Going to the country
George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, says that Britain's negative report card from a major ratings agency is another reason to call a general election.
No surprise there - an opposition party, ahead in the polls, tends to find a lot of good reasons to go to the country. But from the standpoint of the financial markets, there will be a large question mark hanging over the public finances until the result of that election is known.
As Robert Peston has pointed out, we shouldn't get carried away with the news that Standard & Poor's has revised down its outlook for the UK. We are not about to lose our triple-A rating yet. And none of the other big ratings agencies has changed its view.
Also, agency ratings are just one of the factors that investors use in pricing UK debt, and they are re-pricing it all the time. In fact, the government's borrowing costs have already risen in recent months, without any help from Standard & Poor's.
Still, this is the first time since the UK acquired its AAA rating in 1978 that the agency has given it a negative outlook. That's not nothing.
There are two reasons why Standard & Poor's has put the British government on notice. One is that it expects the UK's net debt burden to rise to 100% of GDP by 2013. If sustained, that would be incompatible with a AAA rating and is considerably worse than when the agency last affirmed the UK's rating in January.
The second is that the agency can't judge whether the UK is going to take action to prevent that outcome, until it sees the result of the next general election.
Here are the key quotes from the Standard & Poor's report:
"We note that there is support across the political spectrum for additional fiscal tightening. However, the parties' intentions will likely remain unclear until the next administration is formed after the general election, due by mid-2010."
"The rating could be lowered if we conclude that, following the election, the next government's fiscal consolidation plans are unlikely to put the UK debt burden on a secure downward trajectory over the medium term. Conversely, the outlook could be revised back to stable if comprehensive measures are implemented to place the public finances on a sustainable footing, or if fiscal outturns are more benign than we currently anticipate."
You might say that general elections shouldn't be called for the convenience of the financial markets. And you might be right.
You might also say that international investors are grown-ups. They know that countries hold elections. And neither Standard & Poor's, nor the other ratings agencies, nor the IMF (which produced its report card on the UK yesterday) thinks that the UK will fall off a cliff if further fiscal tightening isn't announced until next year.
This is all about long-term plans - and showing you are serious about getting debt back down again over a reasonable time-frame. Alistair Darling announced a significant tightening in the Budget. But the IFS, the IMF and many others believe that we will end up needing more.
It's not clear that any of the major parties are ready to spell out to the British public exactly what that would entail - still less implement it. But with the government needing to borrow more than 12% of GDP from the markets this year and next, the road to the next general election could be even bumpier than we thought.
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
"But with the government needing to borrow more than 12% of GDP from the markets this year and next, the road to the next general election could be even bumpier than we thought."
Quite so.
But not as bumpy as the road after the next general election .....
Complain about this comment
Not surprising since the more Britain quantitatively ease the economy, the more it has to borrow from the international markets just to get the same amount in real terms !! Without any real effort to rein in spendings, Britain will soon be in such a deep hole, it wouldn't see the sky !! I think this is what S&P are pointing out, i.e. get your acts together, guys !!
Besides which, with the great loss of confidence in the ratings agencies in general over the sub-prime nonsense, they have to make some guarded comment to cover all eventualities. This is not a predictive announcement !! This is a CYA exercise; and they are covering it with both hands !!
Complain about this comment
After the inevitable defeat at the general election the 100 to 150 Labour MP's will need to focus on purging the party of New Labour adoption of Thatchernomics and develop sound radical policies on directly managing the economy including a significant sector of publicly owned enterprises (incl some banks)and maybe after the next but one election....?
Complain about this comment
AAA-rating humbug; this statement is just a bit of preparatory work by the global financial establishment to warn us (the taxpayer) that we will be expected to take the pain for the bankers' gain
tighten your belts people; pain and penance will be good for you; and of course our useless govt from 2010-20??, whether Labour or Tory (let us all pray for a hung parliament by the way) will use this sort of nudge to jump in there and say 'sorry folks but we're going to be £$%"ing you for your own good so vote for us
Japan's debt is pushing 200% of GDP; many EU countries are above 100%; it might not be ideal but does it actually matter that much? I doubt it; we're being sold a line here
time for the voter to wise up; switch off that reality TV programme and try to think!
Complain about this comment
Somehow it seens it is almost a certainty that more not less will be needed inview of the fact every forecast so far has been out, and very quickly. Not just in this country.
Whether a rating drops and debt costs more, or public services are cut, or tax goes up, or all three, it makes little difference, the only way forward is higher costs. This cannot help the much touted recovery can it. Ah, for the days when all you had to worry about was your moat or duck island or where you mainly lived.
Complain about this comment
No.4. somali_pirate wrote:
"Japan's debt is pushing 200% of GDP; many EU countries are above 100%; it might not be ideal but does it actually matter that much? I doubt it"
It doesn't matter, in the same way that borrowing 125% of the value of your house didn't seem to matter back in 2007.....
Lenders always fall over themselves to lend more than the value of the underlying asset/productive output, don't they?
There is no need to worry...........
Complain about this comment
Ladies and gentleman.
China and Asean countries are rapidly joining into some kind of new Commonwealth, free trade agreements abound and China is carefully making it's currency exchangeable and available withing Asean. We are looking at Asean move away from USD.
I sense something new in the air that until now was largely confined to the 'one possible outcome' bin : currency turmoil.
While deflation will continue I suspect some places will vaporise in a flash of hyperinflation (from currency confidence failure of course). The USD will either slide slowly over some years, or hit a catastrophic point and drop suddenly.
I am not a gold bug, but I expect that in this kind of turmoil the price of gold will rise dramatically.
Complain about this comment
Global Markets, the IMF and Rating Agencies like certaintly or clear forecasts of predicted events in an Economy
At the moment, we have politicians resigning or being fired daily, the Government in a total flunk, a General Election being called by the People and our balances of payments going down the plug hole ( as we cannot afford bath plugs like our PMs)
The direction of sterling will be the big indicator. It rose by a huge amount yesterday and dropped back today but has been on the rise now for a month. Chinese and Japanese buying as they are dumping "dollars"?
Complain about this comment
Has anyone thought this through without trying to spin. It doesn't really matter what S&P say, or what GB and Darling say, or the economic figures show. What matters is pay cuts, 4 day weeks, house prices falling, unemployment rising, petrol and food still expensive and our own debt levels beyond comprehension.
We can only grow when the banks lend. Anyone seen any concrete signs this is happening (at realistic rates)?
We are still at the beginning of this. Stephanie, you are the reporter. Stop hiding behind volattile economic figures and see the real world.
Complain about this comment
Every country should hold elections and ask their candidates what they knew about the banking and investment issues, did they vote on any legislation that contributed to the problems and when were they made aware that the crisis was looming? Usually would want opinions on more topics but in this case if the elected officials are not held accountable it will just happen again. Would also like to see a law againist financial institutions having any contact with elected officials or staffs and can only appear to state positions in public forums. The corruption needs to end.
Complain about this comment
No.7. FrankSz wrote:
"I am not a gold bug, but I expect that in this kind of turmoil the price of gold will rise dramatically."
But then fall dramatically when you decide you want to sell it.
When it comes to currencies, if one currency falls another must rise.
The dollar is falling, with both the pound and euro gaining against the dollar. Overall, in the long run, the euro may turn out to be stronger than the dollar....
The pound is gaining a little on the euro at present, but it still has a long way to go before it gets back to its previous natural level of 1.47
Against the dollar, it could be argued the pound's natural level is approximately 1.65 and we are not miles away from that now, which shows how the markets view the USA's fiscal prospects.....
Complain about this comment
Given the supposed weakness of the UK public finances, it's quite surprising that the pound has risen about 30% against the dollar in four months.
But then again, the public deficits - while important - are a bit of a distraction from the real impact on our economy and the pound, which is: what does the long-term productivity of the UK economy look like? After all, it's out of productive economic output that we will repay this debt. So are we on the right path to pay off the debt? My answer here:
http://www.knowingandmaking.com/2009/05/private-productivity-and-public-debt.html
Complain about this comment
I'm trying to understand what the future might hold for us all in terms of interest rates, consumer and retail prices, inflation, deflation or stagflation and the potential of UK business to create wealth; and lets not forget tax revenue.
Although the UK credit rating has not (yet) been downgraded the effect of the negative outlook must be to reduce the enthusiam of potential investors. If this is to an extent that creates a shortfall in the (or any) government's recovery plan, printing money would seem to be the obvious solution.
Will this affect the pound in our pockets, probably. Some inflation, as we are seeing at the moment, is likely. The RPI measure has hidden the 'true' rate of inflation as it has been buffered by the reduction of interest rates. This will not continue as further falls in rates, if any, will probably not be reflected in the actual repayments on mortgages made by the UK population.
So we will see some real inflation. Net revenue to the exchequer will fall with rising unemployment causing loss of PAYE receipts and increased payment of benefits, putting more pressure on disposable income in the form of increased taxation. I can't really see that deflation, which I understand to be a fall in the RPI or CPI indicies, as a strong possibility.
I can however see a rise in interest rates as credit is still relatively tight.
So my view for what it is worth is that we will see inflation and interest rates increase. That might be a good thing if it is not too severe. Government debt will increase. UK manufacturing will be decimated by the loss of skills and finance but global companies in some areas, and I wish I knew what they will be, might do very well. As always the markets will be difficult to predict.
What does anybody else think ?
Complain about this comment
One good thing about calling an election is that it would force the Tories to state exactly what their economic policy would be. No longer could it just be "do down Gordon Brown, but don't frighten the voters with what we intend". Osborne quickly picks up on the IMF concerns re Britains long term debt and its reduction, but seems strangely silent about the praise it gives to Darling/Browns' measures to tackle the credit crunch in the first place. Its time the Tories came clean, and not just in the House!
Complain about this comment
9 eatin
There is no problem borrowing if you have the reliability rating, which is additional to the credit rating. The reliability rating basically is an ongoing assessment of the soundness of your projections and if your forecast events occur. It would appear to be increasingly important. The problem, as the banks are finding, is there is apparently a steady erosion of such ratings on the customer database which leads to higher borrowing costs. The BoE base rate is increasingly irrelevent which tells you that the BoE is increasingly detatched from the market and attempting to force policy when the market says no. As such it will make little difference to borrowing costs if the base rate rises. We appear to still be in a slide and that leads to risk aversion. When we hit the bottom things might improve. Tell me - if you hold capital would you lend it at low rates unless you were sure you would, as well as the interest, actually get your capital back, forget the interest bit, capital. The likely outcome if HMG push for more lending is that those with good ratings will be approached to take more and more loans, not those with poorer ratings, so imbalances will just be exacerbated. As those with good ratings are presumably doing okay they are not in need of borrowings so nothing is achieved. It is simply a matter of waiting and impatience is what got us here I am afraid. People wanting funds sooner than they could 'afford' them. If you do not like the situation I can agree with you but it is the bumpy road at the bottom that worries me not the slide which has already been instigated and cannot be stopped. If the bumpy ride at the bottom is too bumpy all that will happen is risk aversion will continue and uplift will not occur. 2010 is the issue not 2009. Politically we seem to have a Canute mentality about and it is just a waste of time, in fact it is probably damaging because repeatedly initatives which almost certainly cannot work are floated only to sink along with credibility. This is the problem with a spin based politic. The spin heros such as Ld Mandelson and Campbell are finding the spin makes no difference in the face of real problems. Next stop the inevitable contraction of public services and increasing discontent amongst the electorate. This will echo for a generation.
Complain about this comment
Stephanie,
The IMF, Bank of England and Standard & Poor are all making reference to UK bank capital adequacy/bail-out adequacy - manufacturing investment is getting to dangerously low levels where UK capacity could be permanently damaged.Robert Peston says gilts auctions are going well. Could that be because QE is providing the liquidity platform. The IMF says that more private assets should be purtchased instead of favouring public debt.
Look forward to your posts on these vital issues going forward.
Complain about this comment
So to sum up, when the toxic debt is in the hands of Global banks and insurance companies it is AAA rated.
When that same debt is in the hands of the government (i.e you and I the taxpayer) it is more at risk so likely to lose the AAA rating and therefore potentially cost more to finance (your caveats all noted).
There is a case to say a plague on your house, S&P (and other rating agencies) Are they going to pay up on the current lawsuits where they clearly overrated bank debt and instruments and were paid handsomely for doing so. Why should anyone take into account anything they say anymore?
Stephanie perhaps you could make some assumptions about the rate we need to sort out the finances mid-term and suggest some options, as the politicians clearly will not (even Vince Cable has hinted only at major sections of government activity needing cutting) It would give us a sense of scale. Are we talking reducing unemployment benefit across the board, reducing police, nurses, teachers, army, mandarins by a large percentage compared with the odd aircraft carrier and a few Typhoons. Billions to finance and repay suggests something more radical than the above, just what is it likely to be?
Complain about this comment
Gordont10 said it is time the Tories come clean What S&P really says is that it is time someone came clean - the current trajectory is unsustainable. Gordon Brown is desperately holding off on unpopular but necessary financial tightening measures so that if the Tories win the next election he can paint them as creating chaos through cuts in public services - cuts he would also have to make if in government. Cynical - and proof even he doesn't expect to win - Labour is already focusing on the next election but one.
Complain about this comment
12 inoncom
I wouldnt bet on a hung parliament however interesting it might be as an idea. It would anyway appear to be likely it is irrelevant who is in as policy will be increasinglty fixed by events. As the UK has already largely lost its manufacturing base it cannot lose it twice, whereas other developed countries heavy on exports still have some to potentially, probably, lose. However viewing this as an advantage is somewhat like comparing the severity of war wounds. There remains little reason the believe a heavily shackled finacial sector will boom, further one has to be concerned strategically that the financial sector can be piped away to other locations. The financial sector grew rapidly and can disappear just as rapidly, it would appear to be potentially nomadic. It is just the sort of sector an aspiring China would be interested in aquiring. China appears to be moving towards buying european businesses to gain access and overcome cultural communication problems but the next step is stengthening what goes on in China. Multinational activities are based in the homeland, the HQ, that is where the decisions are made, however multinational they might appear. Flutters in currencies are not that important surely.
Complain about this comment
Predictable news, but none the less shocking.
At one time the bond market was there to serve companies and governments when governments and companies deemed it necessary. That was not the case for the last decade however.
For a long time now there has been a wall of money (some of it real, most of it phoney) that needed something to securitise. Corporate earnings, mortgage payments, government interest coupons...you name it.
Money lenders thronged to the western world with ship-loads of cash. The lenders appetite was so voracious that nearly ANYTHING was deemed to be securitisable. Even rubbishy businesses, barely solvent mortgagees and financially incontinent governments.
Now the money lenders are getting realistic about their loan recovery plans and they are making a start by cutting back the number of new loans issued.
As sure as night follows day, lenders will soon be requesting a higher coupon from their borrowers.
It will be a long time until bond markets are our servants again, there to help us out when the need arises. For the next few years bond markets will be our masters and we will be their bonded labourers.
Complain about this comment
#13 DustinThyme You can see simultaneous deflation and inflation. A deflation of asset prices - say commercial and residential property, and an inflation of commodities - say food and energy.
Such a scenario tends to wipe out pretty much everyone.
You would expect interest rates to rise - not least because it is impossible for them to fall further. The government will have problems getting its debt away and this suggests higher rates, and supports asset price deflation.
As western currencies go down the pan - you can expect commodity exporters to want a lot more for their commodities and this suggest commodity price inflation.
The real problem is identifying any sector of the economy that can lead a country of 60 million people out of recession/depression. To my knowledge no-one has ever suggested what this mught be.
If things get too bad a lot of the existing global companies (say oil companies of drugs companies) can the exit the UK almost as fast as the plane will carry them.
Complain about this comment
I have been really gloomy for about 5 or 6 years....at least whenever I thought the economy (aka how rich or poor I'll be in the future)
I don't share the views of those who have touted the last few months shares rally as signalling at least the beginning of the end of the recession---but I do feel the changes that have shaken, are shaking and will continue to shake the Financial world, Big Business, Politicians and so forth do at least signal an end to a whole decade where everyone (at least who appeared in print, Tv or radio) seemed to be in denial about the dangerous fragility just beneath the surface.
At least now it feels as if, bear market rallies not withstanding; there really are fundamental movements which, lets face it are beyond the control of Governments now; are forcing more realism...and eventually more stability into the system; almost against our 'best efforts'.
The MP's expenses thing intersects with the 'Fat cat bloated bankers' thing as examples that there is a re-emergence of a sense of ethical behaviour above and beyond what 'one can get away with' or one can 'charge for and get away with' is surfacing...almost like a submarine breaking through ice.
It's the morality, stupid..... without an understood moral and ethical system every contract and set of rules is so much empty rhetoric anyway.
It may just be that idealism and a sense of shared values; 'beyond the contract', are to be the new reality----that's why I feel a bit more hopeful now, and was so gloomy back in the recent good old days.....despite the lousy next few years as we cancel the holidays and pay back the debt with taxes (should we manage to keep our jobs)
Complain about this comment
Britain spent tomorrow's tax revenues/earnings on yesterday's over-consumption.
Now and in the future, the British government must borrow to pay for the bad debts of the UK banking and insurance sector.
In other words, we are forced to borrow in order to afford today's necessities.
