Richard Murphy
Discussion
My Youtube account algorithm has been suggesting a few Richard Murphy videos. Richard Murphy is a Emeritus Professor of Accounting at Sheffield University Management School. I watching a couple of his videos over the weekend. Jeez this man has some seriously 'different' ideas about how to run the economy!! Sounds absolutely crazy to me but worth a watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GonO5dEpnL8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWbDrtv2HSU&t=...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GonO5dEpnL8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWbDrtv2HSU&t=...
Ecosseven said:
My Youtube account algorithm has been suggesting a few Richard Murphy videos. Richard Murphy is a Emeritus Professor of Accounting at Sheffield University Management School. I watching a couple of his videos over the weekend. Jeez this man has some seriously 'different' ideas about how to run the economy!! Sounds absolutely crazy to me but worth a watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GonO5dEpnL8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWbDrtv2HSU&t=...
yep certainly Fire & Brimstone preacher type attitude.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GonO5dEpnL8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fWbDrtv2HSU&t=...
prolific youtuber - at least 1 video per day.
he also has a blog.
other youtubers are much easier to watch & learn. My favourite is Patrick Boyle.
Simpo Two said:
You wonder why an Emeritus Professor of Accounting would need to do this. Is he short of money or is somebody paying him to do them?
The probability must be that he's a pure theoretician who "knows everything" but has never actually gone out and invested real cash money.The sort of people who say, "Oh look, here's some inflation, the text book says we should increase interest rates", without bothering to think about what's causing that inflation. You wait, in a few months time BoE will hike rates in response to energy price inflation, further damaging an already stagnant economy.
This just proves what an inexact science it all is, a melting pot of idealogy, historical scenarios and outcomes, personal views and psychology.
Put Panamax or Richard in control right now and you'd get two very different responses to the same data/situation and despite one being a meritorious professor we really have no idea which one would actually be better, they both can no doubt make a case for themselves, but not one which would convince the other is wrong, there are few absolutes....
Put Panamax or Richard in control right now and you'd get two very different responses to the same data/situation and despite one being a meritorious professor we really have no idea which one would actually be better, they both can no doubt make a case for themselves, but not one which would convince the other is wrong, there are few absolutes....
Dimebars said:
Putting it as diplomatically as I can........
He's a crackpot.
He's certainly made enough enemies for some to want us to believe he's a crackpot so ignore him but he's been a pretty successful at highlighting tax avoidance of multinationals, tax havens and corporate opacity to name a few of his topics.He's a crackpot.
Which bit of that makes him a crackpot?
I've watched and listened to him and thought he sounded like a crackpot but then struggled to challenge his points and arguments.
In the youtube video's linked in my original post Richard Murphy advocates the following.
- Huge increases in the public sector.
- Big Increases in taxation for higher earners. ("A more progressive tax policy............")
- Lots more trade unions
- Significant increase in the minimum wage.
- Reduction in pension tax relief for higher earners.
- Public ownership of utilities.
- MMT (creating new money or printing cash) to pay for it all.
I'm not an economist but surely implementing the above would lead to rampant inflation, kill aspiration, result in significant damage to the private sector, and keep everyone working for longer as they won't be able to retire? There are very few comments on the private sector or money markets - his view appears to be that they aren't important as under MMT you simply create more money to pay for the welfare state
I can get on board with many left of centre ideas, but what Richard is suggesting sounds very much like marxism. I would be interested to know if any developed nation that has implemented even some of his ideas.
- Huge increases in the public sector.
- Big Increases in taxation for higher earners. ("A more progressive tax policy............")
- Lots more trade unions
- Significant increase in the minimum wage.
- Reduction in pension tax relief for higher earners.
- Public ownership of utilities.
- MMT (creating new money or printing cash) to pay for it all.
I'm not an economist but surely implementing the above would lead to rampant inflation, kill aspiration, result in significant damage to the private sector, and keep everyone working for longer as they won't be able to retire? There are very few comments on the private sector or money markets - his view appears to be that they aren't important as under MMT you simply create more money to pay for the welfare state
I can get on board with many left of centre ideas, but what Richard is suggesting sounds very much like marxism. I would be interested to know if any developed nation that has implemented even some of his ideas.
AbbeyNormal said:
Simpo Two said:
Greenmantle said:
prolific youtuber - at least 1 video per day.
You wonder why an Emeritus Professor of Accounting would need to do this. Is he short of money or is somebody paying him to do them?Pistom said:
He's certainly made enough enemies for some to want us to believe he's a crackpot so ignore him but he's been a pretty successful at highlighting tax avoidance of multinationals, tax havens and corporate opacity to name a few of his topics.
Which bit of that makes him a crackpot?
I've watched and listened to him and thought he sounded like a crackpot but then struggled to challenge his points and arguments.
His basic thesis is that the government can't run out of money because it can just print more, which is true but would just turn us into Zimbabwe or Weimar Germany. Which bit of that makes him a crackpot?
I've watched and listened to him and thought he sounded like a crackpot but then struggled to challenge his points and arguments.
The arguments above, critical of his thinking are broadly correct but the difficulty is that his points are more nuanced. What’s more, his ideologies would be massively unpopular.
But much of his thinking is not wrong.
We have huge amounts of wealth tied up doing nothing in savings accounts and we’re incentivised to save more. House price inflation has had a hugely damaging effect on quality of life as well as the economy overall. Austerity has been massively damaging. His list goes on and on.
I strongly disagree with many of his points but I don’t believe he’s an idiot.
But much of his thinking is not wrong.
We have huge amounts of wealth tied up doing nothing in savings accounts and we’re incentivised to save more. House price inflation has had a hugely damaging effect on quality of life as well as the economy overall. Austerity has been massively damaging. His list goes on and on.
I strongly disagree with many of his points but I don’t believe he’s an idiot.
Mr Penguin said:
Pistom said:
He's certainly made enough enemies for some to want us to believe he's a crackpot so ignore him but he's been a pretty successful at highlighting tax avoidance of multinationals, tax havens and corporate opacity to name a few of his topics.
Which bit of that makes him a crackpot?
I've watched and listened to him and thought he sounded like a crackpot but then struggled to challenge his points and arguments.
His basic thesis is that the government can't run out of money because it can just print more, which is true but would just turn us into Zimbabwe or Weimar Germany. Which bit of that makes him a crackpot?
I've watched and listened to him and thought he sounded like a crackpot but then struggled to challenge his points and arguments.
Now, you might just have a chance if you have lots of resources that others need, lots of people to chuck into any potential meat grinder situation, or have enough resources and guns, lots of guns.
We have none of the above, making his argument a nonsense.
durbster said:
Greenmantle said:
other youtubers are much easier to watch & learn. My favourite is Patrick Boyle.
Patrick's great, although his videos can be either very dry, very funny, or a bit of both.He's the go-to source for rap news too.
However, I'll freely admit my ignorance - seen the rap stuff in the comments as well - Dumbo guide
?Richard Murphy is no economist, and flies under vague titles that hint at being one but don't actually say so.
To me the most damning thing against him is his story of how, rather than bothering with any formal study of economics or involvement in the field, he worked it all out himself independently. This is textbook crackpottery. He has no peer-reviewed work of any consequence. He's just some accountant with a ludicrous blog whose ideas go down well with left-wing fantasists. He must now be a bit pissed off that Gary Stevenson has moved in on his territory and taken a large chunk of his younger audience, which probably explains his increased output of even more dumbed-down videos with that one-word subtitle thing for people with short attention spans.
To me the most damning thing against him is his story of how, rather than bothering with any formal study of economics or involvement in the field, he worked it all out himself independently. This is textbook crackpottery. He has no peer-reviewed work of any consequence. He's just some accountant with a ludicrous blog whose ideas go down well with left-wing fantasists. He must now be a bit pissed off that Gary Stevenson has moved in on his territory and taken a large chunk of his younger audience, which probably explains his increased output of even more dumbed-down videos with that one-word subtitle thing for people with short attention spans.
Pistom said:
The arguments above, critical of his thinking are broadly correct but the difficulty is that his points are more nuanced. What s more, his ideologies would be massively unpopular.
But much of his thinking is not wrong.
We have huge amounts of wealth tied up doing nothing in savings accounts and we re incentivised to save more. House price inflation has had a hugely damaging effect on quality of life as well as the economy overall. Austerity has been massively damaging. His list goes on and on.
I strongly disagree with many of his points but I don t believe he s an idiot.
The arguments aren't nuanced, they're good old fashioned far left politics & economics of jealousy by force. He's already gone Green rather any historical alignment.But much of his thinking is not wrong.
We have huge amounts of wealth tied up doing nothing in savings accounts and we re incentivised to save more. House price inflation has had a hugely damaging effect on quality of life as well as the economy overall. Austerity has been massively damaging. His list goes on and on.
I strongly disagree with many of his points but I don t believe he s an idiot.
Sure it will be dressed up as being for the greater good, but it really is all about taking resources from anyone who tries and succeeds to any extent and gives it to someone else who CBA. Ultimately, you tried, got some benefit, but that benefit shouldn't be in your control.
If he was arguing about investing in the FTSE100 rather than in the US market, he might have a point of view. However, he isn't.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff