Eames Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 The current government are a train wreck, Milliband would be far better because his heart is socialist. His problem is he hasn't got a big enough set to stand up to the right wing media so he goes along playing their game by their rules. So if he was more overtly Socialist (i.e. more than he is currently being, which is rather a lot imo) then everything would be okay because...what? He'd never get elected? I don't think the current government is any good at all, but I do think that either Cameron or - god forbid - Clegg as PM is infinitely preferable to that ludicrous little rocket polisher Ed and his team of proven numpties - who all lacked a big enough set to have Gordon Brown committed when it mattered. What is obvious is that there are no good options in 2015, just a choice between those likely to do the least damage. Miliband's expressions of admiration for Francois Hollande (currently using Socialism to bludgeon the French economy into a bloody pulp) should be warning enough where he'd take the UK, should the electorate be retarded enough to give him and his pals the keys again. If we take the proportion of a country's GDP which the government takes as tax, as a measure of socialism, which I think is fair, France (44.6%) emerges as being a far more socialist country than the UK (39%) and the election of Hollande (2012) has not changed that significantly. And by that measure Germany (40.6%) is a more socialist country than the UK too. I am not sure that a case can be made that socialism has damaged France economically because their GDP is larger than the UK, and the socialism hasn't done Germany much harm either. If socialism can't be shown to have damaged France and Germany then I think that you have to conclude that the aim of the Tories to match the American tax-take (26.9%), is almost certainly ideological. The prurient obsession with the Hollande scandal has been used by the media to conflate his character weakness with France's historical preference for socialism and to promote the right-wing ideology of the Tories/Republicans. There are no current examples of countries being bludgeoned into a pulp by socialism, only examples of countries where huge debts have been accrued to finance property bubbles (Spain, Ireland, Korea) and which were privatised. Socialism had nothing to do with it. Except that France's economy (75% tax rate for the highest earners) simply isn't growing, whereas the UKs (40/45% or something) is. Granted this is again growth based on debt but it is growth. Hollande is rowing back from some of his more "socialist" policies because they aren't working. (I'm not judging whether the cause of this is too much socialism or not enough) I haven't got the impression from anywhere that Hollande's private life is being conflated with socialism. What I have got is the impression that it was another problem he didn't need. Knowing the French, Hollande screwing an actress on the side will probably do wonders for his career. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) It's a travesty that people measure successful governance by GDP growth. Most of the figures are made up shite, anyway. You're a fool to take them as gospel. Edited January 21, 2014 by CarewsEyebrowDesigner 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 It's a travesty that people measure successful governance by GDP growth. Most of the figures are made up shite, anyway. You're a fool to take them as gospel. Fudging the numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 BTW that wasn't aimed at anyone. Anyway, as the Lib Dems are currently doing their best to implode, that leaves us with the worrying prospect of UKIP becoming the nationwide protest vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 It's a travesty that people measure successful governance by GDP growth. Most of the figures are made up shite, anyway. You're a fool to take them as gospel. GDP figures are just a way of comparing the performance of different economies, unless you believe in some finely worked conspiracy the inaccuracies are going to even themselves out. The most important problem with comparing GDP is that they say nothing about how that wealth is distributed, and so even though the UK produces around £24k for every man, woman and child, it doesn't mean ordinary people get to enjoy that wealth. So even if France has the same GDP as the UK but has more economic equality then obviously the average French citizen is going to be better off. Voting for a party which creates growth which is overwhelmingly kept by the rich minority, is not doing the average person much good at all. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted January 21, 2014 Moderator Share Posted January 21, 2014 Except that France's economy (75% tax rate for the highest earners) simply isn't growing, whereas the UKs (40/45% or something) is. Granted this is again growth based on debt but it is growth. UK growth is based on housing prices. It's a unique and harmful facet of our economy. Osbourne is doing the opposite of what he should be doing. A momentary snapshot of a nations tax rates and growth doesn't really show anything. I'm not arguing for any top rate of tax figure here, just saying that our growth is about house prices and debt, as you say, rather than anything to do with tax rates. I don't know enough about the French economy or Gov't to comment on their situation. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Whilst most of our money is effectively counterfeit money (i.e not created by the sovereign nation) but created as debt by private banks any attempts to run the economy by the government is bound to fail in the same way as governments trying to control inflation is a futile attempt and for the same reasons. only 3% of the current money supply is paper government issued money, the other 97% is bank digital currency, always issued as debt, The banking laws of 1844 made it illegal for banks to create their own paper money after the disastrous effect of them doing so on the economy was recognised as problematic and the cause of depressions, unfortunately due to technology banks don't need to create paper money, firstly they did it through accounting entries and now they do it digitally. all this money being pumped into the system without any underlying increase in wealth through wealth creation (through natural resources, making or building stuff, or providing real services) is inflationary and leads to speculation rather than investment to gain returns. Most politicians don't understand how the monetary system works, an awful lot of economists don't either, The folly of thinking of the financial industry as wealth creators needs to stop, at most it is a means of wealth accumulation, because money isn't wealth, it is only a means of exchange for goods and services, the goods and services (through labour) are the wealth. So arguing about different political systems, tax rates, etc is pretty pointless until the problems of our current money system are solved, however our current system is the cause of many of our problems, unfortunately much the same way our that our tax laws are written by firms with a vested interest in not stamping our means of avoidence, the advisers on finance and money (bankers) aren't going to be interested in talking about the real problem (bankers) Edited January 21, 2014 by mockingbird_franklin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Whilst most of our money is effectively counterfeit money (i.e not created by the sovereign nation) but created as debt by private banks any attempts to run the economy by the government is bound to fail in the same way as governments trying to control inflation is a futile attempt and for the same reasons. only 3% of the current money supply is paper government issued money, the other 97% is bank digital currency, always issued as debt, The banking laws of 1844 made it illegal for banks to create their own paper money after the disastrous effect of them doing so on the economy was recognised as problematic and the cause of depressions, unfortunately due to technology banks don't need to create paper money, firstly they did it through accounting entries and now they do it digitally. all this money being pumped into the system without any underlying increase in wealth through wealth creation (through natural resources, making or building stuff, or providing real services) is inflationary and leads to speculation rather than investment to gain returns. Most politicians don't understand how the monetary system works, an awful lot of economists don't either, The folly of thinking of the financial industry as wealth creators needs to stop, at most it is a means of wealth accumulation, because money isn't wealth, it is only a means of exchange for goods and services, the goods and services (through labour) are the wealth. Sounds like you've been reading Hayek or listening to Peter Schiff. Murray Rothbart's America's Great Depression is an excellent read, on the same subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 (edited) Whilst most of our money is effectively counterfeit money (i.e not created by the sovereign nation) but created as debt by private banks any attempts to run the economy by the government is bound to fail in the same way as governments trying to control inflation is a futile attempt and for the same reasons. only 3% of the current money supply is paper government issued money, the other 97% is bank digital currency, always issued as debt, The banking laws of 1844 made it illegal for banks to create their own paper money after the disastrous effect of them doing so on the economy was recognised as problematic and the cause of depressions, unfortunately due to technology banks don't need to create paper money, firstly they did it through accounting entries and now they do it digitally. all this money being pumped into the system without any underlying increase in wealth through wealth creation (through natural resources, making or building stuff, or providing real services) is inflationary and leads to speculation rather than investment to gain returns. Most politicians don't understand how the monetary system works, an awful lot of economists don't either, The folly of thinking of the financial industry as wealth creators needs to stop, at most it is a means of wealth accumulation, because money isn't wealth, it is only a means of exchange for goods and services, the goods and services (through labour) are the wealth. Sounds like you've been reading Hayek or listening to Peter Schiff. Murray Rothbart's America's Great Depression is an excellent read, on the same subject. James Gibb Stuart about 15 years ago was were my interest in the subject of money, how we have lost touch with what it actually is and how it's creation has been hijacked by the private banking fraternity repeatedly throughout history, How money issued as debt is a ponzey scheme at best. Obviously others have been of interest over the years and I'm aware of Freidrick Hayek, peter schiff to me comes across as a gold peddler and I've never really bothered with him On the subject of our current plight, Anyone who compares a countries finance to a households obviously knows so little about financial matters they should be barred from ever talking about it again until they do a little research and come back with a better understanding, and most definitely should never be in any position to influence national economic policy. For a nation to declare we don't have enough money to do something when their are people under employed would be like an author saying he can't write another novel because he has run out of words, or a mathematician to say he can't do any more calculations as he has run out of numbers. or a construction company stopping the building of a road between two places halfway for no other reason than because they claim to have run out of miles. Edited January 21, 2014 by mockingbird_franklin 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Fracking can take place under your house. You can't stop them, they don't even have to go to the trouble and inconvenience of letting you know. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/18/fracking-allowed-homes-without-owners-knowledge-gas-drilling The Tories, paid by you, for the benefit of who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Fracking can take place under your house. You can't stop them, they don't even have to go to the trouble and inconvenience of letting you know.http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/dec/18/fracking-allowed-homes-without-owners-knowledge-gas-drilling The Tories, paid by you, for the benefit of who? Look at Holland: http://tinyurl.com/p896sz6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Good news! The jobless totals are down. Lets all celebrate, low pay, no pay, no rights, zero hour contracts. They're the future. Our bright future. Crack open a bottle. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MakemineVanilla Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Good news! The jobless totals are down. Lets all celebrate, low pay, no pay, no rights, zero hour contracts. They're the future. Our bright future. Crack open a bottle. The only thing I find interesting is the possibility of the independent BOE raising interest rates when unemployment drops to 7%, a year before a General Election. My guess would be NFW and that it was total BS when Carney said it in the first place. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterms Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Good news! The jobless totals are down. Lets all celebrate, low pay, no pay, no rights, zero hour contracts. They're the future. Our bright future. Crack open a bottle. I can remember when work was a route out of poverty. These days, underpaid, part-time, insecure, non-pensionable, zero-hours-contracted work seems more like a tool for trapping people in poverty. Unemployment down? Yes. But what is this "employment"? Is it the cure, or the problem? In many cases, for a growing number of people, it's increasingly likely to be a large part of the problem. That's shameful, and a betrayal of the people of this country, and in particular, a betrayal of young people. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I see the government are putting two fingers up to democracy again today with the lobbying bill. An absolutely disgraceful bill aimed at gagging charities and unions in the democratic process whilst allowing the powerful corporate lobbyists a free reign. They're determined to bulldoze this one through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 I think if things continue the way they do, we should cut our losses and jump into bed with the EU. Some changes are needed, of course. More accountability and a better democratic process and the like, but **** me, I'd take the EU over the upper class millionaires who run the UK for their own benefit. Either that or I could **** off to Sweden or something. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 The governments performance in parliament today was almost as big an affront to democracy as the terrible bill they're making us all accept. They really are trying to gag us. Not only that but they're yet again incorporating the Henry VIII clause. http://www2.amnesty.org.uk/blogs/yes-minister-it-human-rights-issue/henry-viii-lobbying-bill-and-rolling-back-public-engagement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mockingbird_franklin Posted January 22, 2014 Share Posted January 22, 2014 Good news! The jobless totals are down. Lets all celebrate, low pay, no pay, no rights, zero hour contracts. They're the future. Our bright future. Crack open a bottle. Well the government love a sanction or two to help massage the figures a bit (sanctioned claimants don't appear as unemployed) so they are now targeting single parents of children under 5 for sanctions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 Brighton and Hove's Green council want to offer the people a referendum on tax increases to help save vital public services. Labour are standing shoulder to shoulder with the Tory's to block it. Labour-Tories-Lib Dems-UKIP. As George Galloway might quip, if an arse could have four cheeks...http://www.leftfootforward.org/2014/01/brighton-greens-council-tax-move-shows-the-fight-against-austerity-is-on/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingfisher Posted January 23, 2014 Share Posted January 23, 2014 http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/mount-unpleasant-how-the-royal-mail-group-will-make-a-fortune-from-selling-flats-to-private-investors-9080865.html Oh look, the RMG are going to make a big fat profit of possibly over £4bn on property which used to be ours until the government sold it for a bag of chips. Boris stepped in of course, in order to ensure the planning was accepted for expensive luxury flats as opposed to affordable housing - which the people he works for desperately need. Boris' it seems is more keen to work for the benefit of the RMG than the people he is supposed to serve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts