Wayne Rooney symbolises the greed that laid us low

The rumour in Manchester is that Coleen Rooney wanted an audience with the Pope to ask what she should do about Wayne. It’s one of those stories that journalists don’t like to check too strenuously because even if it isn’t true, it ought to be.

Admittedly, a moment of reflection suggests a meeting would have been pointless. Coleen must have known in advance that he would not tear up Catholic doctrine on the sanctity of marriage for her sake and tell her to divorce Wayne and get another man. Nor can I imagine him warning that she must insist on a condom given the company Wayne keeps at night. If the Pope won’t do it for Africans, he is unlikely to do it for Liverpudlians.

On the other hand, it is entirely plausible that Coleen would expect the Pope to make time to see her. Given the attention they attract and the money Wayne expects to earn, the Rooneys are the most famous Catholic couple in Britain. Who could dare refuse to meet the wife of a man who claims to be worth £200,000 a week?

Carry on reading

2 thoughts on “Wayne Rooney symbolises the greed that laid us low

  1. The City financiers are similar to an aristocracy with the way they do what ever they want (aware of the consequences or not) and especially more so when it comes to them having done wrong or doing wrong.
    It’s always on their own terms and with the usual behaviour that things go on, just like it was before.

    What if the City financiers were like this in 1793/94 France?…

  2. Good article.

    Of course the reason shareholders put up with this deplorable situation is that many are pension and other funds. In other words they are managed by managers managing other peoples money and the ultimate shareholders (you and me) have been disenfranchised of our shareholder democratic rights.

    So we have a Faustian pact between fund managers and company managers to ensure they both cream off huge amounts of cash with little risks to themselves. The ultimate shareholders who do need the expertise of the managers and need to spread risk are unable to stop the flow .

    With IT it would be possible to give ultimate investors their votes back so that we could say NO to excessive pay.

    This needs fixing. Any ideas how? I am not sure that limited liability should be allowed in institutions that have enormous systemic downside risks. The directors should be made broke if the company goes bust or the taxpayer is called in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s