Faced with this lack of funds, there can be no internal investment in Britain's public services or Britain's productive capacity. High taxes and high fiscal deficits will put the mockers on any hopes of internal investment. This will hold our economy back for many years to come.
This is a crisis, and not a recession....
Complain about this comment
#6 mrtweedy
anyone who was foolish enough to take out a 125% mortgage in the UK or a sub-prime or 'liars' mortgage in the States probably also did it at 4 or 5x income, so their debt load to personal GDP was probably running at about 600%; maybe 7 or 800% when you add in all the credit-card and car loan debts etc
now I think we would all agree that that really IS TROUBLE (though the banks, govt etc didn't see a problem at the time.....)
when the US and UK debt-load gets to above 200% of GDP then let me know as it might be time to panic
in the meantime I think I'll stay in my hammock under the walnut trees, drinking beer and making a herculean effort to try and remain calm and I look forward to the dim-witted Tories trying to remain popular whilst raising taxes and cutting public services to the bone
Complain about this comment
#24 Somali_Pirate. I think I read somewhere that you are now back in North America - this may account for your seeming gullability in swallowing official spin.
The UK gross external debt to GDP ratio stands at 336% (Q4 2008). This makes it the second most indebted nation of any of the 50 largest national economies in the world.
The US is better placed with a ratio of 95.09% (Q3 2008). Clearly since Q3 of last year the US has stepped up to show that what makes America great is its ability to ruthlessly compete. I fear that the US may yet overhaul the UK.
Check out http://www.cnbc.com/id/30308959?slide=1 for source details.
Complain about this comment
watriler (#3) "After the inevitable defeat at the general election the 100 to 150 Labour MP's will need to focus on purging the party of New Labour adoption of Thatchernomics and develop sound radical policies on directly managing the economy including a significant sector of publicly owned enterprises (incl some banks)and maybe after the next but one election....?"
If they don't purge their Trots/Neocons soon, and do so very obviously, it will be too late and the country will just get another team of the same in.
Complain about this comment
#25 armagediontimes
I am indeed in Canada and hence bringing unwanted sunshine to your gloom-laden British blogs; the gullability of the Americans is well known to the British but I'm not in the US and don't really care what the British think of the Americans or vice versa
I was referring to the 100% net debt to GDP ratio figure mentioned for the UK in the original report and by Stephanie, not your gross external debt ratio, so you are moving the goalposts and I'm not interested enough to look all this info up; the net debt ratio is allegedly about 53% at the moment but that probably omits PFI and all sorts of stuff - personally I assume that most of the figures we see about the economy are spun, manipulated, statistically fiddled about with etc; nevertheless the UK's current and projected net debt level is lower than several other G8 countries...... on that yardstick
perhaps you are right on your yardstick; I have no idea but if I were to bet on it then I would guess that neither is correct and that we're wasting our time discussing it!
Complain about this comment
#27 Somali_pirate - I don´t recall expressing any view regarding Americans other than noting their famed ability to ruthlessly compete.
I am not in the business of moving goalposts - merely in seeking to establish the actual location of the goalposts. A task that is complicated by the seemingly endless fug of obsufication that emanates from all official sources.
I don´t really care what either you or Stephanie Flanders thinks unless either or both of you intend to personally step up to buy a few GBP billion of newly minted UK debt.
My bet is that none of the likely buyers believe for one nano second the official guff that you are so keen to propogate. I care about this because people don´t like being played for patsies - and these particular people will most likely extract their revenge through demanding higher interest rates. Rates that I personally get to pay. Perhaps there is something wrong with me but I have an aversion against being dragooned into paying the cash price of other peoples spin and deceit.
Perhaps you take a different view - in which case you are more than welcome to pay my share.
Complain about this comment
It's almost inevitable that confidence in Britain is reaching an all time low, we have a government which is failing to govern because it is applying all it's energies, not to getting out of the crisis, but to salvaging as many seats at the next election as it can. Thus it cannot take the measures that should be taken to curb public spending or to rectify any of the problems it caused , which made the crisis even worse than it should have been. Now , until there is a new government in office, confidence in Britain's economy will not return, and it is doubtful if there will be any inward investment as long as there is a danger that Brown and Darling will raise the level of debt even further. The growing evidence of this government's incompetence is now obvious to the rest of Europe and indeed the rest of the world, and there will be no hope of recovery until what has become a totally ineffective administration is removed from office.
Complain about this comment
A FEW MORE NAILS IN THE NUlabour project THAT'S BUSTED THE UK ECONOMY.
AAA? ZZZ MORE LIKE FOR ASLEEP ON THE JOB FROM THE FORMER CHANCELLOR TO
THE BANK OF ENGLAND AND THE FSA.
LOTS OF REWARD FOR FAILURE!!
Complain about this comment
#29
Cuts in NHS spending all ready happening ( 10% on capital projects/overtime bans/ agency staff cut back/ 'bank' staff under 6 months employment being laid off) just seems that they are doing it on the qt and at the mo, no-one has noticed
Complain about this comment
#28 armagedion strewth, you ought to read your own comments before replying, as your short-term memory appears to be shot
I am not propagating official guff and have no time whatsoever for any political parties, govts or official economic statistics, none of which I believe; I was simply saying that the debt % figures are not worth getting het up about as they are invented anyway
Is that so hard to understand?
Complain about this comment
Beats me why you guys squabble about something you can do nothing about. What does it matter what the debt is or the what the interest rate is going to be. The debt will crystalise and whatever rate the market demands will be paid. Joe Public and Joe Dole have little to do with it, they just pay. I don't remember any politican asking about anything much, war, millenium domes, engineering booms that arn't booms, engineering megabusts, sliding loads of money to banks, etc etc, asking if I wanted to help out with moat-ability or duck island. Why on earth are you bothered.
Complain about this comment
For goodness sake stop moaning!
Things are difficult in every country in the world - including China. It won't make a blind bit of difference in the long run which political party is in power in the UK because the problems that they are trying to solve are beyond their control.
So, if Cameron wins the next election and cuts public spending AND raises taxes, it won't solve the fundemental problems that the country faces. We really need to take a good long hard look at ourselves and decide for ourselves what kind of society we want to build and then set about building it before the rest of the world recovers and decides for us what kind of society we will have. This is an OPPORTUNITY but as usual we are blowing it!
e2toe4 in # suggests building a new economy (which is a reflection of society) upon moral standards. Seems like a good enough place to start. Then let's define what we really mean by a moral society and economy. We know that we have a very unbalanced economy. We have our own experience of loseing manufacturing output and we have the experience of Germany and China to draw upon. So what type of manufacturing should we specialise in? Let's start asking ourselves what we want and not let the vested interests impose their desires upon us.
Oh but we are so much in debt. Debt is only a frame of mind - after all it's only money and not life or death.
Complain about this comment
"We're talking about nearly nine hundred thousand under 25 year olds now and when the class of 2009 graduates, there will be more than a million.
"This is everywhere around the country. This is not just unskilled people. Its people who are leaving the universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh and London and Exeter. It's a whole generation of people spread across the spectrum who we can't write off."
Prof D Blanchflower, due to be on Newsnight later tonight.
---
Can I point out that this is the important issue. Not people with money whinging about having a little bit less or paying a bit more, or fussing on about their pension being a bit smaller. Quite appart from anything else who does anybody think is going to be paying the tax to pay for public services in the future. This is in all likelihood the creation of an economic caste system and it will have a profound impact. The effect of HMG policy, and it has been a policy by default or design, as apparently tacitly endorsed by most of the older UK population, has been to extract money from the younger generation via housing, and now it is to extract employment from the younger generation. Does anybody really think this will create a balanced society well motivated with the young participating in wealth creation. Dystopia.
I hear increasingly of young people fleeing the UK. Brilliant. That is really going to help just around the corner. Unfortunately I cannot help but agree with what they are doing. Now wasn't somebody saying something about more young being needed to avoid the ageing population pension problem.
Anybody for economic Solyent Green.
Roll on the GE.
Complain about this comment
FACTS THAT DON'T MATTER
[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]May 1995Feb 2007
Complain about this comment
glanafon
SOYLENT GREEN SUMS IT UP. Misery for all except the SPECIAL FEW?
All will soon be run by TESCO with GORDY as the NEW CHAIRMAN!!
Complain about this comment
FrankSz #7.
"We are looking at Asean move away from USD." and "The USD will either slide slowly over some years, or hit a catastrophic point and drop suddenly."
is probably the best news possible. the US is holding the world to ransom with their Dollar adn their "economics", time to bring in a global currency.
Complain about this comment
Oh and only a mere 8.5 billion borrowed by PRUDENT GORDY & DARLING IN
APRIL. WHAT WILL BE THE DARLING BUDS OF MAY:9.78 billion I ESTIMATE!!
Complain about this comment
#32 somali_pirate - My memory is fine both short and long term. If the % debt figures are invented anyway then why do you reference them?
#33 glanafon - I think you will find you have answered your own question in post #35. Let me explain yourself to you.
Moats, domes, ducks or their islands are irrelevant from a macro perspective as none of them has the potential to materially harm the country.
The national debt level is of a different order of magnitude and clearly has the capacity to cause harm. Why is it so difficult to even identify and agree what the level of debt is? Partly because of a number of sleights of hand - such as PFI and unfunded pensions, and partly because the media refuse to report the actual figures, or report a vast proliferation of different figures so that no-one really knows what is going on.
Why do the powerful engage in such behaviour? It is not because they are stupid as clearly significant intelligence is required to obtain such complete opacity. So it must be a deliberate act, but why do they do this?
Luckily you tell us why. They do it because they are out to con the young - those trusting, idealistic people who naturally assume that the world is their oyster, and never realise that it is really their clam. Their only hope is for someone to effectively shatter their illusions and to free their minds so that they at least have a chance of avoiding economic soylent green.
It may sound cynical and cruel - but to my mind it seems a lot better than the planned alternative, and judging from your comments you would agree.
When you are actively planning to eat the seedcorn surely you must see that the game is up and meltdown is unavoidable.
Complain about this comment
glanafon,
That we have to develop an economy that has prospects for our younger people is undoubted. That we are facing the prospect of an 'educated unemployed' (despite what JJ says) is true. All of that adds to the call I made above to really start thinking about what kind of society we really want to build.
However, even though I am starting upon my dotage, when I was young, I couldn't afford to buy my parents house. I didn't earn enough. My expetations were much lower. In fact, the first home that I owned was a very modest maisonette that we bought after we'd been married for a year (oh the joys of only having an ironingboard for a table!). To get the mortgage we had to have saved with a society for over 1 year! Therefore, even though the sums have changed there is no difference between now and then as far as housing is concerned.
As far as pensions are concerned you have more of a case. It has been apparent since the end of the 60s that we would reach a point where there would be more retirees than workers by 2010. Despite that we still have the lowest Old Age Pension provision in Western Europe. I would therefore strongly resist any attempt to reduce it for the benefit of the 'young'. I paid every demand made of me for NI in a contract with the governments of both parties to provide a pension when I reached retirement age. Selfish, well probably but! As for the state of occupational pensions, we could argue that for years. Don't blame those who are old for the mess.
Ah well it will work out somehow!
Complain about this comment
Oh look at this. The USD rapidly declining with the pound slowly rising. This is a bit of a new one. It's good for me - I am waiting for the USD to drop to 10CZK to the dollar so I can order a turbo kit for my car.
Complain about this comment
40 arm n leg
I see moats n gravy boats and national as directly related to national debt. They are all symptoms of the same culture. If those responsible for regulation are interested rooking the system then flippin heck, look what you get. People flippin the economy.
