Jeremy Corbyn Vol. 2
Discussion
Edh - what 'investment' is Corbyn proposing? So far all I've seen is state ownership of utilities (where as per McDonnell earlier this week, they'll be able to pay down the debt, reduce consumer prices and increase salaries - all from the same profits!) and a s
t load of additional staff, pay rises, etc.
There were no infrastructure investments, no productivity improvement initiatives, nothing.
t load of additional staff, pay rises, etc.There were no infrastructure investments, no productivity improvement initiatives, nothing.
sidicks said:
edh said:
No evidence for that just discredited Osborne era dogma
No evidence? You think this was invented by Osborne?sidicks said:
edh said:
How is it not sensible to borrow for investment & stimulus now (and for the last 7 years)? Even some Tories are calling for it. Please don't use the household finance analogy.
Borrowing to invest can be sensible - we are still having to borrow to pay the day-to-day bills, that’s idiotic.sidicks said:
edh said:
Borrowing for tax cuts? Targeted tax cuts could work, but when most of the gains are pocketed by higher earners (see where the benefit of personal allowance increases have mainly gone, at huge cost), they are very poor vfm in terms of economic stimulus. Higher earners have a propensity to save, not spend.
1. Those that pay most tax will benefit most from tax cuts. That doesn’t necessarily seem unfair.2. High earners don’t get a tax free allowance.
3. What happens to the money that is saved?
2. Depends on your definition - plenty of data showing where the benefit of increased tax allowance accrues.
- I find that the resolution foundation are a fairly good source, pretty impartial.
http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/fiv...
"Three quarters of the gains flow to richer families who are more likely to have two people with incomes above the allowance. Only a quarter of the gains go to the bottom half of households."
3. Money is saved, not spent. maybe that's why we need govt borrowing as there is a demand from savers?
Edited by edh on Friday 24th November 18:34
Sway said:
Edh - what 'investment' is Corbyn proposing? So far all I've seen is state ownership of utilities (where as per McDonnell earlier this week, they'll be able to pay down the debt, reduce consumer prices and increase salaries - all from the same profits!) and a st load of additional staff, pay rises, etc.
There were no infrastructure investments, no productivity improvement initiatives, nothing.
2017 manifesto - £25bn pa for 10 yearst load of additional staff, pay rises, etc.There were no infrastructure investments, no productivity improvement initiatives, nothing.
"A £250 billion fund for investment in infrastructure –
transport, energy systems, communications – scientific
research, and housing fit for the 21st century.
Our country and its people have been held back
by a lack of investment in the backbone of a
modern economy – the infrastructure of transport,
communications, and energy systems. Under a
Conservative Chancellor, government investment
has fallen by £10 billion. Private investment is falling.
Those at the top are choosing not to invest in the
potential of our people.
Labour will make different choices. We will take
advantage of near-record low interest rates to
create a National Transformation Fund that will invest
£250 billion over ten years in upgrading our economy.
We will ensure that the huge potential of every part of
our country is met. Using this fund, Labour will build
new high-speed railways, extending HS2 into Scotland.
We will build a Crossrail for the North, tying together
our great northern cities. We will build a new Brighton
Mainline for the south-east. And we will deliver rail
electrification and expansion across the whole country,
including Wales and the south-west. We will transform
our energy systems, investing in new, state-of-the-art
low carbon gas and renewable electricity production.
We will deliver universal superfast broadband availability
by 2022. And we will build on Britain’s immense scientific
heritage, delivering the research funding needed to
create an economy fit for the 21st century."
http://labour.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Fu...
edh said:
I've never seen any - do you have some? This was co-oped by Osborne as justification for his crazy budgets - "expansionary fiscal contraction"
It seems highly likely that government spending (and taxation) will have some impact on private sector spending, the question is surely how significant this effect is, not whether it exists?Edh said:
I agree. We shouldn't be borrowing to fund tax cuts at the moment.
Surely the point is that tax cuts can actually reduce the amount of borrowing required by boosting the economy.sidicks said:
1. Not my point really - it's about tax cut as stimulus.
2. Depends on your definition - plenty of data showing where the benefit of increased tax allowance accrues.
So you think that an increase in tax free allowances benefits those who don’t receive tax free allowances? Really?2. Depends on your definition - plenty of data showing where the benefit of increased tax allowance accrues.
edh said:
- I find that the resolution foundation are a fairly good source, pretty impartial.
http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/fiv...
