Jump to content

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums

Welcome to One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums, like most online communities you must register to view or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Be a part of One Team in Bristol - Bristol City Forums by signing in or creating an account.

  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Full access to all forums (not all viewable as guest)
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members.
  • Support OTIB with a premium membership

Tipps69

After Brexit complications.

Recommended Posts

Just reading Sky Sports paper gossip & there is a paragraph there saying that the government are considering giving Premium League teams that are giving England players extended game time, extra leeway with regards to signing foreign players after Brexit & it highlights Chelsea as being an example!

So Chelsea’s transfer ban could of actually done them a favour in more ways than one, it’s allowed them to use Abraham, Tomori, Mount & James when they otherwise probably wouldn’t of got game time while they spent millions more on foreign imports but the added benefit now is that once Brexit takes affect, the rules won’t be so stringent on them! Is that not kind of defeating the point of Brexit, to an extent? And then having used those extra English players, we’re going to reward you with allowing you to replace them with more foreign imports?!?

I’m not politically inclined & have paid little attention to Brexit but this seems more than a little strange.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chelsea's transfer policy is my main worry too.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is interesting the extensive impact that Brexit is going to have on the restriction of foreign players into the Premiership and Football League, it could hopefully help the England team!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Mr X said:

It is interesting the extensive impact that Brexit is going to have on the restriction of foreign players into the Premiership and Football League, it could hopefully help the England team!

I've never understood the argument that foreign players in the premier league harm the national team.  I think if anything it helps them because they're playing against different styles of players more regularly and at an overall higher level.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tipps69 said:

Just reading Sky Sports paper gossip & there is a paragraph there saying that the government are considering giving Premium League teams that are giving England players extended game time, extra leeway with regards to signing foreign players after Brexit & it highlights Chelsea as being an example!

So Chelsea’s transfer ban could of actually done them a favour in more ways than one, it’s allowed them to use Abraham, Tomori, Mount & James when they otherwise probably wouldn’t of got game time while they spent millions more on foreign imports but the added benefit now is that once Brexit takes affect, the rules won’t be so stringent on them! Is that not kind of defeating the point of Brexit, to an extent? And then having used those extra English players, we’re going to reward you with allowing you to replace them with more foreign imports?!?

I’m not politically inclined & have paid little attention to Brexit but this seems more than a little strange.

What is this “point” you speak of?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, ChippenhamRed said:

What is this “point” you speak of?

Well I thought part of Brexit & with regards to the entire football situation was that it was supposed to limit the amount of foreign players that would be allowed / entitled to play over here & now because Chelsea have spent 6 months encouraging their English players with game time, they are now going to reward Chelsea by potentially allowing them to bring more foreign players in that maybe the likes of Arsenal & Man City etc won’t be allowed because they haven’t encouraged their English players by giving them game time.

Chelsea haven’t particularly done this through choice, more by the fact that they were banned from following their previous blueprint of signing many foreign players at a huge cost while their young English players tended to drift to other teams.

But having now played their young English talent, they will be encouraged to sign this expensive foreign talent again at the cost of bringing through the youngsters. Or am I wrong?

Is this not going against the grain? Like I said, I don’t follow politics & have no interest in it & maybe I’ve got completely the wrong end of the stick but I’m aiming this at the football side of things rather than the entire Brexit / political side of things & that’s why I’ve posted this in the football forum rather than the politics sub forum (which I’ve never actually visited).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Tipps69 said:

Well I thought part of Brexit & with regards to the entire football situation was that it was supposed to limit the amount of foreign players that would be allowed / entitled to play over here & now because Chelsea have spent 6 months encouraging their English players with game time, they are now going to reward Chelsea by potentially allowing them to bring more foreign players in that maybe the likes of Arsenal & Man City etc won’t be allowed because they haven’t encouraged their English players by giving them game time.

Chelsea haven’t particularly done this through choice, more by the fact that they were banned from following their previous blueprint of signing many foreign players at a huge cost while their young English players tended to drift to other teams.

But having now played their young English talent, they will be encouraged to sign this expensive foreign talent again at the cost of bringing through the youngsters. Or am I wrong?

Is this not going against the grain? Like I said, I don’t follow politics & have no interest in it & maybe I’ve got completely the wrong end of the stick but I’m aiming this at the football side of things rather than the entire Brexit / political side of things & that’s why I’ve posted this in the football forum rather than the politics sub forum (which I’ve never actually visited).

I don't think the amount of foreign players was a serious political motivation really, just a possible knock-on effect which some see as a positive others as a negative. Hasn't been seriously discussed.

Edited by Phileas Fogg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mr X said:

It is interesting the extensive impact that Brexit is going to have on the restriction of foreign players into the Premiership and Football League, it could hopefully help the England team!

 

53 minutes ago, Roe said:

I've never understood the argument that foreign players in the premier league harm the national team.  I think if anything it helps them because they're playing against different styles of players more regularly and at an overall higher level.

Without trying to be political, listen to the horse sh1t Steven Barclay comes out with.

Obviously someone who knows eff all about football, and apparently less about the country’s existing work permit rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely from next month the same rules for non- EU players will apply to all “overseas” players.

Don’t see why there should be any special cases regarding “required critical skills” for the good of the nation as with doctors, scientists, engineers etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, reddevon said:

Surely from next month the same rules for non- EU players will apply to all “overseas” players.

Don’t see why there should be any special cases regarding “required critical skills” for the good of the nation as with doctors, scientists, engineers etc.

Nothing will change for 12 months until all the trade deals etc are signed off.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will be an issue for the likes of Arsenal who have previously had European players who aren’t internationals but could come here under EU working rules. That all changes at the end of the year, when presumably European players will be liable to work permits, as per non-EU players.

If we really wanted to increase the number of British players in the English leagues we would institute limits on foreign players as per Spain and Italy, but even then teams try to get round it such as Barcelona trying to get a Portuguese passport for Coutinho or  a Spanish passport for Suarez.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Sir Geoff said:

Nothing will change for 12 months until all the trade deals etc are signed off.

Unless they have a criminal conviction ! So I don’t suppose we will be signing Ronaldo anytime soon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO Brexit was never about getting rid of foreigners that were unique and provided high quality, surely we want the best and the brightest from around the world here earning millions and paying tax. It was about not allowing anyone in that wanted to use public service, get paid minimum wage and live in a tent and send money "home" and undercut the average worker.

Anyone that will earn over 100k will be allowed in the country with no problem IMO.

High quality, high wealth, high inequality (some very rich) will likely be our future. Which has got to be better than low quality, low wealth, low inequality (everyone poor) as the other option. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, reddevon said:

Surely from next month the same rules for non- EU players will apply to all “overseas” players.

Don’t see why there should be any special cases regarding “required critical skills” for the good of the nation as with doctors, scientists, engineers etc.

Main reason being the insane income the government get through taxes 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Pezo said:

IMO Brexit was never about getting rid of foreigners that were unique and provided high quality, surely we want the best and the brightest from around the world here earning millions and paying tax. It was about not allowing anyone in that wanted to use public service, get paid minimum wage and live in a tent and send money "home" and undercut the average worker.

Anyone that will earn over 100k will be allowed in the country with no problem IMO.

High quality, high wealth, high inequality (some very rich) will likely be our future. Which has got to be better than low quality, low wealth, low inequality (everyone poor) as the other option. 

Brilliant. So the rich and powerful can do what they want, and ordinary people will get dicked over. Maybe you earn over 100k in which case, you'll be fine. But if you don't, I really don't understand how you can view this as a positive thing

  • Like 7
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Pezo said:

IMO Brexit was never about getting rid of foreigners that were unique and provided high quality, surely we want the best and the brightest from around the world here earning millions and paying tax. It was about not allowing anyone in that wanted to use public service, get paid minimum wage and live in a tent and send money "home" and undercut the average worker.

Anyone that will earn over 100k will be allowed in the country with no problem IMO.

High quality, high wealth, high inequality (some very rich) will likely be our future. Which has got to be better than low quality, low wealth, low inequality (everyone poor) as the other option. 

******* great.  Can’t wait. 😱

@City oz - see you in Perth on the next available flight, got room for 4???

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bas's perfect hattrick said:

Brilliant. So the rich and powerful can do what they want, and ordinary people will get dicked over. Maybe you earn over 100k in which case, you'll be fine. But if you don't, I really don't understand how you can view this as a positive thing

This is how the world works I'm afraid. 

  • Aubergine 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Bas's perfect hattrick said:

Brilliant. So the rich and powerful can do what they want, and ordinary people will get dicked over. Maybe you earn over 100k in which case, you'll be fine. But if you don't, I really don't understand how you can view this as a positive thing

No I don't earn over 100k but what would you prefer - everyone earn 12k a year and we can't afford public services or some earn millions, some earn hundreds of thousands and some earn thousands? 

Under both scenarios no one gets dicked, the rich pay for the poor! But the rich do want safety for the money they are paying. 

As a society we have a big challenge coming up, we currently have about a 10% of working age people incapable of working due to there level of intellect, with automation and AI that is likely to rise the only way of paying for the people incapable of work is to have people that can pay for them.

As a muti billionaire do you think SL is dicking you or subsidising your football and bringing you a higher quality than the fan base could naturally afford?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Pezo said:

IMO Brexit was never about getting rid of foreigners that were unique and provided high quality, surely we want the best and the brightest from around the world here earning millions and paying tax. It was about not allowing anyone in that wanted to use public service, get paid minimum wage and live in a tent and send money "home" and undercut the average worker.

Anyone that will earn over 100k will be allowed in the country with no problem IMO.

High quality, high wealth, high inequality (some very rich) will likely be our future. Which has got to be better than low quality, low wealth, low inequality (everyone poor) as the other option. 

I believe I'm right in saying that non EU immigration was always higher. As for 'undercutting the average worker', that only happened because there were no controls on exploitative employers, had there been legislation to ban this, a level playing field would have been created.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

******* great.  Can’t wait. 😱

@City oz - see you in Perth on the next available flight, got room for 4???

You cant have it both ways - my personal belief is that inequality is the biggest problem in our society at the moment and I would prefer everyone earned millions but thats not possible as inflation would push up interest rates and everyone gets poor again, its a better than the scenario of everyone earning 12k and not being able to afford nurse's. You can't have public services without the people that pay for them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Pezo said:

You cant have it both ways - my personal belief is that inequality is the biggest problem in our society at the moment and I would prefer everyone earned millions but thats not possible as inflation would push up interest rates and everyone gets poor again, its a better than the scenario of everyone earning 12k and not being able to afford nurse's. You can't have public services without the people that pay for them.

It’s probably best we don’t take this down the politics route.  I’ll leave it there, I won’t even add a final shot.

If this was Footie, I’d be getting my pitch maps and magnetic dots out 😂😂😂

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I believe I'm right in saying that non EU immigration was always higher. As for 'undercutting the average worker', that only happened because there were no controls on exploitative employers, had there been legislation to ban this, a level playing field would have been created.

Yes EU immigration was always higher and I imagine still will be because of proximity. Under EU rules your not allowed to discriminate against EU nationals so if someone wanted the job and asked for 30k and someone wanted minimum wage - all things being equal as the employer you would choose the minimum wage employee of course and maximise profits for them and there investors.

The government can't and shouldn't put in controls against exploitative employers, it's for individuals to decide if they are being exploited or not and if they are they should do something about it (leave). Even if they wanted to how does the government put in controls against exploitative employers that are employing people that are willing to work for less than others?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chucky said:

This is how the world works I'm afraid. 

...unless of course you've got the conviction to 'fight, fight wherever you may be'.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Pezo said:

The government can't and shouldn't put in controls against exploitative employers, it's for individuals to decide if they are being exploited or not and if they are they should do something about it (leave). Even if they wanted to how does the government put in controls against exploitative employers that are employing people that are willing to work for less than others?

I don't agree with any of that. One of the functions of government should be to ensure no citizen is exploited.

 

10 minutes ago, Pezo said:

Yes EU immigration was always higher

Was/is it?

What percentage of UK immigration is from the EU?
The EU born made up 5.5% of the total UK population in 2018, while non-EU born people made up 8.8%. The EU born thus made up 39% of the migrant population in 2018, up from 29% in 2000.30 Sep 2019
Edited by Roger Red Hat
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I think you would find the following blog interesting, https://gimms.org.uk/blogs/

It explains how money really works in a modern fiat economy. There is loads of interesting MMT stuff out there.

After a quick read I do appreciate the point of view but the solutions seem to about a social fixes and aiming for an ideology rather than individual people changing - the problem is identified correctly but the solution is too loose and top down, what do individuals need to do? - what are they going to get for what they do. IMO if you want to fix a society then you have to enable the individuals that make up that society, fix there own house's - if everyone does that then then everyone in the society is ready to move forward.

I will continue to read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Pezo said:

After a quick read I do appreciate the point of view but the solutions seem to about a social fixes and aiming for an ideology rather than individual people changing - the problem is identified correctly but the solution is too loose and top down, what do individuals need to do? - what are they going to get for what they do. IMO if you want to fix a society then you have to enable the individuals that make up that society, fix there own house's - if everyone does that then then everyone in the society is ready to move forward.

I will continue to read.

MMT is about how money is created in the modern sovereign economy and how governments can utilise it to enable their citizens to enjoy a far more equitable and fulfilling existence.

 

Professor Richard Murphy's blog is very accessible and well worth reading on regular basis. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/ 

Edited by Roger Red Hat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I don't agree with any of that. One of the functions of government should be to ensure no citizen is exploited.

 

Was/is it?

What percentage of UK immigration is from the EU?
The EU born made up 5.5% of the total UK population in 2018, while non-EU born people made up 8.8%. The EU born thus made up 39% of the migrant population in 2018, up from 29% in 2000.30 Sep 2019

You don't have to agree but it's an interesting subject and not a view I've head before. Isn't it a higher priority within government to ensure no one citizen is persecuted against?

I would prefer to be exploited knowing I can leave the exploitor rather than be persecuted for the country I'm from everywhere within a whole country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I don't agree with any of that. One of the functions of government should be to ensure no citizen is exploited.

 

Was/is it?

What percentage of UK immigration is from the EU?
The EU born made up 5.5% of the total UK population in 2018, while non-EU born people made up 8.8%. The EU born thus made up 39% of the migrant population in 2018, up from 29% in 2000.30 Sep 2019

The total at 14.3% is very high.

So it's very good news imo that EU immigration will be curtailed.

Our population is clearly too high, the roads are terrible and everywhere you go is crowded to the extent it now effects quality of life.

We need, at the very least, to take measures to try and prevent our population constantly increasing and leaving the EU, while not the full answer, should be a good start in that direction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

MMT is about how money is created in the modern sovereign economy and how governments can utilise it to enable their citizens to enjoy a far more equitable and fulfilling existence.

 

Professor Richard Murphy's blog is very accessible and well worth reading on regular basis. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/ 

The bloke is a Corbynista, a man who's policies have been completely rejected by the electorate.

'In the summer of 2015 Richard was widely credited with being the author of ‘Corbynomics’, which was the economic programme on the basis of which Jeremy Corbyn became leader of the UK Labour Party.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

So it's very good news imo that EU immigration will be curtailed.

The EU legislation has always been there to control immigration, it's just that successive UK governments haven't used it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

The bloke is a Corbynista, a man who's policies have been completely rejected by the electorate.

'In the summer of 2015 Richard was widely credited with being the author of ‘Corbynomics’, which was the economic programme on the basis of which Jeremy Corbyn became leader of the UK Labour Party.'

Murphy is no 'Corbynista', he's been given that label by others simply because some of his policy was used by Corbyn as a basis. If you followed Murphy's blog regularly you'd know he has been/is very critical of the Labour party, Corbyn, and McDonell.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

MMT is about how money is created in the modern sovereign economy and how governments can utilise it to enable their citizens to enjoy a far more equitable and fulfilling existence.

 

Professor Richard Murphy's blog is very accessible and well worth reading on regular basis. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/ 

I work for a financial services business,  I understand the fiat money system a bit and fractional reserve lending after putting a lot of effort into understanding it after the financial crisis.

The only thing I really know is that it is very complicated with different layers of money where some filter into the public and some don't, everything anyone seems to expect to happen something different happens!

I will continue reading but it does seem to think the magic money tree is alive and kicking without a full understanding of either how it workd the consequences let alone the unintended consequences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Pezo said:

I will continue reading but it does seem to think the magic money tree is alive and kicking without a full understanding of either how it workd the consequences let alone the unintended consequences.

The reality is that the 'magic money tree' as you refer to it, really does exist, in the form that any sovereign country that controls its own currency, can issue, spend and pay for anything it wants in its own currency. Steve Keen, Stephanie Kelton are also good sources of information on this subject. There's loads of good videos on youtube.

 

Anyway this is in the football chat section so I'll not say anymore! Enjoy the research, it's very interesting and eye opening. You wont hear or see much about it in the MSM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Roger Red Hat said:

The reality is that the 'magic money tree' as you refer to it, really does exist, in the form that any sovereign country that controls its own currency, can issue, spend and pay for anything it wants in its own currency. Steve Keen, Stephanie Kelton are also good sources of information on this subject. There's loads of good videos on youtube.

 

Anyway this is in the football chat section so I'll not say anymore! Enjoy the research, it's very interesting and eye opening. You wont hear or see much about it in the MSM.

You are of course correct the magic money tree exists to some extent, it's how much you want to shake it and be paying for it in the future or on foreign holidays.

You don't hear much about this in the MSM but you hear nothing about other things such as the lack of free market in setting of mortgage interest rates in the name of financial stability. I think some would be very surprised by the controls in place that are outside of government control but in reality through soft power are within government control.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to football, has there been any information from the Govt /FA regarding their suggestions post-Brexit? New Rules, follow non EU signing rules.?  Lower league recruitment? Etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I don't know what you mean by this.

You shake tree's to get something out of them that isn't quite mature/ready, things you should probably be waiting for. If you have it now you can't have it in the future. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Roger Red Hat said:

I think you would find the following blog interesting, https://gimms.org.uk/blogs/

It explains how money really works in a modern fiat economy. There is loads of interesting MMT stuff out there.

 

6 hours ago, Pezo said:

After a quick read I do appreciate the point of view but the solutions seem to about a social fixes and aiming for an ideology rather than individual people changing - the problem is identified correctly but the solution is too loose and top down, what do individuals need to do? - what are they going to get for what they do. IMO if you want to fix a society then you have to enable the individuals that make up that society, fix there own house's - if everyone does that then then everyone in the society is ready to move forward.

I will continue to read.


worth a watch re Fiat currency and fractional reserve lending. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Nogbad the Bad said:

The total at 14.3% is very high.

So it's very good news imo that EU immigration will be curtailed.

Our population is clearly too high, the roads are terrible and everywhere you go is crowded to the extent it now effects quality of life.

We need, at the very least, to take measures to try and prevent our population constantly increasing and leaving the EU, while not the full answer, should be a good start in that direction.

With respect Nogbad, more people are coming into this country from outside the eu than within. Trade deals that get done will no doubt include other countries wanting their citizens to be able to come to the UK. Australia have reportedly turned down a UK deal that would of allowed free movement between the two countries, I wonder what India and the like will want...............

i personally think that the levels of immigration will actually go up in the future. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Portland Bill said:

With respect Nogbad, more people are coming into this country from outside the eu than within. Trade deals that get done will no doubt include other countries wanting their citizens to be able to come to the UK. Australia have reportedly turned down a UK deal that would of allowed free movement between the two countries, I wonder what India and the like will want...............

i personally think that the levels of immigration will actually go up in the future. 

This is certainly true if we extrapolate out the Australian points based system that they seem keen on, but importantly it should mean low skilled, low wage people can't come in and under cut the low end of the market. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it actually going to be that much of a difference? 

I would imagine most non-Europeans who get a job in the UK worth £100k+ a year would have no problem getting a working visa for tax reasons, so I don’t see why it would be that different for footballers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Harry said:

 


worth a watch re Fiat currency and fractional reserve lending. 

It's just an advert for what they want, I assume they are gold bugs that want to go back to pegging to gold which would make them very rich. 

It's not really a scam and its not really a secret, it's designed to make all of our lives better by bringing future spending forward getting the benafits today but paying for it in the future. So what if some people get rich from it if we all get a bit better off from it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Bas's perfect hattrick said:

Brilliant. So the rich and powerful can do what they want, and ordinary people will get dicked over. Maybe you earn over 100k in which case, you'll be fine. But if you don't, I really don't understand how you can view this as a positive thing

They will still be free to seek unskilled work in their own country and other EU countries, Just not here. Surely more unskilled jobs for the unskilled British people is a good thing? The money they earn also stays right here in this country and spent in this country instead of being sent 'home'

Edited by Up The City!
  • Aubergine 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pezo said:

It's just an advert for what they want, I assume they are gold bugs that want to go back to pegging to gold which would make them very rich. 

It's not really a scam and its not really a secret, it's designed to make all of our lives better by bringing future spending forward getting the benafits today but paying for it in the future. So what if some people get rich from it if we all get a bit better off from it?

Was more in response to you post #35 where you said you only understood Fiat and Fractional Reserve a little bit. 
Well, that video explains it very well. 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Pezo said:

IMO Brexit was never about getting rid of foreigners that were unique and provided high quality, surely we want the best and the brightest from around the world here earning millions and paying tax. It was about not allowing anyone in that wanted to use public service, get paid minimum wage and live in a tent and send money "home" and undercut the average worker.

