I still think Starmer can win but my god he’s a ****.

“Secure, well paid, skilled work is not separate from good business. It is the driver of good business. When business profits, we all do.”

I’m not sure why people are reading “trickle down economics” or “drilling more surplus value” out of workers into this. It seems perfectly sound to me. If Labour is the party of the worker, it is the party of helping workers build on their skills, of being paid fairly, of security and rights in the workplace. A Labour government will not bring an end to capitalism, or end employer/employee relationships. Successful businesses who properly value their employees, and benefit from them being better skilled, better paid and more secure (in law not just at the whim of the employer) should be one of the key aims of any government, no? Or are we going to pretend you are either pro-business, or pro-worker, and you can only be one or the other?

I’m not sure why people are reading “trickle down economics” or “drilling more surplus value” out of workers into this.

This

When business profits, we all do.

Is pretty much the definition of trickle down economics.

So Mike Ashley isn’t a very good businessman then? How come he has been so successful?

High profits do not necessarily equate with high wages.

Anyone who suggests that making rich people even richer helps poor people become less poor, as Ronald Reagan famously did and which is central to selling neo-liberalism to the gullible, is making the case for trickle down economics.

I’m not sure why people are reading “trickle down economics”

Kelvin in a world where there are billionaires who are richer than some countries and pay almost no tax, where companies like Apple have hundreds of billions in the bank, and at the same time working people have to go to food banks to feed their kids. How can you possibly think that Starmer’s economically illiterate ‘when the rich get richer everyone else does too’ fantasy is ok?

How can you possibly think that Starmer’s economically illiterate ‘when the rich get richer everyone else does too’ fantasy is ok?

Whoa, no one knows what Starmer thinks, he probably doesn’t even know himself, we only know what he says.

He didn’t say anything like that at the Labour Party Conference, as far as I am aware, he was talking to the CBI when he made the comment.

So he would say that, wouldn’t he?

If you don’t like what he said at the CBI Conference just focus at what he said at the Labour Party Conference. Which I believe is what he wants you to do.

‘when the rich get richer everyone else does too’

Where did he say that?

Do we not want successful businesses?

You’ve listed many ways that our system is failing people. All of which I agree with you on. None of it means we shouldn’t have a skilled, well paid, secure workforce. Or that businesses wouldn’t profit from a better skilled, better paid, more secure workforce. Or that we can’t all benefit from having successful businesses here.

This, is quite good:
“Secure, well paid, skilled work is not separate from good business. It is the driver of good business”

This, is both wrong, and a stupid thing for him to say:
“When business profits, we all do”

And the timing of dropping a stupid line like that right when he should be relentlessly hammering the tories for being in businesses’ pockets and for pouring money at Track and Trace and so many other private failures, all of which are examples of “when business profits, we get shat on”…

Where did he say that?

Do we not want successful businesses?

Whoa, no one knows what ernie thinks, he probably doesn’t even know himself, we only know what he says to ‘win’ arguments on the internet with his mad debatin’ skillz.

This, is quite good:
“Secure, well paid, skilled work is not separate from good business. It is the driver of good business”

This, is both wrong, and a stupid thing for him to say:
“When business profits, we all do”

This can be read two ways. If you take the second quote in isolation then you do get the trickle down economics nonsense of the right wing. Putting the quotes together then its not bad. You can read it as ‘If you have a secured, well paid, skilled workforce then when that business does well, we all do well.’

Gosh, are we back to your personal attacks and your strange obsession with my alleged “debatin’ skillz” vazaha?😁

It must be really frustrating for you to be unable to contribute to any political thread beyond repeating the same personal attack.

I can’t say I can recall you making any comment beyond your cack-handed attempts to say that you disagree with me.

Having generously shared your opinions of me, how about giving your opinions of Starmer? Or anything else for that matter.

There is no such thing as trickle-down, the last 40 years have demonstrated this. (Which implies the private sector generates money – which is tosh.)

The private sector obtains its money when the government spends into the public sector. The public sector then effectively spends into the private sector (who cream profits away) and the deficit is enlarged as money moves around. The money is then taxed back out at some point.

It is the only source of GBP.

Commercial banks provide loans that have to be zero’d off at the end of their usefelul life.

Private companies don’t create money! They just swill and concentrate existing money around.

That said we do need business to produce services and products, and offer employment.

But we need the workers as much.

Starmer is working from an 80s playbook now.

He has no good or new ideas.

I’m all for small businesses (I’ve run one for 30 years) but he doesn’t mean this in a CBI speach does he?

If the Telegraph are citing him as grasping fiscal responsibility – you know it is a bad thing for all of us because the Telegraph are economically not interested in the have-nots.

But we need the workers as much.

Goggle ‘where have all the workers gone’ for insight into how post-pandemic things have changed

Goggle ‘where have all the workers gone’ for insight into how post-pandemic things have changed

Well yeah I’m keeping an eye on all of that too.

Let’s see what happens to demand for goods, and supply shocks over the next few months too.

We’ve had Starmer’s proposed exciting new system for 40 years.

It’s crumbling in front of us and yet he thinks it’s the road to success?

The government can act as an employer you know? It has all the cash it needs to rebuild society without the profit element being creamed away and producing ‘cheap’ outcomes.

It has all the cash it needs to do whatever we want society to be.

You don’t need business men/women for that.

Good news is things are in really poor-shape so they can’t talk up the success of private enterprise forever, particularly in delivering housing and infrastructure.

That said we do need business to produce services and products, and offer employment.

But we need the workers as much.

Yes, we need both things and we need a government that has the correct level of controls in those things to get the balance right. That will never happen in this democracy.

That will never happen in this democracy.

The STW prophet of doom has spoken! Of course it can happen. Fair wages, progressive taxes and workers rights are not extreme communist policies. They’re what we had for decades before the tories and Blair dismantled it all. In fact, that’s exactly what Corbyn was offering, but you’ve already said you don’t think he’d have been any better than Johnson, so you seem to be contradicting yourself.

The government can act as an employer you know?

Yes, we do know. Do you want it to be the only employer?

Of course it can happen.

Can, and should.

Or are we going to pretend you are either pro-business, or pro-worker, and you can only be one or the other?

I think that’s roughly the case. The solution the UK has found to the conflict between workers and business owners is to completely strip workers of any collective power.

If we’re going to have this form of capitalism then I think it’s reasonable that the role of the state should be to shield people (ie workers) from the consequences of the imbalance.

Starmer gets The Times onside:

At a time of economic anxiety business leaders deserved better than the prime minister’s shambolic speech – they got it instead from Sir Keir Starmer https://t.co/UVTnpXUmTm

— The Times (@thetimes) November 22, 2021

Starmer gets The Times onside

I’m sure the working people of the UK will be very relieved about that. 🙄

It’s not just The Times though, is it. Those two speeches were a strong contrast between a failing flailing PM, and the alternative. Of course, unless Starmer had gone in there and told all the CBI members that they should be out of a job, capitalism has failed, prepare to be nationalised, you’re all going to jail… his distractors on the left are going to attack him. But for most people, there was only one man speaking to the CBI yesterday taking the role of the PM seriously. The question will build over the next few years as to whether voters really want serious though… I’m not hopeful, but would love to be wrong.

If you take the second quote in isolation then you do get the trickle down economics nonsense of the right wing.

I don’t think it does. Everyone knows that in a non-communist system, when businesses do well there’s more money around. Trickle down is nonsense, yes, but the more money businesses make the more there is for a left-wing government to redistribute. I thought this was fairly obvious no?

I don’t think it does. Everyone knows that in a non-communist system, when businesses do well there’s more money around. Trickle down is nonsense, yes, but the more money businesses make the more there is for a left-wing government to redistribute. I thought this was fairly obvious no?

This might seem obvious but is in no way correct.

Money is not ‘generated’ by business. Businesses are currency users not issuers. The UK government is a monopoly currency issuer. Governments with central banks like ours do not redistribute money (as in via Taxation) – They issue new money every time they spend. This money makes its way through from public to private purse.

Left-wing or Right-wing the government has the same power of spending.

This is why every time we go into austerity (I.e the UK government taxes back more than it spends) – then countries like the UK & USA have historically dropped in recession – because business is ultimately being starved of money because consumers have less to spend.

Money is not ‘generated’ by business. Businesses are currency users not issuers

is this always the case? If a business attracts foreign investment? Or if they sell their goods abroad? Or in the case of tourism tourists come here and spend their money earned abroad here?

Trickle down is nonsense, yes, but the more money businesses make the more there is for a left-wing government to redistribute.

Um….

At a time of economic anxiety business leaders deserved better than the prime minister’s shambolic speech – they got it instead from Sir Keir Starmer

They got it much more convincingly from Jeremy Corbyn a few years ago but the Times et al were too busy trying to make him out to be a dangerous communist terrorist.sympathiser.

Of course, unless Starmer had gone in there and told all the CBI members that they should be out of a job, capitalism has failed, prepare to be nationalised, you’re all going to jail… his distractors on the left are going to attack him.

What do you think you are achieving with this kind of stupid straw man? 🙄

I mean, capitalism has failed, if you think avoiding planetary disaster for humankind is important, but…

If a business attracts foreign investment surely that is creating money?

No – there is no creation of money from anyone apart from the BoE and its agents.

The UK generally imports more than it exports.

They got it much more convincingly from Jeremy Corbyn a few years ago but they were too busy trying to make him out to be a dangerous communist terrorist.

But he was pro leave and always was. Brexit is bad for business especially leaving the SM & CU so I am not sure how JC could have been credible with this?

Or if they sell their goods abroad? Or in the case of tourism tourists come here and spend their money earned abroad here?

With exports – this is not that good in the long run as you’re swapping a real resources for money. Something the Government can issue when it needs to.

Tourists from the UK also take their money out of the country. Neither of which is part of money creation.

No – there is no creation of money from anyone apart from the BoE and its agents.

I edited my reply to remove the bit about creation of money for that reason. If a business attracts foreign investment that is bringing money into our country no? BoE had nothing to do with it?

If a business attracts foreign investment?

They have to deal in GBP ultimately.

There is only one source of GBP.

When a company attracts foreign investment – it will ultimately be on a balance sheet and owe the investor. It’s a loan. Not generation of money.

Sort of like how commercial banks work.

Of course, unless Starmer had gone in there and told all the CBI members that they should be out of a job, capitalism has failed, prepare to be nationalised, you’re all going to jail… his distractors on the left are going to attack him.

I refer you to my earlier post. What the vast majority of us want is not the end of capitalism, but a fairer, more transparent and less cutthroat form of it..

Jeremy Corbyn’s CBI appearance was the most memorable answer I’ve ever heard on wealth creators.

Have a listen. pic.twitter.com/IAjBAX4Uol

— Tory Fibs (@ToryFibs) November 22, 2021

I watched that when you posted it before. And agreed with you. Both of them talked about growing businesses, and how that can benefit the country as a whole. Starmer’s focus on improving skills, wages and security for workers benefiting companies, and society as a whole, was utterly uncontroversial, but a stark contrast to the current government cutting the money spent on post GCSE education… hurting future workers, and businesses, and society as a whole.

“Trickle down is nonsense, yes, but the more money businesses make the more there is for a left-wing government to redistribute. I thought this was fairly obvious”

Trickle down is nonsense for more reasons than one, which is why despite once being said in all seriousness it is a rarely used term these days, other than a source of ridicule.

Not only is it obvious that making billionaires even wealthier doesn’t automatically equate with more money for those who haven’t got a pot to piss in, but it is an established fact that if you give a fiver to someone on very low income it will stimulate the economy significantly more than giving a fiver to a billionaire.

Those at the top of the ladder need consumers with money in their pockets. Someone without a pot to piss in is no good to anyone.

The way to stimulate the economy is to irradiate poverty, not making the very wealthiest even wealthier.

The way forward is trickle up, not trickle down.

I run a small business consultancy, all the folks in the business are very well paid typically twice the national average.

We charge substantial day rates 700 to 900 a day this allows us to pay the wages.

For me as a socialist/capitalist (stand back and braces himself) the problem with the current pre covid economy is that it was built on mimnimum wage services and priced accordingly- we need to pay people more and pay more for the associated services,

For me to pay someone £50k per annum i need about £70k (minimum) to cover that) or about 100 days consultancy and that does not cover training, insurance, non fee earning staff etc.

If i assume 30 days leave 15 days training, 12 days admin and other odds n sods thats 60 days from 240 days so 180 days available for paid work. Then i take out presales/proposals etc which is typically 48 days i am left with about 30 days to create net profit..

My rambling post shows how a day rate converts into a salary… in summary you need to make lots of money (in the real world) to pay good salaries.

Those at the top of the ladder need consumers with money in their pockets. Someone without a pot to piss in is no good to anyone.

The way to stimulate the economy is to irradiate poverty, not making the very wealthiest even wealthier.

The way forward is trickle up, not trickle down.

I absolutely agree that this should be the economic goal. Sadly, the current situation is that the big bad capitalists only need enough people with enough money in their pockets so that they can generate big profits and leave the genuinely poor up shit creek.

And there’s nothing to stop this bit:

Secure, well paid, skilled work is not separate from good business. It is the driver of good business.

helping to work towards that with the right government strategy behind it.

My rambling post shows how a day rate converts into a salary… in summary you need to make lots of money (in the real world) to pay good salaries.

Have you ever estimated your own value to the business? Maybe you should be paying yourself less.

Save that line for job interviews copa.

Lol, ‘ambulance chaser’ law firms going after Labour for data breaches and judging by some of the FB posts they are in deep doodoo.

https://www.facebook.com/KellerLenknerDataBreach/posts/394908915676271/