Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

[fez]

How can there possibly be a moral case for inflicting harm on some that brings no benefit to others? Even when there is a benefit it still doesn't mean that it will be moral to do something, but when there's none at all...? What kind of a mindset thinks like that?

The kind of mindset that tells people that they deserve everything on a plate and that people who are better off than themselves don't deserve any more than they do.

 

[mid_gen]

this was posted by somone on my FB today really explains the mindset of the "momentum" crowd

and the average earnings of the momentum crowd...


one of the comments




so much aspiration.


although somone amusingly pointed out that MP's earn just under 80k

When I was younger and I earned a pittance I voted voted tory because I bought this whole 'hard workers don't deserve to be punished' line.

Now I'm older and have earned decent (in that 5k a year extra bracket) I'm much more socialist. Once you're earning over a certain point the extra money means bugger all, it's not like earning six figures is that hard anyway, particularly if you come from a moderately privileged background.

I'll happily pay 5k a year extra. Means bugger all to me.

 

[Dolph]

I'm sorry, I completely garbled that reply. I meant to agree with your point, rather than your question. My bad. But, of course, in those years the state owned a significant chunk of the productive economy so the balance of payments was very different.

Makes sense.

 

[stewski]

I'm sorry, I completely garbled that reply. I meant to agree with your point, rather than your question. My bad. But, of course, in those years the state owned a significant chunk of the productive economy so the balance of payments was very different.

Oh, Mr Jack you agree that because the later post war governments didn't run a deficit, there is no evidence of stimulus during that period and that Keyne's approach required governments to run a surplus during boom years before stimulus in recessions as suggested by Dolph?

 

[Dolph]

Feel free to inform me how the post war governments didn't stimulate, invest and rebuild during those periods. I'm not advocating increasing the deficit nor did they, I'm against ideological simplistic cuts which in terms of return's to the economy have clearly performed more poorly than the Governments predictions.
I believe Labour are advocating investing more into the UK's infrastructure as a means to grow and I haven't seen anything that suggests they were planning to do that by increasing the deficit either.

Frankly if you can accept the banking sector crash is not of the left, why you/we are splitting hairs over how much the UK spent on nurses the same year global banking nearly eat itself I don't know. The difference being the bankers are mostly better off, not sure about the nurses/police/teachers etc.

You appear to be using state spending and state investment interchangeably, they aren't. Just because the state spends, it doesn't follow that the state has invested.

Part of the problem with a lot of the current state spending is that it is just spending, not investment, and that applies to all parties. The other part of the problem is that actually rebalanced spending towards investment is massively unpopular, as it involves welfare cuts, wage and productivity efficency in the public sector, and then repurposing the spending towards infrastructure and the like, and it takes time to start to come to fruition.

Labour are advocating borrowing to fund their investment plans, by their own manifesto.

 

[stewski]

You appear to be using state spending and state investment interchangeably, they aren't. Just because the state spends, it doesn't follow that the state has invested.

Part of the problem with a lot of the current state spending is that it is just spending, not investment, and that applies to all parties. The other part of the problem is that actually rebalanced spending towards investment is massively unpopular, as it involves welfare cuts, wage and productivity efficency in the public sector, and then repurposing the spending towards infrastructure and the like, and it takes time to start to come to fruition.

Labour are advocating borrowing to fund their investment plans, by their own manifesto.

Borrowing does not automatically lead to an increased deficit depending on how it is spent. Similarly ideological cuts do not return as much to the economy as blunt analysis would suggested, reduced tax take, increased welfare costs, we are pretty much discussing Keynes entire point!

 

[Mr Jack]

Oh, Mr Jack you agree that because the later post war governments didn't run a deficit, there is no evidence of stimulus during that period and that Keyne's approach required governments to run a surplus during boom years before stimulus in recessions as suggested by Dolph?

No, I agree that governments in most of the post war period didn't run deficits.

 

[stewski]

No, I agree that governments in most of the post war period didn't run deficits.

A point in dispute by no one!

 

[StriderX]

Well the Tories have certainly done zero investing, I would choose a party that borrowed to invest than one that simply has a massive throbbing vein on their forehead for austerity or robin hood silliness.

 

[Dolph]

Borrowing does not automatically lead to an increased deficit depending on how it is spent. Similarly ideological cuts do not return as much to the economy as blunt analysis would suggested, reduced tax take, increased welfare costs, we are pretty much discussing Keynes entire point!

The deficit is simply the difference between incomings and outgoings, how you spend what that difference is makes no difference to the existence of it.