My position is I don't know what size the national debt is and I don't know what interest rate is that will attract Johnny foreigner, I doubt anybody does. I do know it has to be paid. I don't see much point in expending energy on the detail because I only have so much energy. I do not see what I can do about it. I can do something at the GE. That is about it. To ensure, as far as possible that parliament is on the right track, and it helps because they are the regulators. I can't get hold of multinational banks and nor can you otherwise I suspect you would have by now. The control loop in a system is always smaller than the main flow it operates on. As the moat is smaller than the RBS debt. But the moat is important. Few will forget it. It is an icon. Here is an emoticon : )
Complain about this comment
Increasing numbers of unemployed, including educated young people
Over-indebted businesses and households
Large trade deficit
Increased taxation
Falling asset prices
Large public debt
Rock bottom interest rates
Savings shrinking, as CPI outstrips interest earned
Increased business and personal insolvency
Weak sterling
Weak dollar
Falling value of pension funds
Public sector cutbacks
I wonder if all the above are somehow connected?
I guess they are just a state of mind, and will all go away if we just think happy thoughts.....so no more bears please............
Complain about this comment
44. MrTweedy wrote:
"....(long list of problems)
I wonder if all the above are somehow connected?
"
Don't you mean "I wonder if ANY of the above are somehow connected?"
I cannot see anything in the proposed Tory economic policy statements (and heaven knows they have been trying to make as few as possible) to provide any more encouragement that they have any 'answers' or at least any more answers than the present government.
As I see it any 'recovery' based on inflating house(asset) prices is not a recovery at all. Thus all economic policy that has as a consequence the re-inflating of asset prices is ipso facto wrong ab initio.
A sound well balanced economy requires that interest rates (the cost of capital) is raised from the 300 year lows that we have at present. The consequence of this not being done as soon as possible is the inevitable disastrous skewing of the economy to supporting the uneconomic and financial non-viable as against supporting the financially rational. Savings must be increased as a proportion of GDP and policy is also working exactly in the opposite direction.
Complain about this comment
41 foredeckdave
A sector failing is a sinking ship that takes many down with it - social class or the education of those on board does not stop it. Bit like the Titanic. And the band played on. And despite skills being transferable to other sectors in practise there is resistance.
I am not sure you can 'build' a society. They evolve. In view of the damage HMG is capable of I would not want them 'building' anything other than a padded cell for themselves on duck island. And no plug on expense please.
UK housing now significantly costs more than the historical average earning ratios regarded as sustainable. Monthly costs are being held down by abnormally low interst rates and that will not last. All involved in housing have been manipulated via supply and demand on both with planning (HMG) and finance (HMG and Banks). Housing at this point remains almost certainly too high in price as a direct result of HMG and Bank failures. Simple as that. In a housing boom those on the ladder benefit, they are older rather than younger. I dont recall many saying I dont want my house to go up. Nor do I recall 4 million households saying give me negative equity, and lock me in to this property, which may well happen.
Most public funded provisions are paid on a rolling programme, ie out of current earnings. The illusion is money is put to one side for future payouts but it isnt, it never has been, it is funded by current income. If you hold a private pension it is different to a state pension as the funds are seperate. It will matter little if you have a private pension if public services fail because you will be busy paying for access to healthcare and the like. As existing pensions are now judged too high to be sustainable how do you think that will be dealt with. Could it be paying for more services, ie less service provision, or reducing pensions by one means or another including skewed taxation. Or both.
''Don't blame those who are old for the mess.'' So who do you suggest are to blame - those at school, those not born yet. Whether you like it or not the older generation has been part of the process of stripping opportunity from the young. I do not blame individuals for that as such, I do blame the group for a lack of social conscience. You are also seeing a government pandering to the majority of an electorate who are older. The government in part reflects the aspirations of the public. Look at the way it runs, not the way it walks and talks.
To talk about 'building societies' is dangerous. What is needed is ethics that is all.
Complain about this comment
No.45. John_from_Hendon
Britain needed to begin paying down its debts, and asset prices needed to fall from their over-inflated highs. Unfortunately, this correction is happening too fast; so the BoE has cut interest rates and increased liquidity in order to try and reduce the pace of the correction.
However, given the high speed of the correction we have ended up with a severely contracting world economy, which in turn brings further problems.
Britian and the USA were hooked on the debt drug, and should have been weaned off it slowly. However, we were froced to go cold turkey, with the result that our economies have gone into shock and threaten to shut down their vital organs....
The only solution is to flood the economy with liquidity, in order to try to bounce the economy back into life, and then attempt to try to reduce the debt levels in a more controlled manner, through increased interest rates and lending controls. However, it's all a massive gamble, and there is a significant risk that it will all end in disaster.
Complain about this comment
45 John from
The problem re policy is simple. Because Brown has always made it plain he would not go we have to wait for a GE. Electorates do not tend to favour being told they will have services cut and be taxed more. So we are in a dutch auction where all sides try to avoid giving a strategy. Sooner or later Brown has to, but in the meantime he ducks the issue and continues spending because the electorate like it today. There is no imperative for the opposition(s) to state what is inevitably a bad case until Brown has, so the whole issue hangs, to the detriment of the country, which is all S&P were saying. Whilst anything is possible Browns position is next to impossible, nobody has ever come back from his sort of ratings so he expects to be out. That is why there are no policy statements other than rhubarb about efficiency savings when it is far more likely much worse will be needed. In the meantime the word has gone out to public funded bodies to prepare for cuts probably in the region of 10 percent at some point and in response stealth cuts have started. Forked tongue.
Complain about this comment
Oo. I have just had a bit of a spooky thought. You know, deflation can be seen as either:
a) a drop in confidence in the future value of assets in terms of money and other disincentives to buy
b) a increase in confidence in the future value of money in terms of assets and other disincentives to spend
If you are a relativist then a) and b) are the same. I put it to you that QE and other such inflationary measures rely on that kind of relativism, but what is actually happening is
a) Low confidence in the future value of assets remains
b) Low confidence in the future value of money increases
This is because there is always some alternative money that can be used - to save in eg: gold, Euro etc. In a sense QE just sparks off a race to the bottom between nations for lowest confidence in their currency! The only survivor has to be a reserve whose quantity cannot be easily manipulated.
Complain about this comment
I still find it incredible that people think a General Election will make any difference to the economics of all this. The papers still hang on every last opinion poll as if the vestiges of the old tribal entrenched political parties matter. ITN News (whisper it quietly here) last evening had well below 50% planning to vote in the next election. This sort of disengagement is what ushered in the Nazis in 1930's Germany. The expenses fiasco has been a necessary cleaning of the Augean stable but is essentially a distraction from the enormity of the economic and moral problems facing the country. The old term 'Life Choices' comes to mind, when speaking of lost generations of unemployed.
People are free to wish for a general election and blame who they like, but face it we are all culpable even marginally. Sadly most do not have the interest, intellect or capacity to appreciate let alone make the decisions needed to get the UK on an even keel.
Complain about this comment
Stephanie, could you or someone else enlighten me please? Debt of course is a principle amount that one owes and must be repaid with interest over time. However, due to the [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]PFI FIDDLE, there are also contractual future obligations to pay which, originally at least, were "off balance sheet" and did not technically count as public debt. I believe that new EU rules disallow this accounting practice.
Nonetheless, it has all added to what we and future generations must pay in the coming decades for alleged benefits and investment now. Did the ratings agencies take this into account before, and are they doing so now?
(Not that I really care too much about the ratings agencies. In view of their track record. I believe that there should be new international legislation to curb them and, in particular, to force them to declare any actual or potential conflicts of interest.)
Complain about this comment
glanafon ""Whether you like it or not the older generation has been part of the process of stripping opportunity from the young."
So true: One reason I will never forgive the New Labour Government. They were of the generation that had it all, student grants, final salary pensions etc. For many of today's youngsters, our leaders have pulled up the ladder which enabled they themselves to rise and prosper.
Historically, since enslavement for debt has gone out of fashion, unsustainable debt has always ended in repudiation or in inflation (a politer form of the same thing.) Thus the moneyed classes were greatly diminished by the inflation of the first world war. (Of course, the non-moneyed classes often lost life and limb and breadwinner instead).
Complain about this comment
I'm not quite sure why the PFI link was removed. To see a measured analysis of some of the issues, click below
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/
Then enter "PFI truth" in the search bar.
The writer expresses the opinion that we don't actually know whether the PFI offers value for money, because the Treasury is unwilling to do the research.
Of course, PFI contractors have been major political contributers, so it hasn't been in the interests of the politicians to ask the right questions either.
Complain about this comment
Saint Vince Cable also called for an election on Question Time last night, as did the audience.
Somebody with a mandate for change at some point soon, must take an axe to the enormous number of non productive jobs in the public sector or this countries economy and its triple AAA rating will continue to slide down the pan.
Complain about this comment
#43 glanafon - OK moats and gravy boats and things are clearly symptomatic of a likely wider problem, - but of themselves they are not a problem other than emotionally and ethically (which I accept is itself a big problem - but a different problem).
If you don´t know what the national debt is then you cannot know that it has to be paid as clearly it is possible to have a debt so big that repayment is impossible under all circumstances.
The problem is that no-one knows what the debt is and that is a problem because it should not be hard to quantify this number. This all comes back to the systemic fiddling of statistics. Even if you know what the debt it has to be compared to something - GDP is a reasonable comparator. However it is beyond doubt that GDP has been fidddled upwards, and so you just re-enter the cycle of obsufication and confusion.
I agree with you that seeking precision in this matter is a waste of time, but seeking to understand the underlying trends is not. This is because I do not wish to see the young shafted any more than you do.
If they are to be advised to leave, or not to return then it is important to understand the basis on which such advice is given. If people do not accept the validity or accuracy of the advice that is of course entirely their perogative. But if you can see a problem and do not mention it then surely that is wrong.
I will be very surprised if you can do anything at all at a general election. The only possible alternatives are Labour or Tory, I would assume that Labour will lose. Whoever wins will do exactly as Washington tells them. The only other alternative is that people are so fed up that a whole bunch of single issue loonies are elected, but even that doesn´t matter much as big business does not pay that much attention to Parliament.
Complain about this comment
#53 sashaclarkson. Is it not the case that Private Eye have asked a lot of questions about PFI, and that their conclusions are fairly unambigious?
Tell me did you become aware of a growing problem of superbugs in hospitals before or after you became aware of PFI.
Complain about this comment
#47. MrTweedy and
#48. glanafon:
But what evidence is there that an election will make any difference? It is my belief that asking for an election is simply national procrastination. All that this does is let the permanent government of the country carry on as business as usual. Even if there was to be an immediate election it will take a year or so before the new government's polices are turned into action, even if they had policies in the first place!
Do you recall the doubling of VAT by the incoming Tory government under Mrs Thatcher? Do you recall the Poll Tax? And these were predetermined policies.
The guys at the Bank of England, the FSA and the Treasury will continue to dictate policy and continue to dictate the wrong policies of generating a pseudo-recovery by asset price inflation as their only club in the arsenal of economic weapons. You cannot hope to 'work towards' doing the right thing in policy terms, just as you cannot be a little bit pregnant! The interest rate weapon's use is insane and was always insane. I see no reason why quantitative easing could not be combined with a rational interest rate policy, not the present insanity.
I do not accept the argument that rates have to be set at zero or the whole borrowing economy will collapse. All the policy has done is increase rate margins for the benefit of the banks and at the expense of the investor and saver. This a short term recipe for disaster and it is critical that it is reversed immediately. I think there is an absolute certainty, not 'a significant risk' that it will end is disaster! The policy is contrary to even contrary economic policy - no economist has set out to destroy the value of money in such a determined and insane way ever in the last 300 years!
