My aim has always been for a cappuccino economy: one where state and private sectors both flourish because each is allowed to do what it does best. We’re a long way from being there right now.
Who could – despite the tortured analogy – disagree?
For example, why do we currently use the state to do what the state is manifestly incompetent at doing? We should, if we are to use each at what it does best, be using the private sector rather more, no? Even, markets where they work better – say, the provision of health care?
Or is that not to quite grasp what the Spudda is suggesting?
The analogy works with a bit of interpretation. The black arts are vested in the state which milks the private sector. The latter flourishes to the limited extent that a parasite fails when it kills its host but sadly history shows that parasite states always gets this wrong.
Cappuccino economy? Frothy & overpriced?
Private sector creates wealth, public sector pisses it up the wall. Simples.
A list of what the State does well would be illuminating…………
When I’m in Costa, behind others in the queue and simply require a cup of PG, the barista will ask “What type of coffee would you like sir?” and whatever the answer, it always seems to be whichever one takes the longest to make…..
Can’t grasp why you can’t get a mugaccino either………
Cappuccino! That’s a revealing admission by El Tubero. 1. He patronises establishments that the 1% frequent. A genuine prole would wash down his instant noodles with instant coffee. 2. He is cool with the unjust labour reward system known as “tipping” where pay is linked to merit.
“Who could – despite the tortured analogy – disagree?”
I do. The state should do only what the state can do. Important stuff that is a monopoly. It will still do it badly. But you can’t privatise the law courts, despite how badly they’re run.
2. He is cool with the unjust labour reward system known as “tipping” where pay is linked to merit.
Does anyone here really believe that Richard Murphy would ever leave a decent tip? He’s the type that thinks that bitching out a waiter for some minor infraction is a fair substitute for leaving a tip.
My aim has always been for a cappuccino economy: one where state and private sectors both flourish because each is allowed to do what it does best.
And yet, when you examine the totality of his writings, what comes across is fact that he has far more interest in punishing the private sector for doing what it does best than implementing policies to allow it to continue to flourish.
bis, I am applauding you in between sips of Nescafe’s finest.
Of course kpt. Kartoffel wants cappuccino.. He can’t take his coffee straight..
And the advantage for him is that the moo-juice gets everywhere with the scum floating to the top….
I guess he’s heard someone use the term cappuccino economy and not understood what they meant and made up some shit that doesn’t even make sense. Its been round quite a few years:
Another example of the fat tuber making word mean what he says they mean.
I pity his students if he’s told them his version of cappuccino economy and they then go and use it work or even in an exam set by a real economist. The student is going to be a laughing stock.
Actually, Mr on M4, you sorta can privatise the law courts. Its called arbitration.
It’s not a complete solution, as you still need the high court to enforce arbitrators’ decisions, and you’d need an appellate court, or two.
But still, it’s got legs.
Yeah. Fair point.
Ritchie’s ‘cappuccino economy’ – everything except coffee shops run by Gov’t.
He likes coffee and doesn’t like WWII Camp Coffee (racist) or German State Acorn Coffee
Pcar- he wants to interfere in coffee shops as well.
Remember all the whining and bitching about tax when it looked like some chain franchises were making average profits
Also his beloved EU wants to reserve the profits on roasting coffee beans to itself and not allow those nasty profits to be misspent by a 3rd world farmer.
So still interference in all aspects of business on an epic scale.