Gary Stevenson – Economist
Discussion
I'm sure Gary himself would tell you to not take the advice of someone on the Internet without thinking about it and doing your own research. It sounds to me like people are taking slightly different things from what he's saying, which is interesting. I think all he's doing is giving a possible future, with arguments about why he's worried it might happen, what that means long term and that his solution is that tax should be fairer. Yes, he is (apparently) rich, but he got taxed at 60% effective rate while he earned that money, his issue is with people earning huge amounts from their investments etc and getting charged much less. And yes, as had been said, he's not talking about people earning £100k/year or even £200k a year, he's talking about people with a large amount of assets.
varsas said:
I'm sure Gary himself would tell you to not take the advice of someone on the Internet without thinking about it and doing your own research. It sounds to me like people are taking slightly different things from what he's saying, which is interesting. I think all he's doing is giving a possible future, with arguments about why he's worried it might happen, what that means long term and that his solution is that tax should be fairer.
Presumably this means that the unfairness of the top 1% paying nearly 30% of all income taxes on around 13% of all earnings - the last time I looked a few years ago - would in future be taxed less i.e. more fairly.Wealth not income? They earned it, they bought it.
Outside tax authorities and other govt depts e.g. DWP, what another person earns and has legitimately acquired is of no relevance to other people, aside from the other people being nosey and/or wanting to know for other irrelevant reasons. The public sector approach to knowing what others earn - no thanks, it's none of my business / others' business, that needs to go.
Challo said:
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?
As for the 'correct' accent - no need for Kings English, just someting neutral would be fine. For my sins I'm from Newcastle but most people would struggle to pick that up in my accent which is fairly neutral
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
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.
Hes trying to pass off his own political agenda as "economic theory" and most of his theory is narrow minded and not reflective of reality. His only genius is convincing people that he somehow knows what he's talking aboutk 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.
How will an "uprising of the poor" will help anyone? its bulls
t. What will help is a smaller government and a revolution of the state forcing people to take risks, be self sufficient and to be creative. You make a population rich by giving them the impetus to succeed- byt being rewarded. I've been Poor- its s
t- the solution wasn't to be given money but to work out how to make money for myself. Garys' economics are simplistic political b
ks - its exactly the same as the right wing classes blaming immigrants- just as disingenuous and just as untrue.Jhonno said:
Do you know that he doesn't?
Statistically, we can be reasonably sure. There were 200 voluntary payments of additional tax received in the 17 years between 2000 and 2017.https://www.ft.com/content/4b3e6db0-e57a-11e7-8b99...
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
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 fk 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.
Or you could say its a classic story of us vs them, or in his terms "ordinary people" vs "the rich". He aims to engage the ordinary people in order to revise the tax system to reduce the burden on them, and increase it on the "the rich" (however those terms are defined, since in reality its a spectrum). To take it to a further extreme, you could frame it as encouraging a revolution of the proletariat against the bourgeoisie...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.
Some of his explanations of specific concepts are nicely accessible, but I don't really see his takes as much more than standard left economic thought wearing the skin suit of his relatively short career in finance. How he's got to this point I don't know, but I hypothesized up thread that it could well be internal conflict of his background and general world view butting up against the financial success he had (and is having, with books, tours, patreon etc...)
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
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 fk yourself' , 'st on the poor' politics.
k yourself' , 'st on the poor' politics.
PH in the time i've been reading and posting hasn't been 'a bastion', never mind the last, of that.
PugwasHDJ80 said:
Garys' economics are simplistic political bks - its exactly the same as the right wing classes blaming immigrants- just as disingenuous and just as untrue.
Agreed on the testicles, but...as not-a-leftie I wasn't aware I was supposed to be doing that particular blame game, and in fact I still won't.ks - its exactly the same as the right wing classes blaming immigrants- just as disingenuous and just as untrue.turbobloke said:
PugwasHDJ80 said:
Garys' economics are simplistic political bks - its exactly the same as the right wing classes blaming immigrants- just as disingenuous and just as untrue.
Agreed on the testicles, but...as not-a-leftie I wasn't aware I was supposed to be doing that particular blame game, and in fact I still won't.ks - its exactly the same as the right wing classes blaming immigrants- just as disingenuous and just as untrue.PugwasHDJ80 said:
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
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 fk 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.
Hes trying to pass off his own political agenda as "economic theory" and most of his theory is narrow minded and not reflective of reality. His only genius is convincing people that he somehow knows what he's talking aboutk 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.
How will an "uprising of the poor" will help anyone? its bulls
t. What will help is a smaller government and a revolution of the state forcing people to take risks, be self sufficient and to be creative. You make a population rich by giving them the impetus to succeed- byt being rewarded. I've been Poor- its s
t- the solution wasn't to be given money but to work out how to make money for myself. Garys' economics are simplistic political b
ks - its exactly the same as the right wing classes blaming immigrants- just as disingenuous and just as untrue.ks to you but he does have a point, I take these stats from the Oxfam website. The richest 1% of the UK hold more wealth than 70% of the UK population.
The richest 1% of the UK pay 29 % of the national income.
4 of the richest people in the UK have more wealth than 20million people in the UK
That doesn't make for great reading when we have food banks, crumbling infrastusture and low growth. Something will have to give and the ones that can most afford it dont want to pay anymore.
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
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.
I think I am more agreeing with the problem but not clear on his proposed solution other than increasing taxes still further?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.
Saying things like QE mainly benefited the rich is somewhat obvious stuff. The issue becomes more why QE was pursued both post 2008 and during lockdown?, and the answer was mainly to keep government spending at levels thought required. That is not necessarily a problem with the implementation of QE but structural issues with the economy and public finances combined in the latter instances with the catastrophic impact of lockdowns.
I am sure discontent will continue to grow, and wealth inequality will worsen. I am one of those who will not be as rich as my parents despite earning a good salary by UK standards so this is not I am alright Jack. More that problems are rather more deeper rooted than failing to give the "rich" a good kicking.
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
turbobloke said:
Wealth not income? They earned it, they bought it.
did they earn it though?The Duke of Westminster for example, did he earn that 10bn tip in his dad gave him after he became deceased?
Randy Winkman said:
Dynion Araf Uchaf said:
turbobloke said:
Wealth not income? They earned it, they bought it.
did they earn it though?The Duke of Westminster for example, did he earn that 10bn tip in his dad gave him after he became deceased?
As a government, having certain individuals effectively having more money than the country should ring alarm bells.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff