Viewing 13 posts - 41 through 53 (of 53 total)
  • austerity measures found to be eminent economist's miscalculation…?
  • teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    Of course I have. But those in power are generally doing the same thing once you strip out the rhetoric. And the troika who control the purse strings keeping the periphery afloat are still forcing the same policy mix ignoring the democratic process in the meantime.

    Did you notice just how forcefully Liam Byrne attacked Tory welfare cuts. With the venom of a wet fish!

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    Well if you have then you’ll see that your claim concerning “parties across the political mix” is far from accurate.

    Did you notice just how forcefully Liam Byrne attacked Tory welfare cuts. With the venom of a wet fish!

    No I didn’t. If you claiming that because New Labour are piss-poor at offering a credible alternative to the Tories, this somehow means that the Tories can’t be ideologically motivated, then that’s quite frankly rather silly.

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    On the contrary we have parties of different political persuasions (and differing rhetoric) implementing the same policies. Hence completely accurate. That is not the same as saying that everyone agrees with them. But noteworthy how they change once they come into power.

    I think politicising what is going on is a red herring. The point about Byrne was an example of why.

    The global elite are impotent right now. The two major blocks in trouble with excess debt have tried diametrically opposed economic policy mixes – Japan v the west (broadly speaking). They have both failed to deliver growth. Hmm…..and now Abeeconomics had become the latest convert to ultra loose monetary policy. I am sure you have noticed the rapid bounce that has resulted in Japan’s equity market. (but) Have they noticed what is happening in Europe?

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middling Edition

    Fresh Goods Friday 696: The Middlin...
    Latest Singletrack Videos
    rudebwoy
    Free Member

    The ruling classes are in fright, they are not in control of economic forces , global capitalists are worried that their system of enrichment is lurching from crisis to crisis, they know that it depends on people believing they have more to lose from revolutionary change, but that belief is always under threat. In ‘good’ times it is relatively safe, but in times of crises, it has to divide and rule with ever more draconian measures, leading to more unrest….the illusion of stable capitalism is exposed– its an exploitative system whose mask slips when the heat is on..

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    I think politicising what is going on is a red herring.

    Hardly a red herring, it is the very reason why Osborne will not consider any deviation from the course he has set. Ideological commitment is what makes Osborne so doggedly determined, in face of overwhelming evidence that austerity is not the solution.

    rudebwoy
    Free Member

    the parties in politics are virtually all offering different versions of the same thing– how do you like your pain—they are all bankrupt of ideas– they all live in a pampered world, with salaries, fringe benefits,rewards when leaving office, and pensions that ordinary people never see. Its no wonder they all sing from the same sheet, but in different tones…..

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    It may well not be the solution but that is not to say that people in power will abandon the idea that it is required. It is the whole chicken and egg aspect that makes life so difficult for policy makers (in their defence). Determining the level of interest rate that makes current debt levels unsustainable is easier and more formulaic. The challenge is that different things can cause them to rise rapidly. And that is where the debate lies.

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    they all live in a pampered world, with salaries, fringe benefits,rewards when leaving office, and pensions that ordinary people never see. Its no wonder they all sing from the same sheet, but in different tones…..

    I like the way that, as usual, it’s all just the fault of politicians.

    One of the reasons why there is so little difference between Labour and the Tories is because Labour are aware that it is far easier to adopt Tory policies which the electorate has by and large already bought, and which continues to be sold to them on a daily basis by the right-wing press, than go through the difficult and arduous task of attempting to win an alternative argument, in face of a very unsympathetic press/media, and which is far from guaranteed to succeed.

    If the electorate were demanding that Labour provides a serious alternative to the Tories then they probably would. But until then Labour will continue to play it safe by not offering anything radically different to the Tories. And the “just like the Tories but nicer” strategy will very probably be enough to win them the next general election.

    rudebwoy
    Free Member

    the idea that you can make capitalism more palatable with some reforms and controls is laughable–given that the first thing to go in a crisis is all those reforms and controls– reformist politics can only appeal in a time of economic growth not decline– hence all parties adherence to austerity, they do not have any control over global capitalism– they all seek to appease the business class–at the expense of everyone else.

    i agree that people expect more form a Labour govt, but it doesn’t take long for normal service to be resumed–i do however remain optimistic that events may pass them all by and consign them to the dustbin of history….

    ernie_lynch
    Free Member

    the idea that you can make capitalism more palatable with some reforms and controls is laughable–given that the first thing to go in a crisis is all those reforms and controls

    It’s not laughable at all – you can make capitalism much more palatable.

    And which “reforms and controls” were removed by the last government when it found itself faced with the worst global capitalist crises since the 1930s ?

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    One way of making capitalism more palatable is to avoid running up budget deficits during the good times. The powder keg needs to be dry not essentially empty when the time to use it (ie,recessions)comes. As a self_confesses Keynesian economist the one bloke out of the current Uk political elite who “should” understand this is Ed Balls. At least his lot didnt tie us to a fixed currency at the same time. Imagine the mess we would be in then – then we would be facing “real” austerity not the type that was described in one broadsheet yesterday as moving from Income of £40 and expenditure of £50 to income of £40 and expenditure of £47. Some austerity package that?

    teamhurtmore
    Free Member

    FWIW – at least some (!?!) honesty from the “great and good” of the world’s economic and political elites this weekend at the IMF meetings…

    Reflecting the lack of consensus, Mr Tharman (Chairman of IMF’s governing body) added: “There is no single bullet that will get us to normal growth and some normality in jobs”.

    …which I guess can be translated as, “help, anyone got any new ideas?”. At least we are only on version 3 of what the IMF says the UK should do!! And after the attempt at consensus, then we get the interesting bickering as to whose fault it is:

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/acb7a84a-a9fc-11e2-9c7b-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2R5mMF6Ru

    …and further comments on the risks of QE from the worlds biggest bond investor

    The idea is simple: manipulate key financial markets in order to “push” investors to take more risk, thus also stimulating spending and investing. With time, improving fundamentals would validate the artificial prices, thus also allowing central banks to exit.

    Most investors have responded to QE as very few wished to take on institutions with a printing press in the basement. Yet, despite the manipulation of financial markets, growth and jobs have consistently fallen short of expectations.

    Facing insufficient demand, structural impediments and policy uncertainty, the real economy has not responded as envisaged by central bankers. In response, officials have widened the scope and scale of QE…..

    ….So, what exactly are these collateral damages and unintended circumstances?

    Modern market-based economies are not wired to function well at artificial prices for any prolonged period of time. The pricing system loses its critical signaling role. Markets operate less well. And, critically, resources are misallocated – both in the financial sector and also in certain parts of the real economy.

    So, less than five years after a global crisis triggered by irresponsible risk-taking, concerns are again surfacing about bubbles. The worry is heightened by the fact that both governments and central banks now have fewer weapons to counter the detrimental effects of another financial crisis.

    http://www.businessinsider.com/el-erian-g-20-warns-of-qe-collateral-damage-2013-4

    kimbers
    Full Member

Viewing 13 posts - 41 through 53 (of 53 total)

The topic ‘austerity measures found to be eminent economist's miscalculation…?’ is closed to new replies.