The excellent Facebook Group Philosophy, Poetry and Art frequently posts challenging, intriguing quotes from well- known writers, artists and philosophers. And what fun! Comments roll in from both sides of our polarised society and I love reading them and engaging with people I don’t necessarily agree with.

Here are my responses to some of the comments from people who took umbrage and saw fit to disagree with Sayers

Why is she right?

1. THE TIMELINE

18th Century: Industrial Revolution – huge production possible for the first time.

Someone has to buy it – millions employed both manufacturing and in distribution (read Adam Smith)

Late 18th/19th Century: Growth of free market economics and untrammelled capitalism

Late 19th Century – becomes a science mid 20th Century: Invention of marketing to fuel demand

Post 2WW: Increased manufacturing and distribution 

(Massive increases in pollution of air and water)

(Massive increases in carbon emissions)

1960’s 70’s 80’s; Increased wealth and production fuelled by increased marketing and increased availability of consumer finance = more marketing = billions spent on promoting and consuming goods people don’t need at prices they cannot afford

Addiction to ‘Growth’

Huge increases in fossil fuel, plastics etc

= huge increases in pollution and emissions 

= Climate Change 

….Sayers said it more succinctly. Admirably. As only a novelist and poet can.

As to me? Years of teaching both Economics and Marketing!  

2. THE ECONOMICS

To AP’s comment that ‘poets’ have nothing useful to say (knowing nothing about Sayers, freely admitting she has never read her. oh you right wingnuts! Your ‘trickle down’ turns out to be utter nonsense. Doesn’t happen! It takes a CEO of a top FTSE 100 company 4 hours to earn as much as the average wage – and do you think anyone benefits but offshore banks, yachts and finance houses? The only ‘trickle down’ from rich to poor is urine. 😰🤣Your ‘free market’ turns out to be impossible, it causes consumers to be ripped off and is a major contributor to Climate Change. Your addiction to profit, growth, the giant casinos of the stock market, the focus on rewarding shareholders above all stakeholders delivers shoddy goods at inflated prices, and infuriated consumers who don’t have enough money to heat and eat.

‘Conservative Economics’ delivers misery, poverty and soon, utter fury.

We will not be ruled by the 1%. If you’re content to lie down in front of their Bentleys, cool. But be sure they’ll ride right over you and have a flunkey pick your teeth out of their rubber diamond-encrusted tyres.

RP: ‘Monetarism saved us in the crash of 2007’ And threw us into the inflationary spiral as presented by Keynes!

George Osborne’s addiction to controlling the money supply (Chancellor 2010-2016) resulted in Austerity,, massive cuts in public services, which caused a vast chasm to open between the rich and the poor. The rich got MUCH richer and the poor went and go in increasing numbers – to food banks. The current industrial unrest in Britain can trace its root cause to Austerity, as nurses, doctors teachers and practically everyone else (except the rich) watched the true value of their remuneration erode with inflation. What the monetarists got wrong was not including fiscal measures in their ideological ‘solutions’. Income and wealth must be fairly distributed, best through taxation. This is not ‘Socialism’ it’s pragmatism. The Tories cut taxes for the rich when we were in a dire financial position. I assure you (tackling the Tory trope) the rich would not ‘flee the Country’ if they were still charged 45% on top salaries rather than the 40% Osborne cut it to. Many of the rich are crying out to be taxed more! The problem with economists of the Left and the Right is that they are Left and Right. Polar opposites who hate each other irrationally. The answer lies between. Sensible fiscal measures, sensible monetary measures, well-ordered public spending backed by prudent borrowing. So time to depolarise and start a conversation rather than an argument. Can you, say, do that or are you a polar bear? 😉

3. THE ROLE OF MARKETING AND THE NEW ECONOMICS

‘People have a choice when they buy consumer goods’: Bro! I taught marketing. Every trick in the book to prise money out of people to pay for goods they don’t need at prices they can’t afford. I deeply regret that now, with the sad conclusion that Climate Change is largely caused by overproduction and overconsumption. Ultra Capitalism and free-market economics has screwed the world and will impact hugely on our children and their children. The answer is not Socialism either, but a new economics based on needs, regulation based on environmental concerns and sustainable products. The Circular Economy is an excellent ideal to work towards. Look it up. We must think local, not global when sourcing goods and services. We must abandon the ‘Greed is Good’ Gecko philosophy. Companies need to put customers, employees and suppliers above shareholders and mere profit. This is ethical business. The profit will follow! Most people prefer to deal with an ethical business than a grubby, cheating, unreliable cynical business that does its best to screw them. Top executives, currently vastly overpaid must be appropriately taxed and forced to pay fair wages and to stop exploiting their staff. Unless we have a massive step-change, frankly, to use that rather comic phrase,  – we’re doomed. 

The consequence of free-market deregulated economics is Climate Change.

The consequences of holding on to the old ways of rampant consumerism are horrible for the next generation.

We need a new Green Economics, neither Capitalist nor Socialist. 

Sayers would heartily agree.