"Three quarters of the gains flow to richer families who are more likely to have two people with incomes above the allowance. Only a quarter of the gains go to the bottom half of households."
People paying little tax don’t benefit when tax is reduced - I’m not sure that this is surprising or a problem?http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/fiv...
"Three quarters of the gains flow to richer families who are more likely to have two people with incomes above the allowance. Only a quarter of the gains go to the bottom half of households."
edh said:
3. Money is saved, not spent.
What happens with that saving? Does the cash just sit in a vault somewhere?sidicks said:
edh said:
I've never seen any - do you have some? This was co-oped by Osborne as justification for his crazy budgets - "expansionary fiscal contraction"
It seems highly likely that government spending (and taxation) will have some impact on private sector spending, the question is surely how significant this effect is, not whether it exists?
sidicks said:
Edh said:
I agree. We shouldn't be borrowing to fund tax cuts at the moment.
Surely the point is that tax cuts can actually reduce the amount of borrowing required by boosting the economy.sidicks said:
Edh said:
1. Not my point really - it's about tax cut as stimulus.
2. Depends on your definition - plenty of data showing where the benefit of increased tax allowance accrues.
So you think that an increase in tax free allowances benefits those who don’t receive tax free allowances? Really?2. Depends on your definition - plenty of data showing where the benefit of increased tax allowance accrues.
sidicks said:
edh said:
- I find that the resolution foundation are a fairly good source, pretty impartial.
http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/fiv...
"Three quarters of the gains flow to richer families who are more likely to have two people with incomes above the allowance. Only a quarter of the gains go to the bottom half of households."
People paying little tax don’t benefit when tax is reduced - I’m not sure that this is surprising or a problem? http://www.resolutionfoundation.org/media/blog/fiv...
"Three quarters of the gains flow to richer families who are more likely to have two people with incomes above the allowance. Only a quarter of the gains go to the bottom half of households."
sidicks said:
edh said:
3. Money is saved, not spent.
What happens with that saving? Does the cash just sit in a vault somewhere?Dr Jekyll said:
edh said:
Dr Jekyll said:
I was being taught about govt spending crowding out private investment back in the 80s.
and what did you observe when this theory was put into practice in 2010?edh said:
Dr Jekyll said:
edh said:
Dr Jekyll said:
I was being taught about govt spending crowding out private investment back in the 80s.
and what did you observe when this theory was put into practice in 2010?Sway said:
OK, so feel free to expand your understanding of the 'multiplier effect', and why it'll work.
Yes, it's become McDonnell's lovely soundbite - but little to show he actually understands it, or cam actually demonstrate his ideas will utilise it effectively...
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-john-mcdonnell-doesnt-seem-to-understand-how-government-debt-worksYes, it's become McDonnell's lovely soundbite - but little to show he actually understands it, or cam actually demonstrate his ideas will utilise it effectively...
Dr Jekyll said:
Sway said:
OK, so feel free to expand your understanding of the 'multiplier effect', and why it'll work.
Yes, it's become McDonnell's lovely soundbite - but little to show he actually understands it, or cam actually demonstrate his ideas will utilise it effectively...
https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-john-mcdonnell-doesnt-seem-to-understand-how-government-debt-worksYes, it's become McDonnell's lovely soundbite - but little to show he actually understands it, or cam actually demonstrate his ideas will utilise it effectively...
1) spend more money
2) tax the rich*
3) ?
4) profit
- except MPs on 140k p/a with houses worth millions, they obviously don't count and are just one of the people
edh said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Government borrowing was increased, thereby leaving less money for the private sector to borrow.
Makes no sense and ignores the demand side.Is there a defined stock of money available per year?
Dr Jekyll said:
edh said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Government borrowing was increased, thereby leaving less money for the private sector to borrow.
Makes no sense and ignores the demand side.Is there a defined stock of money available per year?
edh said:
sidicks said:
edh said:
Only if you believe the household finance analogy is appropriate to describe the UK economy. Which it clearly isn't.
No, not "only in that situation" at all.Dr Jekyll said:
edh said:
Dr Jekyll said:
Government borrowing was increased, thereby leaving less money for the private sector to borrow.
Makes no sense and ignores the demand side.Is there a defined stock of money available per year?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff