Virtual capitalism

I've been playing World of Warcraft for about 3 months now and, like all MMORPG's, the forums are a gold mine of very useful information. Where to quest, how to get enough gold for that mount, lessons in world view etc. One area which solicits particularly heated debate is the auction house. There are two of these auction houses in the World and I frequent the one at Irongforge whenever I have items to sell or need to buy that particularly delightful phantom blade or some such. It's a busy building full of people bidding, shouting, and sometimes fighting.

Anyhow, some players have noticed that other players are simply buying items from the auction house which they see are under priced only to put them straight back on for sale at higher prices. It annoys some people to the extent that they feel it necessary to argue about the practice endlessly on open forums.

Luckily for us one particular Warcraft player on the American forums has put a stop to the practice, and hence the endless arguments, by posting this:

I hope you people learn some lessions.

Capitalism is corrupt. It is biased towards the people with power and thus contradicts the basics of freedom.

Capitalism is just an excuse used by the people in power to try and justify their own greedy ambitions.

I am pround to be a socialist. And I would gladly explain that socialism is NOT communism. But alot of you Incestious rednecks down in Jesusland Might be a tad bit slow on the uptake there. Thats OK you can go right back to watching FAUX news and you'll always be told what to think.

So now we know. Those crazy capitalist auction house players. You can tell who they are by the fancy horses they ride. The poster of the above message however can be identified by his constant requests to passing players for 15 silver plz.

Nice economy, shame about the wealth

We've got such a great economy in Britain haven't we? An astonishing achievement for this New Labour government I'm sure you'll agree. I think you'll also agree that it's even more astonishing, in light of our great economic powerhouse, that the 'average household' got poorer in 2003-2004. As the Times says, this revelation (we knew it was true anyhow - we could feel it) is shocking precisely because it comes out of a clear blue sky.

New Labour, new rules and this one's a humdinger.

Sorry Gordon, too busy

In the Times the Chancellor Gordon Brown gets all excited about enterprise in Britain:

And it is because we must unlock entrepreneurial ability right across society that in over 1,000 different competitions, masterclasses and business events starting today in Britain’s first National Enterprise Week, we will crown Britain’s young entrepreneurs of the year, celebrate the fastest- growing inner-city start-ups and school-based companies, start to choose Britain’s first capital of enterprise and send out a message that Britain’s economic destiny depends upon enterprise open to all.

Sorry Gordon, can't go to any of these business events. I'm too busy helping the entrepreneurial Mrs England Project with the paperwork for her new business.

Avoidance and the budget

Now, I wonder why Gordon Brown's budget includes this little gem.

Accountancy firms will have to register tax avoidance schemes with the Inland Revenue.

Do you think that all the complexity is getting too much for them? Is this the start of a new area of tax avoidance scheme registration avoidance schemes?

Gordon's brown underpants

Like a star feasting on itself just before it goes nova:

The trouble is that most of the country's economic growth...has been generated by the expansion of the public sector, which doesn't produce the bonanza in corporation tax revenues that would come from private-sector led growth.

My emphasis.

I want to say Booooooooom! when I actually mean bust.

Peter Hitchens on the welfare state

He lays into it:

A welfare state is like heroin. It makes you feel good while it kills you. The more you have of it, the more you want.

In the end, you will do anything to get the money to pay for it, by stealth or by theft, up to, and including, dragging penniless pensioners to court.

Because you are too weak willed to stop, you lie to yourself that giving up is physically impossible, so that you no longer need feel responsible for your own stupid, destructive behaviour.

And it ends amid the dustbins, in a waste of squalor, filth and decline.

He seems depressed. Cheer up Peter, at least we can look forward to when tax freedom day lands on the 25th December.

Man, what a party day that’s going to be.

How much taxation can you stand?

Voting for a Labour government is expensive:

LONDON (Reuters) - Chancellor Gordon Brown will unveil his pre-budget report on Wednesday against a backdrop of surging spending and sluggish tax receipts which threaten to bust his own much-vaunted fiscal rules.

And it doesn't get any cheaper:

Economists are divided. Some think Brown will continue to meet his rule while others think he will break it but not for a few years which means that any further politically damaging tax rises can be avoided before the next election, likely in 2005.

Don't vote for them again. The country can't afford it. You can't afford it. I can't afford it.

New labour, old problems

This kind of thing seems to be part of the British landscape again:

Hundreds of council workers are staging the latest in a series of selective strikes in London over pay.

It's like olden times. I'm going out to buy some candles for when the power cuts come.

Sexy housing

Peter Hitchens is dissing property ownership:

The great British home-owning fetish has always looked like a dead end. Why do people think of their houses as assets?

Because generally that's what they are. Just because the price of a bigger house has also gone up it does not invalidate the fact that you now have an item (in this case a house) worth more than you paid for it.

So what have we gained? What do I care that the theoretical price of my house has risen? I live there. If I sell, I must either live on the streets or find another home, so the money is about as much use to me as if it were buried under 20 tons of ice and snow in the Ural Mountains.

You need to think of the long term Peter. True enough that most will be looking to upgrade their homes to bigger and better ones but this progression up the property ladder is not the end game of property ownership. The end game is when you decide to downsize, when the kids have left home and you no longer need the room. There's a whole lot of sexy assety goodness staring you right in the face.

Of course, you could have avoided this whole sordid fetish all together and rented a property instead. That way you could be really sure that you were property asset free. Much better.

You know what, this little chat about housing has got me all hot and bothered.