Gary Stevenson – Economist
Discussion
sugerbear said:
a bunch of people that didn't deserve it at the expense of people that did
Who decides who deserves what? Who can say something is or isn't deserved? You? Starmer? No thanks. Me? No thanks. We make our choices and take our chances.Even if there was an objective and universal definition of fair - and there isn't - life isn't it, we can accept reality or whine pointlessly forever...selling a book along the way is a bonus. At leastbook sales can be measured objectively.
As per any sleb new or old and from any background, one subjective opinion is worth a pile of diddly. There are plenty of slebs convinced they're right, and plenty of opinions that can't all be.
Type R Tom said:
Greenmantle said:
Puzzles said:
I can't watch his BS.
Agree. Understand totally who is trying to get to watch his videos but anyone with a bit of experience is saying BS.Type R Tom said:
So, as you were, there is nothing to see here, and let's keep going in the direction we are heading.
The thing is though is he proposing a genuine change in said direction?.We have never taxed wealth in this country aside from wealth transferred through the generations via inheritance. Income taxes on high earners are high by the standards of post 1988. Taxes are also historically high as a percentage of GDP.
Is the answer ever more taxation or is it to look at why we have no growth?, and why the structure of the economy favours the outcomes we are seeing?.
I have read, and much enjoyed, his book. He had an interesting story to tell.
I subsequently watched some interviews with him and also some of his YouTube videos. Although I understand his angle that the momentum of inequality increasing more than it has been in more recent history, when it comes to logical and clear answers to what is possible to change this, it all becomes very vague. He says a lot without saying much.
Most of his videos seem to be him pondering what can be done, how we need to form a greater mass of population forcing a change and trying to grow his YouTube audience to achieve this.
Once he started asking for Patreon help for his channel, considering he apparently has millions and continues to make money from these millions, I checked out.
I subsequently watched some interviews with him and also some of his YouTube videos. Although I understand his angle that the momentum of inequality increasing more than it has been in more recent history, when it comes to logical and clear answers to what is possible to change this, it all becomes very vague. He says a lot without saying much.
Most of his videos seem to be him pondering what can be done, how we need to form a greater mass of population forcing a change and trying to grow his YouTube audience to achieve this.
Once he started asking for Patreon help for his channel, considering he apparently has millions and continues to make money from these millions, I checked out.
contango said:
I can't listen to this chap for too long, with his apparent multi million pound fortune and mantra to tax the rich, does he realise he can pay more in voluntary tax contributions if he has such strong convictions? 
Do his personal tax contributions alone affect society? Such a bizarre response to ignore the argument and reason in favour of telling him to pay more tax - who does that help?Type R Tom said:
Greenmantle said:
Puzzles said:
I can't watch his BS.
Agree. Understand totally who is trying to get to watch his videos but anyone with a bit of experience is saying BS.It is a difficult problem to tackle, hence why we don't tackle it. It's pretty much just a natural consequence of having some surplus income that you can invest and an investment's value naturally increasing exponentially with time. A small headstart grows into a huge lead. Small wealth inequalities naturally grow into enormous wealth inequalities.
If you want to stop that natural process you have got to add rules to the game that oppose it, but you don't want those rules to dissuade people from investing and growing the economy. Not easy.
s1962a said:
I've watched some of his videos. For most people out there "tax the rich" means taxing people who have more than you, whereas he talks about the super wealthy, who are probably untouchable from a tax point of view.
And their combined wealth isn't actually that much when you compare it to the size of the economy as a whole. Even if you could take all their wealth and convert it into cash (which doesn't actually make sense), it wouldn't keep the lights on for long.ATG said:
s1962a said:
I've watched some of his videos. For most people out there "tax the rich" means taxing people who have more than you, whereas he talks about the super wealthy, who are probably untouchable from a tax point of view.
And their combined wealth isn't actually that much when you compare it to the size of the economy as a whole. Even if you could take all their wealth and convert it into cash (which doesn't actually make sense), it wouldn't keep the lights on for long.The City of London contributes something like 15% of total tax take of the UK.
turbobloke said:
sugerbear said:
a bunch of people that didn't deserve it at the expense of people that did
Who decides who deserves what? Who can say something is or isn't deserved? You? Starmer? No thanks. Me? No thanks. We make our choices and take our chances.Even if there was an objective and universal definition of fair - and there isn't - life isn't it, we can accept reality or whine pointlessly forever...selling a book along the way is a bonus. At leastbook sales can be measured objectively.
As per any sleb new or old and from any background, one subjective opinion is worth a pile of diddly. There are plenty of slebs convinced they're right, and plenty of opinions that can't all be.
There is no such thing as trickle down economics, rich people hoard it, poor people spend it, If you start to deprive the poorer people of a means to spend then the economy slows, they find it harder to live, people begin to look for excuses of why they are poor, society breaks down and so on.
As for something being fair. I would say yes that everyone has a moral compass and I personally dont need a dictionary definition to know what is fair and what isn't. Do I think that someone like the Duke of Westminster gets to benefit from QE through asset inflation whilst someone who rents a property from him doesn't? No I don't that is fair, you may think otherwise. Your moral compass, your choice.
Challo said:
Lotobear said:
....I stopped as soon as I heard his MLE accent, couldn't take him seriously bro
He was born in Ilford, so that is why he sounds like that. What should he sound like to take him seriously?
turbobloke said:
Challo said:
Lotobear said:
....I stopped as soon as I heard his MLE accent, couldn't take him seriously bro
He was born in Ilford, so that is why he sounds like that. What should he sound like to take him seriously?
I wondered how long it would take for a Gary Stevenson thread to appear on PH - which is the last bastion of 'so long as i'm alright, you can f
k yourself' , 'st on the poor' politics.
He's been banging his drum for 5 years, so it's taken some time.
I don't buy that he is a grifter, that's a phrase too easily misused for anyone you don't agree with. He's not looking to make money out of you, he's looking to change the direction of economics. He has a very relevant back ground and is clearly borderline genius and he can explain economic theory in a clear and concise manner.
He doesn't delve too deeply into solutions as they will be polarising, he wants there to be an uprising of the poor, enough to change political and media attitude to taxation and the economy.
If you aren't buying what he's talking about I can only assume you aren't one of the middle classes having your assets taken from you.
For everyone else, we're almost certainly not as rich as our parents, which means in the future your kids may not be as rich as you. That's not a good destination to get to.
k yourself' , 'st on the poor' politics.He's been banging his drum for 5 years, so it's taken some time.
I don't buy that he is a grifter, that's a phrase too easily misused for anyone you don't agree with. He's not looking to make money out of you, he's looking to change the direction of economics. He has a very relevant back ground and is clearly borderline genius and he can explain economic theory in a clear and concise manner.
He doesn't delve too deeply into solutions as they will be polarising, he wants there to be an uprising of the poor, enough to change political and media attitude to taxation and the economy.
If you aren't buying what he's talking about I can only assume you aren't one of the middle classes having your assets taken from you.
For everyone else, we're almost certainly not as rich as our parents, which means in the future your kids may not be as rich as you. That's not a good destination to get to.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff