Forum menu
However I can see no evidence that what you say is established fact in economics
Yeah you're right. Fiat currencies, central banks and govt accounting practices don't really exist. The earth is also flat, climate change is a conspiracy and the world is governed by lizards.
Yeah you’re right. Fiat currencies, central banks and govt accounting practices don’t really exist. The earth is also flat, climate change is a conspiracy and the world is governed by lizards.
Lovely stuff.
Aaaanyway..... What's the crack with the Badenoch stories floating around? I'm reading something about a blog?
I could be totally wide of the mark, but I really don't think she's all that popular amongst MPs..... they'll eventually whittle it down to two to put to the party members....is she going to get that far?
As someone above said, it is nice to watch the infights without worrying about what fresh hell they're about to do in power. Of course the Tories as a vacuum of sensible opposition will mean Reform getting more coverage. The Lib Dems need to go back into GE campaign mode, or certainly Ed Davey does. Hardly heard a peep from them! 70+ of them and plenty of sensible ideas, I'd like to hear more from them.
Just harking back to the snippy reply I got on the Netanyahu/Sharon point - does anyone actually think we'll see Netanyahu in the dock or at The Hague? Seriously?
But, in any case, it is the right thing for our government to do. On that, I assume, we might agree.
The tetchiness on this thread is already reaching Rishi levels.
I don’t think it works like that. House prices and land prices are extremely elastic. A large part of the cost of a housing development is the land, and since land only has value based on what you can do with it, the price of the land is the price you can get for all the houses you can build on it minus their cost.
In other words, people can only afford to pay so much for their houses, so if you make them cost more to build then the landowner gets less. Boo hoo.
House prices are continually increasing and any around my way that have any green tech are more expensive, by a fair margin, than those without. Therefore I don’t think it works how you think it does either. People on average salaries aren’t affording to either upgrade their current house or move in to a more modern one with newer greener technology. It needs big subsidies for existing stock to be upgraded and reasonable caps on pricing for new.
The biggest con with solar, in my mind, is the crappy rate you get for selling units back to the grid... it makes it a lot less attractive.
I'm not nessesarily insisting you should be able to sell back at the full price you buy units for, but it seems to me there is a huge disparity.
Just harking back to the snippy reply I got on the Netanyahu/Sharon point – does anyone actually think we’ll see Netanyahu in the dock or at The Hague? Seriously?
Do you think any scenario of this ends in anything but disaster, say an actual nation does apprehend him, sends him off to the Hague, you now have given the Israeli's even more ammunition to become more isolated, more threatening and it'll cause absolute chaos with nations pitted against each other over it, the next option is someone grabbing the headlines by trying to 'citizens arrest' the leader of Israel, flanked by his heavy security, that will end messy as well.
The way this whole conflict has turned out, it's only going to reduce through the US getting tough, or citizens of Israel actually asking questions and pushing for change internally.
So you think that the far-right government in Israel is above international law and those accused of war crimes should not face the consequences?
Does that apply to other countries too or just Israel?
I think the Labour Foreign Secretary, who is a member of Labour Friends of Israel btw, is absolutely spot on in believing that Netanyahu should not be above the law.
It is a very welcome change from the previous Tory government position on the issue
Btw although relatively unpopular with the Israeli people Netanyahu's popularity has been growing significantly in recent months, if you are arguing that Israelis should deal with him themselves
I know this is the UK government thread, not the USA one, but there is an important cross-over.... Harris has stated pretty clearly that a two state solution is the only way out of this. And I agree.
An internationaly brokered new border, with an officially internationaly recognised state of Palestine. That will be a massive argument in itself with the various 'illegal' land-grabs thathave taken place over time, most recently, in particular, but it's the only sensible and logical solution I can think of.
This has been 'casual policy' by many western governments but never really enforced via sanctions or whatever... that needs to change, and IMO, fast.
So you think that the far-right government in Israel is above international law and those accused of war crimes should not face the consequences?
Sigh.
So you think that the far-right government in Israel is above international law and those accused of war crimes should not face the consequences?
Nope, but as i was responding to the previous poster who asked about what people thought, i gave my opinion of the outcome, which is that a sitting leader would not be brought to task, the ICC can pass judgement, but they are powerless to enforce, and count on states to do that for them, how many states will say they'd do it is one thing, how many states that would actually go through with it is another.
Btw although relatively unpopular with the Israeli people Netanyahu’s popularity has been growing significantly in recent months, if you are arguing that Israelis should deal with him themselves
Yes, and the reason for that is how he is 'hitting back at Hamas' for their atrocity, Netanyahu was a man who was passed his sell by date, fighting corruption charges and running out of friends, then the Hamas attack took place and this is the outcome, if that attack hadn't have happened, i dare say Netanyahu may well have been out of politics now with the trial against him having concluded a lot quicker and less friendlier than it'll do now.
Harris has stated pretty clearly that a two state solution is the only way out of this. And I agree.
Maybe but that is a whole different argument, right now the priority must be to stop the killing by the IDF and to stop all the deaths through starvation, lack of shelter, lack of medical care, etc
And in that respect the current Labour government's decision to reverse the previous Tory government's attempt to block the International Criminal Court from issuing an arrest warrant for war crimes is a very welcome move.
The more the perpetrators of war crimes are held to account the less likely they are to openly commit them.
a sitting leader would not be brought to task,
The ICC arrest warrant would be valid until the day he dies. It will be far less effective if the ICC waits until after Netanyahu is no longer in power before issuing an arrest warrant, the alledged war crimes are happening right now. Besides I see no problem with a sitting leader being arrested, they certainly have been in situations of war.
Lammy has got this right imo.
Edit: And btw the arrest warrants are not just for Netanyahu
**** all will happen to Netanyahu unless the US want it.
Of course he should stand trial for war crimes. He's a million miles beyond the threshold for collective punishment (a war crime in itself). But in the real world, only the US can make it happen.
A bit like MMT working in an imaginary world in people's heads where the other hundred and fifty odd economies in the world (including the issuer of the de facto world currency) just let you do whatever you want and don't react to it to preserve their own interests.
The UK government's change of stance will definitely put pressure on the United States.
There is no logical reason why the United States should protect Netanyahu come what may. In fact there are very good reasons why they should abandon him, even if it is just for their own self interests
Yep, It's a welcome statement, on the surface by both the UK and the USA.
Unfortunatly as I'm sure you'll agree it dosn't do much to stop the current genocide Israel is inflicting on Palestine.
I don't know why you appear to think that Netanyahu's government is doing whatever it wants in Gaza.
IMO they aren't, they are doing what they believe they can get away with. And certainly issues such as the amount of food and other aid that getting through is dependent on how much pressure they feel they are under.
The regime in Tel Aviv is deeply concerned at the thought of being isolated internationally, and they certainly don't dismiss the threat of ICC arrest warrants as inconsequential, Netanyahu is livid.
I find it strange that some people who claim to be concerned about the situation should be so dismissive about an important step made by the new Labour government. Obviously much more needs to done but if it is established that those in positions of responsibility have a case to answer with regards to war crimes the next steps will be easier to achieve.
The current Labour government was only elected this month and already important steps have been taken over the issue of Palestine.
I find it strange that some people who claim to be concerned about the situation should be so dismissive about an important step made by the new Labour government.
I literally said "Yep, It’s a welcome statement, on the surface by both the UK..."
Learn how to read?
Learn how to read?
Nice. Maybe you should read what I wrote. I said "dismissive".
I consider this :
Unfortunatly as I’m sure you’ll agree it dosn’t do much to stop the current genocide Israel is inflicting on Palestine.
To be dismissive. And no I don't agree. IMO every bit of pressure helps to minimise what Netanyahu feels he can get away with. I have already made that point.
A nice bit in today's Guardian editorial:
In the UK, where Labour’s perceived indifference to Palestinian lives cost it votes and seats in the election, there is already movement. The new government has thankfully resumed funding to Unrwa, the Palestinian relief agency, long after others did so. Downing Street confirmed on Friday that the UK has dropped its opposition to the international criminal court issuing an international arrest warrant for Mr Netanyahu over alleged war crimes.
David Lammy, the new foreign secretary, will soon decide whether to publish legal advice on the supply of arms to Israel. Sources have told the Guardian he is preparing to announce a partial ban on the sale of weapons. He should do both.
I have already made that point.
In multiple threads. It was only a matter of time before this one was dragged down this path too.
That's me, always singing the praises of Labour politicians, I'm well-known for it.
And in more good news (imo) from the new Labour government:
Edit: Although I remain deeply unimpressed with Labour not following economic policies significantly different to the Tories and I am very impressed with some of the purely ethical stances they have taken in the first 4 weeks since forming a government. That definitely seems to be significantly different to the previous Tory government, and up to this point at least more than I had dared to hope for.
Good stuff! Hopefully we’ll be seeing the back of all the Tories other pointless, badly-drafted, culture war bullshit
It literally was all they actually did while in power (especially the last 5 years) bar the looney few weeks where Liz Truss drove the economy off a cliff.
If you discount all that sort of nonsense it’s as if, from 2019 until a couple of weeks ago, we didn’t actually have a government at all. They ‘ruled’ without a trace, while the public sector crumbled around them
Hopefully we’ll be seeing the back of all the Tories other pointless, badly-drafted, culture war bullshit
Exactly my thoughts. And what I have to admit surprises me is that in doing so they don't appear be, at the moment at least, to be too concerned by the threat of a right-wing press backlash.
With the majority Labour have got and with the Tories about to start a massive insular, navel-gazing scrap for 'the soul of the party' (whatever that is?), theres very little point in the right wing press piling in. I believe they're busy having a go at the French instead
I also hope we've seen the back of the Orwellian use of language too. The 'Freedom of Speech' Bill, which could be more accurately called 'the Freedom for Government to dictate who can and can't say what and ban the stuff we don't like people saying' bill, which admittedly isn't as snappy a title
It's going to get tiresome I imagine, spending more time undoing all the stupid and insane shit that bunch of chancers installed.
I'm sure certain quarters are remaining quiet as it's still too close to the point of impact to start gobbing off, they'll be back soon calling for heads on spikes.
That bill sounds very American, which is a point of distaste before you even get into the detail. Much less of that required moving forward please.
Edit: Weird stuff going on...... deleted double post
@relapsed_mandalorian - it was indeed th Americans who started all this nonsense with language, really ramped up by Dubya who brought in things like 'The Clear Skies Act' which basically removed environmental protections and allowed their petrochemical donors to pollute with impunity, and then of course 'the War on Terror'.
If you fancy a good read on the subject of how this corruption of language all started, then progressed to what we have today with government by three-word-slogan, this is a great book (yes, I am that boring)
‘the War on Terror’.
Sadly well versed in that area. GWOT still makes my teeth itch.
This is worth sharing and probably sums up what the Tories can expect with their protestations in parliament for the forseeable future...
https://Twitter.com/Haggis_UK/status/1816778960211980784
I've had a right old spring in my step today.
Until this thread I didn't realise we could sort all our problems by adding a couple of zeros on a spreadsheet and lived in a world where a maniacal Israeli leader would realise the error of his ways as a result of a sharp word from the UK.
It's a lovely world to inhabit.
To be fair, MMT in theory should be beneficial, and during recent crises, all western nations (including the EU via the ECB) have all used a similar way of working to fight against it, my big concern is a single country, like the UK doing it in isolate, i see a lot of others fighting it, and causing the UK a lot of headaches, so basically, the system looks like it functions well, but then it fails the humanity test!
MMT or classic Keynesian. Now is the time to borrow to invest in either model I think
Thats Revves is resistant to this puts her in the wrong
To be fair, MMT in theory should be beneficial, and during recent crises, all western nations (including the EU via the ECB) have all used a similar way of working to fight against it, my big concern is a single country, like the UK doing it in isolate, i see a lot of others fighting it, and causing the UK a lot of headaches, so basically, the system looks like it functions well, but then it fails the humanity test!
Communism failed the humanity test too. In theory a fantastic way of doing things (and will ultimately be the way things have to go for humankind to live sustainably), but in the end people couldn't make it work.
The neoliberal version of capitalism we are currently living through is also failing, the asset bubble is basically borrowing from future generations. And now we are starting to live the payback period, where the young and those not already in profit from the past inflation are paying the costs.
Unless the effort that is currently being put into keeping the bubble inflating is redirected to creating far greater financial equality, I fully expect a complete collapse of the system in my lifetime.
There's plenty of 'systems' that are going to fail as humankind runs out of options for continuing as we are.
Yep, pretty clear that humans species on the whole has ****ed it up. Time to almost completely die off and start again just as other species who over consume what they are dependant on and grow too big to support.
Back to my hobby horse again 🙂
Starmer has said in the past that he favours looking at end of life care / assisted dying with a free vote in the commons. As DPP he will have been involved with various cases where carers where prosecuted for helping someone commit suicide usually when they helped someone to go to Dignitas. At some point there was a change in policy at in his office whereby the presumption changed from always prosecute to rarely prosecute ( I cannot remember the various legal terms). I think that may have been his decision.
AS DPP he will have an interesting insight to all this and the legal issues around it all and understand the real human suffering.
An interesting test of his moral compass. It will be a bruising fight to get the law thru particularly with COE bishops in the lords. We know the public is overwhelmingly in favour. We also know the religious lobby will lie, misrepresent and do anything they can to stop it and are very well funded mainly buy American fundamentalist churches and pretty much all of the UK churches also oppose.
Jersey, Isle of Man and Scotland all have laws working thru their parliaments at the moment and the Scots law which I have knowledge of would be a good model to follow - ie the hard work of formulating a law has been done. There is also a private members bill being introduced in the Lords
I do not expect this to be a top priority but I do expect it in this parliament.
Now is the time to borrow to invest in either model I think
That would've been a few years back when interest rates were literally zero.
Thats Revves is resistant to this puts her in the wrong
Is this the latest stick you've decided to beat this govt with after the hysteria over the twp child cap has mysteriously died away?
The two child cap issue is not going to go away.
Reeves economic straitjacket she wants to wear has been roundly criticized.
|However I did think we have debated these issues a lot. I thought a new issue might be interesting to debate as in my post above.
Just to show I'm even handed / fair minded in this debate, and provide info that goes against my arguments. Just saying....
So decisions CAN be made before the Spending Review, decisions which I suspect the various Depts (DSIT in this case) have already ringfenced and know what is well above where their cutoff line may come. If other decisions by other Depts (like 2CBC) aren't being funded in the same way yet I can only surmise that they aren't well above the line for whatever reason - and let's not do that loop again, I too think it should be, while noting there's a review taskforce as well.
For note
Funding for last round of hubs is coming to an end and without this follow on the researchers and post docs have to find other work, such as new grants at their Universities, grants at other Universities, or out to Industry. So there's a strong necessity here to not have a gap, because there's other countries or companies that would snap them up.
The funding is £100m and I'm pretty sure that's multi year, possibly 4 - so a tiny amount in comparison to other demands.
Have a read of the 'pen pictures' of the Hubs and their purpose, but I draw attention to one part, given I was asked previously to justify why spending on these is in the big picture/with 'morality removed' more important than child poverty
Much of the UK’s critical infrastructure relies on the accurate measurements of time, direction and speed which enable us to stay in constant contact with communications satellites. Currently, those connections are vulnerable to disruption through technical problems or deliberate malicious actions like signal-jamming.
If those connections are lost for any reason, it would have a huge impact on key industries like energy, finance, communications and transport, causing an estimated economic loss of a billion pounds a day until service is restored.
£100m in *4* years, across 5 hubs; assume all equal that's £13k per day for the PNT hub against £1bn/day risk.
That's why I call it a no brainer, and yet it still is / has been under review for affordability.