Forum menu
We're a net importer. The manufacturing sector is all but wiped out. Where do your raw materials come from?
This latest edition of The Totally Bonkers Economic Policy Podcast is brought to you by....
*checks notes*
Oh... just the usual two. As always
Carry on.... 😂
The manufacturing sector is all but wiped out.
Is it? All those factories I see everywhere are obviously just doing nothing. It may be smaller than it was, as is the case in every western economy due to globalisation, but it still exists. In fact many western economies are now scrambling to build up their industrial sectors (look at the US), and assuming we also want to do the same, which is the express intention of both the tories and labour (especially in carbon-zero tech), then a devalued pound is a good thing? Or maybe it just doesn't really matter that much because in the end it all balances out? Either way there's no real reason for binners and the rest of us proles to care that much about it.
This latest edition of The Totally Bonkers Economic Policy Podcast is brought to you by….
Binners the bonkers economic policy is accepting unending austerity and govt inaction like you and many others on here do.
but they’re also accepting austerity now because they believe it needs paying for!
That is quite a bold claim, anything to back it up with?
Tories winning by-elections on the back of claiming that austerity measures are vital and necessary?
https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2022/11/uk-voters-austerity-spending-cuts-opinion
Voters won’t tolerate austerity 2.0
Public opinion has shifted against spending cuts in the 12 years since David Cameron and George Osborne imposed them.
Fair shout Ernie but people also aren't accepting it because mmt.
It also improves our ability to export which sustains hundreds of thousands if not millions of jobs in the manufacturing and services sectors.
Do you work for an exporter? Where does it export to? What are the barriers? Are any major ones new?
but people also aren’t accepting it because mmt.
I didn't say people accepted MMT, I said they accepted the way govt finances work. The fact that the way things work is also aligned with one of the central planks of MMT is neither here nor there to the voting public, but it does mean that you can't say people don't accept it.
Do you work for an exporter?
I work in the services sector, we export a massive amount of work to other countries, including the EU which is obviously what you're alluding to. We actually do quite well out of a less valuable currency because it makes us more competitive when bidding for large foreign projects.
but they do accept it, because that’s the reality.
It's not, there's no mainstream economy based on Pure MMT operating anywhere. Elements of the economic theory of money creation are the same for some parts of MMT and more traditional theories - such as spend first tax second, and governments not be able to default on their own currency. But MMT requires govt to be an employer of last resort, because the theory needs full employment (no one is doing that) and requires increased personal taxation as a way of control inflation during a recession, and you'd have to be brave govt to do that.
requires increased personal taxation as a way of control inflation during a recession, and you’d have to be brave govt to do that
Psst... they are doing just that.
(not technically a recession... blah blah... bouncing along on close to zero)
MMT is what happens. Now. Using it to claim that spending, borrowing and taxation decisions are not to be considered in the round is the bit that isn't accepted (even if you look at an economy as huge as the USA, never mind ours). If every time people bring up tax issues, or spending issues, you shout "it doesn't matter, cut taxes, spend on everything, hit go... it'll all be fine"... you won't persuade people of the merit or usefulness of the economic model (or correctness of the description is the term "model" offends you).
Lay out long term investment plans. Explain how taxation will prevent that investment sitting in pockets of wealth outside mainstream society. Don't mock people who consider spending and taxation as being linked as not understanding economics... they've stopped listening as soon as you've done that... and rightly so.
We're (unsurprisingly) going off on tangents here
This is meant to be a thread about Rishi Sunak.
The point is that he's built his supposed reputation on being the grown up in the room after the lunacy of his predecessors and the mantra he's constantly vocalised is that there's no money for teachers/NHS pay rises, theres no money for infrastructure projects so bye, bye HS2, theres no money for anything...
Then, if all the rumours are to be believed, he's due a screaming U-turn and invoke the language of the woman who's policies he derided and announce a shedload of unfunded tax cuts, which will only benefit top earners and those inheriting large amounts of capital. So bollocks to any investment in anything, we'll just spaff all those (borrowed) billions on giving more money to people who don't need it. All of this to be funded by borrowing at a time when thats never been as expensive.
And the markets are going to react differently than when Mad Lizzie tried the same madness 12 months ago, because.....?
It sounds to me like they know they're done, so **** it, lets just give a load of (borrowed) taxpayers money to our mates before the electorate kick us out.
The tax cuts will benefit the 4% of the population who inheritance tax applies to and then maybe the top 10% of earners
Yep... that all sounds reasonable
Most voters these days accept that when necessary quantitative easing is actually a great idea.
Quantitative easing is an euphemism - it used to be known as printing money.
After over 40 years of Thatcherism and the Tory mantra "there is no such thing as government money", talk of printing money is frowned upon.
It’s not, there’s no mainstream economy based on Pure MMT
I never said it was, I said that the way govt finances work, and the way MMT describes them are aligned, and that people accept that. It's why I talk about govt finances rather than MMT. Del was the one who brought up MMT not me.
We’re (unsurprisingly) going off on tangents here
This is meant to be a thread about Rishi Sunak.
Not just about Rishi Sunak but also all those around him who are completely deluded and unhinged, such as Mad Lizzie.
So let's's get back to the entertaining hyperbole that we all know and love, and ditch all that boring stuff about the economy 💡
This is meant to be a thread about Rishi Sunak.
Binners you were quite happy to talk about the economy until you were challenged on it. What I don't understand is why despite your long history as a labour member and centre-left blairite you've suddenly become a Cameron/Osbornesque pro-austerity flag waver?
despite your long history as a labour member and centre-left blairite you’ve suddenly become a Cameron/Osbornesque pro-austerity flag waver?
I haven't. I just believe theres a middle ground between 'lets cut taxes' and 'lets fire up the printing presses'
The clue's in the word 'centre'
If you look at what Biden is doing in America, then that makes an awful lot of sense to me. Using public money to fund huge investment in infrastructure projects etc. Thats what the labour party are proposing now, isn't it?
Being against tax cuts for the rich during difficult economic times is not "pro-austerity", quite the opposite. We should be investing. In lots of things. Not getting left behind in the energy transition game at the top of that list.
What I don’t understand is why despite your long history as a labour member and centre-left blairite you’ve suddenly become a Cameron/Osbornesque pro-austerity flag waver?
Because he is loyally following the line decided for him by his Party Leader?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/keir-starmer-labour-government-spending-b2376121.html
Starmer says he’s happy to be branded a ‘fiscal conservative’ as he refuses to commit to greater public spending
Oh christ. Here we go again....
[img] 
[/img]
I'll leave you to it 😂
Using public money to fund huge investment in infrastructure projects etc. Thats what the labour party are proposing now, isn’t it?
Is it? Can you point me towards concrete policy commitments where they've promised to spend public money on infrastructure projects? They used to talk about spending 28bn a year on 'green stuff', but that's been put out to the long grass because 'there is no money' (or words to that effect). They supported stuff like HS2, but have now failed to commit to reversing Sunak's cancellation because 'there is no money'. Literally everything that comes from the mouths of Starmer and Reeves is qualified by 'there is no money'. So where is this middle ground that you're talking about?
Starmer says he’s happy to be branded a ‘fiscal conservative’ as he refuses to commit to greater public spending
Labour are already committed to greater public spending, billions of it. Just not everything, everywhere, all at once, from day one. There's the little matter of reality to deal with. Saying yes to everything, right here, right now is both uncredible and when it doesn't come true will perpetuate the idea that all politicians promise the earth and deliver on none of it.... see the current period of politics that the UK needs to break out of.
Does Rachel Reeves know about this?
Labour are already committed to greater public spending, billions of it.
Evidence please. Policy commitments on actual stuff, not 'we want to spend more when we can afford it'.
have now failed to commit to reversing Sunak’s cancellation because
They have no idea what extra cost a restart will involve. They can't commit to it unless they know they can restart it. My money is on it being made into an impossible ask by the current government over the next 12 months, they seem determined to make it so. They already making a good start on it (see, Sunak can act quickly when there's stuff to sell off and plans to destroy).
They used to talk about spending 28bn a year on ‘green stuff’, but that’s been put out to the long grass
It's been reduced in the first two years of a possible Labour government, but the commitment is still there for the life of the parliament. Also, that's only part of the spend. I've linked to the NEC policy platform document in the thread that this stuff should probably go in. Have a read.
I’ll leave you to it
And binners has flounced! You can talk endlessly about Mad Lizzie on the Rishi Sunak thread but as soon as you mention Sunak's opposite number, and almost certainly the next UK PM, and he's off!
Still, he'll be back here tomorrow to once again inform us just how mad Lizzie is.
To be fair to Binners, the thread was descending into another discussion about MMT (There's a thread for that), and more Starmer bashing (There's a thread for that). This is a thread about Rishi and there was a big veer away from him for a while there.
I do wish our inhouse left wing loons would give it a rest, we get it, you've all got massive superior understanding macro economics than the rest of us or the politicians.
Meanwhile Torys get ever worse but we still cant endorse Starmer.
Conservative MP arrested on suspicion of rape.
Crispin Blunt has just outed himself as the arrested tory.
This is a thread about Rishi
I thought it was an all purpose rant-about-the-tories thread?
'Pincher, Bone and Blunt'
sounds like a music hall chorus
Crispin Blunt has just outed himself as the arrested tory.
At this stage I'd be more surprised if there were any Tory MPs who were actually reasonably "straight" (I don't mean sexual orientation, I just mean not up to their necks in fraud, corruption, bullying or sexual assault claims).
I suspect that the only other institution where you find such a high percentage of sex pests, perverts and fraudsters would be a prison.
At some point surely their selection committees have got to look at the number of mps getting into trouble and think hmmmm we might need to improve our vetting.
Is it any surprise that Crispin Blunt who is a paid director of the international centre for Palestinian justice and very recently spoke out against the war crimes committed by Israel and hamas has suddenly been dobbed in to police by the Tory whips?, he’s been very outspoken against the Tory policy of supporting Israel’s right to bomb innocent Palestinians.
I doubt that's the case.
His first police interview was 3 weeks - so, before the Hamas terror attack - and he's standing down at the next election.
"I have now been interviewed twice in connection with this incident, the first time three weeks ago, when I initially reported my concern over extortion. The second time was earlier this morning under caution following arrest"
Unless I am misunderstanding I assume that three weeks ago he was interviewed by the police because he reported an attempt to blackmail him.
There is no information concerning why he was arrested this morning. I reckon it is feasible that the police have been provided with more information, whether reliable or false, which they feel justifies an arrest.
I also reckon it is feasible that it is connected to Crispin Blunt's very recent outspoken criticism of Tory government support for the bombing of civilians and collective punishments, rather than just a coincidence.
Good gob, someone who's been advised they're not suited to sixth-form study and then spends their adult life flagging up the same old images, accusing people of being sixth-formers and dullards might benefit from a quiet word in the ear.
Everyone loves a conspiracy theory.
Unless I am misunderstanding
I think you are:
I have now been interviewed twice in connection with this incident
Seems pretty straightforward to me. Someone has been threatening to blackmail, he went to police 3 weeks ago and they followed it up by arresting him and interviewing him under caution.
Doesn't seem to be playing like a grand conspiracy unless they're clairvoyants.
Everyone loves a conspiracy theory.
No not everyone. I prefer a level of openness and honesty in politics rather smear tactics.
There is no explanation why he wasn't arrested three weeks ago. Which suggests that the police have information now which they didn't have 3 weeks.
The idea that it isn't feasible that anyone would smear a politician is strange. Crispin Blunt clearly has political enemies, including now in the Tory Party.
rather than just a coincidence.
Too much of a coincidence IMO. I guess it’s all part of the effort to silence or stigmatise any criticism. Something which this forum is contributing to even if its intentions are genuine. At some point in the future we’ll look back on this as a dark and sinister period in history when we all played a part in the horror. The parallels with past history are pretty terrifying.
Dear god! I love our little cabal of unhinged 6th form lefties. Seriously, you’re absolute comedy gold.
So on a thread nominally about Rishi Sunak, having run through your usual achingly tedious repertoire of bonkers economics and slagging off Starmer (boo hiss!), you’ve now come to the conclusion that a Tory MP being a bit rapey (like that’s a first) is probably a conspiracy?
Righto lads …. obviously. You’re probably on to something. Makes you think eh? It’s certainly opened my eyes…
So, who set it up then? Mossad? The CIA? MI5? Maybe it was all of them? Maybe they were all sat in a Bond Villain Lair under a volcano, stroking a big fluffy white cat, cackling like maniacs while developing their death ray? Maybe it was aliens? Maybe they’ve already got a death ray. Eek!
Absolutely ****ing hatstand, the lot of you 😂
Isn’t this exactly the kind of allegation party whips supposedly like to use as leverage to keep MPs in line? On an aside, I thought it was amusing how the BBC mention but don’t name the other Tory MP (and former whip) under arrest on suspicion of crimes including indecent assault and abuse of a position of trust.
So on a thread nominally about Rishi Sunak, having run through your usual achingly tedious repertoire of bonkers economics and slagging off Starmer (boo hiss!)
It is how a countries economy works whether you like it or not so while not bonkers is a bit tedious. And as I have said before mentioning Starmer, who is the main opposition to Sunak, and what he says or does matters in any overall discussion about current life under Sunak.
Go on, post that hilarious sign of yours for what the 100th time now.
Absolutely ****ing hatstand, the lot of you 😂
But isn't that the case with anyone who has a different political opinion to yours? My understanding is that they must be either stupid or mad, or both. That appears to be the basis of all your political critiques.
Btw I'm loving how you obviously dismiss the possibility that someone might have made false allegations concerning Crispin Blunt, or if they have that they could not possibly be politically motivated.
Just to remind you, or you possibly didn't even know, here is how in the last week Crispin Blunt has understandably pissed some Tories right off :
The International Centre of Justice for Palestinians, which Mr Blunt co-chairs, has issued a notice of intention to prosecute UK officials and says there is “clear evidence that Israel has committed war crimes”.
I know absolutely nothing about any allegations made against Blunt beyond that he has been accused of rape. But I find the idea that they can't possibly be malicious and politically motivated bizarre. Hatstand indeed.
Edit:
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/gaza-war-crimes-uk-rishi-sunak-b2429728.html