Borrowing may not lead to an increase in the long term deficit as it may be a one off, but it still impacts the figure unless there is a surplus to offset it.

 

[Uther]

Not so 'strong and stable' after all...
http://news.sky.com/story/general-election-conservatives-stumble-on-wobbly-wednesday-10881751

 

[Tefal]

When I was younger and I earned a pittance I voted voted tory because I bought this whole 'hard workers don't deserve to be punished' line.

Now I'm older and have earned decent (in that 5k a year extra bracket) I'm much more socialist. Once you're earning over a certain point the extra money means bugger all, it's not like earning six figures is that hard anyway, particularly if you come from a moderately privileged background.

I'll happily pay 5k a year extra. Means bugger all to me.

Do it then.

Lets see you give 5k this year to charity.

Not what you already give or any other half arsed excuse if youd happily pay 5k a year extra then do it.

If you dont do it thwn dont bs about how its ok to take it from others

 

[Tefal]

The deficit is simply the difference between incomings and outgoings, how you spend what that difference is makes no difference to the existence of it.

Borrowing may not lead to an increase in the long term deficit as it may be a one off, but it still impacts the figure unless there is a surplus to offset it.

I think the point hes making is if you borrow say 100mill but spend it in a way that grows tax income by 101mill it wouldn't add to the deficit.

But i cant think of a way to do it

 

[Dolph]

I think the point hes making is if you borrow say 100mill but spend it in a way that grows tax income by 101mill it wouldn't add to the deficit.

But i cant think of a way to do it

There are ways to do it, but not in the same year.

 

[Freakbro]

so are you denying that debt rise slowed once labour left power?

Well of course, when the deficit reduces, the rate of increase of debt will slow....but what that other graph shows more importantly is that if the debt to GDP ratio increases then the economy is growing even slower than the debt....which is bad.

So in answer to Ubersonic, sure you can look at that proposal from Darling and say the debt would be higher, but what you can't say is what the growth rate of the country would have been, since that was the point, it was a stimulus response, so if the debt to GDP ratio was lower than now then that would be better

 

[stewski]

The deficit is simply the difference between incomings and outgoings, how you spend what that difference is makes no difference to the existence of it.

Borrowing may not lead to an increase in the long term deficit as it may be a one off, but it still impacts the figure unless there is a surplus to offset it.

Are you suggesting incoming and outgoing have no impact on each other?
If you can generate more value by borrowing, than not borrowing, you are a fool not to...

 

[Tefal]

Well of course, when the deficit reduces, the rate of increase of debt will slow....but what that other graph shows more importantly is that if the debt to GDP ratio increases then the economy is growing even slower than the debt....which is bad.

but the period of highest growth of debt to gdp on that graph is the boom years of the early 2000.

And the slowest is the last few years.


Which is the exact oposite of what you describe

 

[stewski]

There are ways to do it, but not in the same year.

Thanks both, perhaps this is why you aren't chancellor material and have little grasp on Keyne's contribution to modern economics.

 

[Energize]

When I was younger and I earned a pittance I voted voted tory because I bought this whole 'hard workers don't deserve to be punished' line.

Now I'm older and have earned decent (in that 5k a year extra bracket) I'm much more socialist. Once you're earning over a certain point the extra money means bugger all, it's not like earning six figures is that hard anyway, particularly if you come from a moderately privileged background.

I'll happily pay 5k a year extra. Means bugger all to me.

Then give the money to charity you are totally free to do that.

Socialism is favouring coercion instead of voluntary cooperation, it's the exact opposite of "coming together".


We now have two different kinds of evil vying for power in the UK, we've got May and her authoritarian fantasy, and Corbyn and his socialist fantasy. Both trying to grab more power the government, but one trying to grab it over the people by using police force and one by taking control of infrastructure and stealing peoples money. It will be very interesting to see which abyss the UK will fall into at this election.

 

[Freakbro]

but the period of highest growth of debt to gdp on that graph is the boom years of the early 2000.

And the slowest is the last few years.


Which is the exact oposite of what you describe

No it's not? (I know I'm exhausted, but I don't think I'm reading the graph that wrong )

The highest rate of debt to GDP % change is from 2008 - 2010 which is when our deficit (and thus debt) rocketed, combined with a contraction in the economy, hence a massive increase in debt to gdp ratio. My point was that even though the deficit has reduced from +100Bn then to 14Bn now, the debt to GDP % is still rising....which shows the economy isn't growing very well