h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

"If firms screw their workers to the point where the workers can't afford to buy the kind of products the firm makes, it puts the whole economy in trouble"

<> Hoo

I'd guess Bentley make up around 1% of car workers in the UK. The 95% or so who make cars most people can afford, would certainly be able to buy a Ford Mondeo etc. on their wages.

Which isn't really the point. The point is, that if an economy has money constantly sucked out of it, there'll be consequences for everyone when growth tanks because people can't afford to buy all kinds of things. I read recently (can't remember where, sorry) that income going to labour in the UK has fallen from 59% a few decades ago to 53%. 6% of our £1.4tn economy is £84bn a year.

And labour (ie most of us) can't afford to save the way that rich folk can. I'd guess around 90% of that £84bn would get spent. I wonder how much Philip Green or the Barclays brothers would spend. 1%? Maybe 2%..

<> Hoo.

No, what I described was within the law, but still... icky. Wrong, even, but then we'd be talking about morality.

When the law doesn't work, we should change it. The law designed to stop goalies tripping up strikers has been exploited by strikers to gain an unfair advantage. Just like the tax laws have been roundly abused by financiers.

"The law designed to stop goalies tripping up strikers has been exploited by strikers to gain an unfair advantage. "

So change the rule. Or get the referees to spot when the striker is taking the piss, and send the striker off, instantly, and give them a five-match ban if there's any dissent, from them or any of their team mates.

At this point, with the amount of money there is in the game, there is no rational reason why the ref shouldn't have access to an instant replay of any action beamed directly to a handheld screen he carried with him for the game, thus allowing him to see EVERYTHING. Saying "if the ref doesn't see it, it's OK" simply shows contempt for the rules, but I've heard that used as a defence for cheating in football many times. That may have been OK in the days when the ball was wet leather and the shorts were long and the players had to have a full time job. But with the top lot making more in a week than I make in a year (or two or three in some cases) the rules should be rigidly enforced.

You'd only need to send a couple of players off, instantly, when they took the piss before they'd start to all clean up their act and football might, possibly, become a sport I could watch without wanting to throw something at the television.