Actually, it isn't. It is abuse of capitalism. And my view of the real parasites is probably at least as strong as yours. In fact, if I was dictator I would have cheerfully flung numerous "investment bankers" and other banking directors who lent such huge sums so irresponsibly into the deepest darkest jail I could find, and put them on trial for high treason. In loathing those who so badly abuse capitalism for their own ends, I bow to no-one.

Same way as what we saw throughout the so-called "communist" world was not socialism or communism (Marx and Engels must have surely turned in their graves at the evils that were being perpetrated in their names) but abuse of those philosophies.

In both cases, what we actiually saw and see were and are not serious faults with the underlying philosophies or systems, but abuses of those philosophies and systems by a nasty unpleasant minority. We saw and see the worst side of human nature. Which, funnily enough, was a key point Thatcher seemed to be making in that much (deliberately?) -misunderstood interview.

But this all belongs on that democratic and open-minded forum known as the Sin Bin, where anyone dissenting from the party line is mercilessly derided and belittled. Indeed, by people whose response to anyone who holds a contrary view to the party line would typically be to call them, e.g. "idiotic".

As you have done on here, in fact.

Back to your specific examples. Out of interest, how many of the " poor , vulnerable and desperate" you refer to are in that situation because of spending more than they should or can afford on drink, fags and betting? If you believe such people should be "protected" from taking out loans at very high interest rates that they cannot repay, would you also not agree that such people should also be "protected" from spending too much of what money they DO have on drink, fags and betting? To prevent them having to resort to doorstep lenders in the first place? And if not, why not? Since surely it would be preferable to tackle the causes of their situation not the symptoms? Even if it meant a state that Orwell would have recognised?

Alternatively, if you believe people should be free to make their own choices about how they conduct their lives, and not be prevented from spending money on things that they cannot afford or are not good for them, how can you then seek to prevent them from availing themselves of the services of those who may provide means for them to do just that?

Those on here and elsewhere who have said they have used payday loans responsibly and only at need, and in full knowledge of what they were doing and taking on, would seem to validate the "free will" approach? And to be talking a load of common sense?

It is not a question of "scale" at all. It is a question of causes and symptoms. And people taking responsibility for their actions. And you would seek to treat the symptoms not the causes, from what you say. And maybe prevent people from having responsibility for their actions. What next? A Telescreen in every living room, everyone to use only NewSpeak, and Room 101 for anyone who dares to exercise free will?

And anyway, if the likes of you succeeded in getting the likes of Provident shut down, all you would have done is remove the long-established, regulated and legitimate supply-side. Demand would remain undiminished, so the unregulated, loan-shark illegal supply-side would expand to fill the vacuum. THEN you would REALLY see the impact on the "poor, vulnerable and desperate".

It's capitalism irrespective of the post-facto moral judgement people make of it.

Hardly.

Do you blame the road network because some people are killed on it? Or do you instead blame those who deliberately or negligently or carelessly abuse the roads?

"Capitalism" is no more to blame per se than the road network or "society". People are to blame.

"Exploitation" seems to be the key word here - and how we view the people/resource being exploited, and whether they could exercise any genuine choice in using the service being offered. We all love to see the oppositions defence "exploited" in a game, and we all like to "exploit" new technology, equally you could argue that the farmers of the world were "exploiting" the basic human need for food. My "ideal world" would see everyone receive a basic living wage which would in theory - though I am sure not in practice - end the market for short term loans. But we do not live in an ideal world so I agree with the more pragmatic posters here that better a regulated company like Provident than some shark cruising round the estate in a Merc with darkened windows.

first i hope you dont suffer from vertigo being on such a high horse .
second as to your rebut-le "i always support the vulnerable and underdog. is that why your a Huddersfield fan (your gonna win f*** all your gonna win f*** all)

but thirdly and on a serious note the new bulls sponsor has been around for years since my old man was a boy (in his 60's). Nearly all loan companies offer these high rate loans but they just simply don't advertise it so obviously. Loan companies will asses you look at your credit score and judge you on this, if they judge you to have anything in your past that may seem like you may not be able to repay they will offer you a loan but on a stupid repayment packet.

This is nothing new and the fact your talking like people are being help with a gun to there head forced to sign to these loans is childish.Bitter and stinks of Jealousy !!!

first i hope you dont suffer from vertigo being on such a high horse .
second as to your rebut-le "i always support the vulnerable and underdog. is that why your a Huddersfield fan (your gonna win f*** all your gonna win f*** all)

but thirdly and on a serious note the new bulls sponsor has been around for years since my old man was a boy (in his 60's). Nearly all loan companies offer these high rate loans but they just simply don't advertise it so obviously. Loan companies will asses you look at your credit score and judge you on this, if they judge you to have anything in your past that may seem like you may not be able to repay they will offer you a loan but on a stupid repayment packet.

This is nothing new and the fact your talking like people are being help with a gun to there head forced to sign to these loans is childish.Bitter and stinks of Jealousy !!!

how childish you are.

The bit in green is quite sad, Representing the poor and supporting the struggle equality is the basis of methodism, socialism, the Quakers, the Trade Union movement and mother Theresa. No doubt they are all motivated like me by jealousy!



But with your attitude i am sure you would make a good salesman as a loan shark.
The bit i highlighted in red sums you up. A responsible lender would and should not lend to someone in that position.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Not sure whether you are disagreeing with my point (you usually do... who abuse capitalism exploit and impoverish the vulnerable. Society does not care for the disadvantaged and the vulnerable; [ipeople[/i (including perhaps Durham Giant?) care for the disadvantaged and the vulnerable.

Oh I am sorry I didn't realise the rules of a debate . If you disagree with someone then there reply is childish .Also I am so glad you can figure everything about a person from one post. But add I can see that your inability to take on other people's opinions has made going any further with this pointless. I am sure that will make your weekend

I am kind of agreeing I think. When bad things happen, society likes to blame everyone and everything apart from (usually) the people who do it. At some point, people have to take responsibilty for their actions.

Having said that though, I am uneasy about this sponsorship. On a selfish level, as a Bulls fan, I welcome it. On a more general level, I don't like what Provident do, but my argument is more with the society that leaves people in such desperate situations that they use the services of organisations such as Provident. I would help anyone of my friends or family, if I could, to stop them using such companies. But it does not make them the devil incarnate.
The devil incarnate sits much higher up the food chain.
I do however, hope that Provident are serious when they say they are wanting to give something back to the community. We will see.

I unlike Durham Giant am not worthy, I would have to be Smug, Righteous, Pious and Moralistic, so I will say thank you Provident for supporting my team.
I may wear a hairshirt to attone for my sins but then again I think I will buy a Bulls one.

Did Barcelona advertise UNICEF for free ? If so then good on them. If not then i wouldn't be happy with any of my donations being used to sponsor such a big global brand name as Barcelona football club.

At the time Barcelona actually paid to have the UNICEF logo on their shirts. Having fallen on harder times, Barca are now sponsored by the Qatar Foundation, which is non profit.

I did wander when i first saw UNICEF on their shirts. Thanks for clearing that up.