Discussion
Though I'd offer up an alternative view on the economic crisis that sounded quite interesting:
http://gu.com/p/32gct
Discuss...
http://gu.com/p/32gct
Discuss...
maix27 said:
Though I'd offer up an alternative view on the economic crisis that sounded quite interesting:
http://gu.com/p/32gct
Discuss...
I do find it odd that these people are gping around saying that we are stuffed when it was them and their insane policies of every building needing to be shiny and new and every person given lots of money so they don't feel left put which has left us riddled with debt and nothing in reserve to protect us. http://gu.com/p/32gct
Discuss...
It's just baffling.
maix27 said:
I think what it is saying us there's not enough demand in society to sustain the economy if all we do is try to create money with money.
But that is all we can do because the very same people who want us to make things stop it from happening by preventing cheap labour being paid a bowl or rice and shot in the head if they get uppitty. 
But, they are being misleading as the 'making money from money' is only 10% of our economy the rest is based on intellect and high skill either exporting products that only the West can make or exporting people with the required skills.
What is worrying is that we can hold onto our financial revenue but the other 90% is going to be lost as the East catches up in education and ceases to require our services.
But, this manufacturing argument is a red herring as their real issue is that we no longer employ millions to dig holes etc and other manual labour.
And frankly, this is a massive problem but it isn't helped by the looney left who try and hide the reality behind layer after layer of hatred.
We can't have manual labour ever again as our labour laws have banned it.
So we need to get over this and stop carping On about the past and find the solution going forward.
You can't have manual labour in the UK, you can't exterminate people, you can't sell them to another country and more recently, as the left discovered, you can't pay them to sit still.
It's a massive issue but no one is yet even trying to find a genuine modern solution. We are still in the b
h fighting and lying phase. 
DonkeyApple said:
We can't have manual labour ever again as our labour laws have banned it.
When? I don't think I've seen this bit of legislation? If this is the case do you mean building site labourers are working illegally? What about landscape gardeners, they do a far bit of manual labour, fruit and veg pickers think they do too? Manufacturing is an absolutely essential to the UK; not necessarily 10p widgets, but more complex, highly engineered products. We need to expand this in the UK in my opinion.
Vimto156 said:
When? I don't think I've seen this bit of legislation? If this is the case do you mean building site labourers are working illegally? What about landscape gardeners, they do a far bit of manual labour, fruit and veg pickers think they do too?
Manufacturing is an absolutely essential to the UK; not necessarily 10p widgets, but more complex, highly engineered products. We need to expand this in the UK in my opinion.
I think you'll find this is what I was saying. Manufacturing is an absolutely essential to the UK; not necessarily 10p widgets, but more complex, highly engineered products. We need to expand this in the UK in my opinion.
Sadly you cannot build and maintain an economy the size of ours on the back of fruit pickers, gardeners or even labourers. Firstly there are not enough jobs in these areas but also they are in many instances a byproduct of a wealthy economy and not the driver.
As I wrote earlier we already manufacture heavily but it is high end non labour intensive work.
The problem in the UK is that in the last 30/40 years we have lost the industries which employed millions to other countries due to labour and living costs.
We could only get mining, steel, ship building etc back if we paid less than a worker in Asia receives and with the same safety nets.
The problem facing the UK is not one of manufacturing per se but one of unemployment. Until we find a solution that delivers meaningful and suitable work to those who would have been manual workers in the old economy we can't fix the problem. Previous Govts swept it under the carpet and inflated other sectors artificially to generate short term cash receipts to pay off these people but we know this doesn't work.
We are also, long term, at risk of losing our high end manufacturing and exports as Asia catches us up.
DonkeyApple said:
The problem facing the UK is not one of manufacturing per se but one of unemployment. Until we find a solution that delivers meaningful and suitable work to those who would have been manual workers in the old economy we can't fix the problem. Previous Govts swept it under the carpet and inflated other sectors artificially to generate short term cash receipts to pay off these people but we know this doesn't work.
We are also, long term, at risk of losing our high end manufacturing and exports as Asia catches us up.
In economic terms the cheapest answer is to euthanize the unemployed. This isn't socially acceptable however so perhaps we could export them to a country where the cost of living is a lot lower. We are also, long term, at risk of losing our high end manufacturing and exports as Asia catches us up.
plasticpig said:
DonkeyApple said:
The problem facing the UK is not one of manufacturing per se but one of unemployment. Until we find a solution that delivers meaningful and suitable work to those who would have been manual workers in the old economy we can't fix the problem. Previous Govts swept it under the carpet and inflated other sectors artificially to generate short term cash receipts to pay off these people but we know this doesn't work.
We are also, long term, at risk of losing our high end manufacturing and exports as Asia catches us up.
In economic terms the cheapest answer is to euthanize the unemployed. This isn't socially acceptable however so perhaps we could export them to a country where the cost of living is a lot lower. We are also, long term, at risk of losing our high end manufacturing and exports as Asia catches us up.
You cannot march them onto foreign guns, ship them off to another continent, rely on a disease to wipe them out, starve them to death, make them work for nothing, imprison them etc, etc, etc.
The genius will be in working out what can be created to replace the invaluable (in terms of labour usage) old industries of heavy manufacture and mining etc.
The hurdle is minimum wage and general cost of living which you would not want to change.
One solution is to study how immigrants are able to arrive and find employment and then work out why these jobs are not being taken by indiginous unemployed. The answer there is likely to be laziness which can only be redressed by reducing welfare and forcing people to hold down a job or starve. But this only counters part of the problem. We simply don's and can't have enough manual labour for the population.
What we do have and can expand is the service industry but this require a suitable level of education which our schools do not appear to be achieving as we are having to import workers from overseas to fill this market.
It's all the £64m question and for lefty fools it is the elephant in the room that will always exist for socialists as you cannot have welfare eutopia and a strong work ethic at the same time. It is one or the other and with the former we go bust as we have just done and with the latter some people suffer badly and some of them through misfortune not of their own making.
It's quite simple to see why we are in this mess.
Since the 60's Governments have accepted that they are fine to run a deficit as the 'future' will pay for it. IE I don't need to worry about it, as once my period in Government is over then it is for another political man to worry about.
If you constantly spend more than you earn you will end up in the st.
The same goes with banks, they should be left to fail. They will need more money than Governments can afford to pump into them so they don't go under. The best way would be to let the banks collapse and asset strip them. You can't just write off the private debts. The key point he misses is when a company goes into receivership, the private debt isn't written off it is sold on.
Since the 60's Governments have accepted that they are fine to run a deficit as the 'future' will pay for it. IE I don't need to worry about it, as once my period in Government is over then it is for another political man to worry about.
If you constantly spend more than you earn you will end up in the s
t.The same goes with banks, they should be left to fail. They will need more money than Governments can afford to pump into them so they don't go under. The best way would be to let the banks collapse and asset strip them. You can't just write off the private debts. The key point he misses is when a company goes into receivership, the private debt isn't written off it is sold on.
Esseesse said:
Think that might be the best thing I've read from Monbiot. I don't disagree with him either until the very end where he speaks of the answer being to reset personal debts.
I agree, it's a good analysis - but let's not forget that this is not Monbiot's analysis, he's just relaying someone else's work. Resetting personal debt may work, but it has the politically undesirable effect of rewarding irresponsibility and profligacy. An alternative way to boost M3 would be to give everyone an annual 'cash' award based on the level of their debt ad/or assets, on the condition it was spent within Britain within the year. Couldn't be used overseas, or invested, or on imported goods, it would have to be spent buying stuff that our economy has produced.
Starting off on a 'refinancing the banks' basis means there's something to disagree with well before the end. Not that banks weren't refinanced, but that this isn't the main problem after 13 years of Labour with the last 10 years dedicated to overspending because some educated idiot thought he had abolished boom and bust and could sort his mates with our taxes, then when they ran out on borrowed money, then when that ran out on the mortgaged futures of our children. Once the mess from him and a buddy overseas had hit home, the same educated idiot thought he had saved the world. Monbiot must have missed all that, but no doubt the Clown and other politicians of a similar ilk were there in Keen's crystal ball. As to a debt jubilee it's been on PH for ages as an option and even the Torygraph printed an article not long ago. Good to see Monbiot has joined Big Ron's wide awake club.
turbobloke said:
Starting off on a 'refinancing the banks' basis means there's something to disagree with well before the end. Not that banks weren't refinanced, but that this isn't the main problem after 13 years of Labour with the last 10 years dedicated to overspending because some educated idiot thought he had abolished boom and bust and could sort his mates with our taxes, then when they ran out on borrowed money, then when that ran out on the mortgaged futures of our children. Once the mess from him and a buddy overseas had hit home, the same educated idiot thought he had saved the world. Monbiot must have missed all that, but no doubt the Clown and other politicians of a similar ilk were there in Keen's crystal ball. As to a debt jubilee it's been on PH for ages as an option and even the Torygraph printed an article not long ago. Good to see Monbiot has joined Big Ron's wide awake club.
It really is that simple isn't it. Our Govt went and spent money it never had on things it didn't need and so did half the country. To fix this they need to only spend what they can afford and in the meantime those who didn't live like Elton John will bankroll the fools and pay off their debt.
What we do need to do is restrict access to debt more strongly or the muppets are just going to keep loving the dream and we will keep having to bail them out. Half the homes in the UK are no different from Greece, living in lala land and unable to control their spending and debt habits.
WTF! Let me see if I understand the concept correctly.
The plan is to allow people to default on their debts with no comeback, the only downside is that some banks will go bust? In return these people will continue to spend money like there's no tomorrow and rescue the economy.
Riiight, thanks for that. So those of us who pay shedloads in tax, live within our means and try to save money for our futures in said banks could stand to lose those savings if the bank folds? This seems like a typical lefty approach, reward the feckless and punish the prudent.
The plan is to allow people to default on their debts with no comeback, the only downside is that some banks will go bust? In return these people will continue to spend money like there's no tomorrow and rescue the economy.
Riiight, thanks for that. So those of us who pay shedloads in tax, live within our means and try to save money for our futures in said banks could stand to lose those savings if the bank folds? This seems like a typical lefty approach, reward the feckless and punish the prudent.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff