total capitalism . . . what is it?

My ignorance sometimes astounds me . . . (only sometimes because often I am acutely aware of it . . . what the hell is that, or this or the other, etc.) but, as I said, sometimes it astounds me . . . (and at least as often embarrasses me . . . what is that? upbringing, cultural claptrap, character defect, common sense . . . I doubt I nailed that . . . ). BUT there are some definitions and guide posts for "total capitalism" and as I come across them and read some of the text it is apparent that I am even aware of some of the argument . . . a good place to start (a little dear for my current pocketbook - but that's relative not only to obvious circumstances but to current dreams of growing a budget for retirement . . . ) is a a book of the name: Total Capitalism. So I may start there - I'll discuss the budgetary consequences with A and take her advice (but I sometimes am able to argue an effective way around the obvious shortcomings of the developing expenditure . . . ) and probably buy the book (FYI, she seldom reads over my shoulder - or visits this blog - her world tends to be full enough of the real concerns of food, happiness and a retirement off the street . . . ).

Another avenue is, of course, the Internet (with all of its dark, cavernous recesses where one may be mugged in an endless variety of ways . . . mostly, not pleasant) where sometimes there is light, with an attached dimmer, and a chorus, not necessarily Canadian, singing Leonard Cohen's Hallelujah. One such locale, not the music but the economics of private gain, may be Colin Leys' flat somewhere in London. I leave you to find the relevant baedeker, I've become consumed with an irresistible urge to listen to something that better fits my pre-2012 election mood (I'll be back to total capitalism):