Anyone that will earn over 100k will be allowed in the country with no problem IMO.

High quality, high wealth, high inequality (some very rich) will likely be our future. Which has got to be better than low quality, low wealth, low inequality (everyone poor) as the other option. 

At the moment high inequality is what we have - higher than at any point in recent history - which causes a large number of our financial problems. And I think it is a mistake to see our options as a binary choice between that one extreme on the other hand and everyone being poor on the other hand when, in reality, those are not the only options available to us.

What you may not realise is actually an exceptionally small number of people being exceptionally rich makes us all gradually become poorer over time. And this is what we've actually seen since the 1970s as the number of very rich people has grow smaller, the extent to which they are rich compared to rest of the population has become greater and this has had a massive impact on the cumulative wealth of the general population.

Fundamentally the problem is this: In order for society to work financially, you need money to move around the economy. In an an ideal society, what you really want is people to grow rich and those rich people then to spend that money within the society in which they live - for example hiring staff to work for them and buying luxury goods, products and services. Once you've got rich people buying luxury goods, products and services, this creates opportunities for people to set up businesses selling those goods, products and services. The rich people give their money to those businesses, those businesses then make their owners financially comfortable and those businesses also employ other people, in turn giving them a source of income. The business owners have money to spend, so people set up more businesses to sell things to them, thus making another group of people and so on until the fact that people are getting rich at the top of society means everyone else is gradually getting wealthier over time.

This is a good model but it does not happen in a high wealth, high inequality society which you describe (and I would argue is our present, not simply our future).

What happens instead in a high wealth, high inequality society - indeed the reasons why is a high wealth, high in equality society in the first place - is that, once people get rich beyond a certain point, they simply cannot spend a vast proportion of the money they have. Therefore - rather than going on products, goods and services and making everyone else wealthy - the money gets siloed in investment accounts or moved overseas. That money then is not going to the middle-class business owners, which in turns restricts their ability to run successful businesses and employ people, which in turns makes working class people poorer. Thus ending up with a society where you have a tiny number of people with a huge concentrated amount of wealth and everyone struggling.

I agree with you that inequality is the biggest problem we face as a society but a root cause of that inequality is allowing a small number of people to accumulate money that cannot spend. The way to reduce inequality - and to make everyone richer - is to find ways to incentivise the very rich to spend their money in society and ensure nobody gets to a point where they are earning so much money that it is impossible for it to recycle around the economy. 

I don't want to get loads further into this because there is a politics board for that, and this is a football discussion, but I did think this needed clarifying.

Edited by LondonBristolian
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current rules on foreign (non-EU) players are pretty complex.

https://latitudelaw.com/news/the-fas-policy-on-non-eu-football-players-and-possible-implications-following-brexit/
 

I think it’s likely that the rules will be extended to treat EU players in the same way as non-EU players are currently treated.

Will that be a good thing? Depends on your view of foreigners I guess! 

From a football perspective though I think it’ll only widen the gap between the Premier League and the rest of English football. Man City and Liverpool will not struggle to get the players they want.

But lower league clubs? They are going to be competing for players from a much smaller pool. We’ll likely see a situation where there are far more English players, but the lower end Premier and Championship clubs will take the better British players and League One and Two will be taking the dregs.

It'll make little difference to the England team. The England squad will be made up of players from the top clubs the way it is now. Those top clubs will still be buying up international players from around the world.

So yeah I think that English players overall will obviously get more of a chance to play. But outside of the Premier League those English players will be of a much lower quality than the players currently playing. Which will make the lower leagues worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So anyway, Chelsea potentially getting rewarded with being allowed to sign more foreigners because they spent 5 months having to Blood their English talent due to a punishment, still doesn’t make any sense to me because they’ll sign this foreign talent, which means many many millions of pounds will leave the UK & this English talent & any further English talent they have in their youth system get pushed back down the list of players to potentially make it good here.

And then we’re back to losing this English talent relatively cheaply to clubs abroad so they can get game time before having to pay many millions abroad again to bring this English talent back to our shores (Jadon Sancho) & hence the country is sending lots more money away from England!

Just doesn’t make sense to me, let’s reward these clubs for playing their homegrown talent by encouraging them to replace their homegrown talent with talent from elsewhere? Only in England could such a plan be put in place!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...