And ppor old “Woolies” is bust…we have known it for years.

David Davis

Now, the shares have been suspended.

Perhaps capitalism is good, in that it shakes out redundant models by which things are done. Wilkinsons, for example, does more or less what Woolworth does in £, or a bit less, but with much less than half the stores and selling twice the money per square foot per day. That ought to say something.

If Woolies does go down, it will be sad. Those of my generation and before have never known anything else, in a manner of speaking. My first “Airfix” Spitfire model kits, in about 1958 or 1959, for 2/- (that’s two bob to you, matey) were got from the one in Leatherhead. But if it means a respite for the beleaguered taxpayers and poor-people, who can buy the distressed-stock at about 10p for a DVD, or £5 for a player, that’ll be some comfort, for a week or two, and that’s as far ahead as we can look right now, under real socialism, which is back.

The Libertarian Alliance Christmas message this year will not be as positive as the last one.


  1. So, I was on a web forum talking about this issue. Part of my post was “When wasteful, inefficient businesses go bust, everybody wins.” Fair comment, yes?

    I was hit back with this:
    “Except the sales assistants, shelf stockers, managers who suddenly find themselves on the dole…”

    I think that’s like saying we need more murders, because otherwise prison guards will have to be let go.
    Some people are damn crazy.

  2. You should tell them that when inefficient businesses go bust, some things happen:-

    (1) People are freed up from unproductive labour, to be re-employed, possibly more cheaply if useless, possibly more expensively if useful, elsewhere. It depends on how good they each are.

    (2) Resources used unproductively are freed for sale, to those who can afford to pay the most – if at auction – to re-use them elsewhere. those who can pay the most are probably, but not necessarily, the most potentially successful. If they are not, the process begins again.

  3. Oh, boo hoo, now I’m “harsh” and “unsympathetic” because I’m not crying over people loosing their jobs.
    Blimey, I was trying to have a debate about the economical side of things.
    Stupid forum. Full of stupid people. So stupid.

  4. Should have explained.
    My post was the reaction I got from the OTHER forum, not this blog, which is full of humans of the highest calibre.

Leave a Reply