. Gotta have the yacht, the speedboat, the seats at Monaco, the tickets to the…whatever, and so it goes on. Amazing the number of people who make money from just having money and fuckin' the rest of us over, aint it……….?
No resolution to problems here, folks, just a general confusion as to the status quo and how the riots in London over the week-end ain’t gonna change a thing; really, trust me, I know ‘bout these things. Anarchy is just another way of grabbing an unfair share of what’s available, trashing it and scrubbing out anyone else that gets in the way of that goal; greed and capitalism by another name; definitely not democracy. Be very afraid of stupid people in large numbers, folks.
Byee…..!