WE have reached a three century low in monetary policy, in public probity, in private greed - this is a recipe for revisiting the Glorious Revolution. (Prince Charles even has the right first name to echo his namesakes journey onto the scaffold outside the Banqueting House!!!) Policy must be reversed as it is wrong if we are to save the Nation from turmoil. It is not yet too late but the clock has reached one minute to midnight! The 'wise men' (at the Bank and Treasury) in charge are leading the Nation to destruction.
Complain about this comment
#56 armagediontimes
Oh yes, Private Eye have been gunning for the PFI since the last Tory govt introduced it. (I have been a subscriber for years, and have hardly missed an issue since 1971.) I personally believe they are right, especially in the light of anecdotal evidence I have heard from friends in the NHS and education sector.
However, although PE does tend to get things right, I wanted to post something more neutral, as PE is a campaigning magazine. If we had proper government analyses, it would be possible, for say the Public Accounts Committee, to examine and pick at the official figures.
MRSA etc have, of course been around for longer. I first became aware of that when there was a BBC (Horizon I think) programme about it in the early '90s. Then it was brought home about 12 years ago when a friend had a hip operation which went wrong because of infection. He survived, but has never been able to use the leg again.
Complain about this comment
Before the crisis, the political choice was:
New Labour = Free marketeers, who spend all the profits
Conservatives = Free marketeers, who give the profits back to the private sector
Liberals = Isn't Charles Kennedy a nice man?
Now, the political choice is:
New Labour = Free marketeers, who will be forced to borrow and cut spending and increase taxes, to pay for all the losses racked up during the excesses of 2001 to 2007
Conservatives = Free marketeers, who will be forced to borrow and cut spending and increase taxes, to pay for all the losses racked up during the excesses of 2001 to 2007
Liberals = Isn't Vince Cable a jolly nice man?
Complain about this comment
Private Eye also great on the Railways, Farming and the money pi$$ed away on the large and never ending Government IT projects, which surely have to stop.
These IT projects are almost as pointless job creation schemes as having benefit scroungers watching daytime TV.
Complain about this comment
The GE issue is pertinent.
Whoever gets in - which is highly likely not to be Brown - will be shackled with the debt mainly built up with Brown, and the structural problems which have been building up for decades. They will however have the opportunity to disavow the policies that got us here and set a new path. I fail to see how Brown can do this, ie disavow his own policy history, and until this step is taken then we are in the current hung policy mode.
If you think a non-policy mode is good for anybody you are mistaken, as S&P have quietly tried to say. There is a need to set a new direction. This is done by government not business. It is because business has been setting policy not government that we are here. Business seeks to monopolise and exploit - government is there to regulate and prevent exploitation by ensuring competition occurs. Both are healthy in balance.
When government bows to business then you get this mess, quite apart from anything else because business never usually is allowed to get its own way, when it does get it, it then does not know how to behave because it is new ground. It continues to push against barriers that no longer exist so moves too far and runs amok. Recognise it. The end point of the game is when government waives competiton rules and colludes with business to create monopoly. Lloyds anybody? Incidentally having allowed Lloyds to gobble up HBOS it is ineveitable that at some point the whole thing will have to be broken up under competiton rules. Maybe not, maybe they get away with it, that was Blanks gamble, knowing that Joe Public, HMG, shareholders and employees would probably pay for the deal so it was worth a go.
The start point in sorting this mess is government, just like the starting point of this mess was government failing to do its job.
51 sasha
Repeatedly ingenuity has been used to move figures off the public accounts using mechanisms such as PPP and PFI. The problem is higher costs result due to profit requirements from private sector involvement and liability cannot be removed. If all goes well the private profits are taken and the public pay, if all goes wrong then all liabilities and default costs suddenly show up on the public accounts.
If you intend buying a facility why would you use a middle man which increases the costs and does not mitigat liability unless you wish to hide the matter. Similar ingenuity was employed in privatising utilities. Models which did not yeild the maximum point of sale income were dispensed with out of hand. Eg keeping the infrastructure in public ownership and buying in private management. Assets where sold as this gave a high price.
It is inevitable higher costs are seen by the consumer in these stunts because profits have to be paid in the private sector. The principle objective with utility privatisation was to remove the cost from the PSBR, ie off accounts. On has to be concerned that moving costs off public accounts and replacing them with more new costs on the public accounts - so the declared volume remains the same simply indicates steady expansion of public debt. And ever higher payments required by the individual.
Complain about this comment
#58 "John_from_Hendon"
#47. MrTweedy and
#48. glanafon:
But what evidence is there that an election will make any difference?
It might not, but this lot have been so egregious, that they have to go - "Pour encourager les autres"*. (And it won't be an injustice as it was for poor Byng.) Brown can't correct mistakes that he won't admit he's made. Also, like most governments in power for too long, I believe they've become a serious threat to civil liberties. The Labour party has to sort itself out, or disappear; I don't care which any more, but it needs to be chucked out for its own, and the public's good (in reverse order).
I have few hopes for Cameron, and even less for Osbo the hedgies' friend, but we can get rid of them next time if/when they fail to perform.
*To encourage the others" (to the mods, please don't remove this just because there's a French phrase: it's a widely in English literature.)
Complain about this comment
QE is working like a dream; the markets are surging ahead in response to future prospects of economic growth and a strong recovery by Christmas. Don't write-off Gordon - what price a mini-boom in house prices by this time next year? After that, well, who knows and who cares?
Complain about this comment
57 john from
''I do not accept the argument that rates have to be set at zero or the whole borrowing economy will collapse. All the policy has done is increase rate margins for the benefit of the banks and at the expense of the investor and saver.''
I have never argued for low interest rates, and in fact high interest rates remain available. I see the low interest rates as a way of getting people with money to chip in to pay part of the mess bill, simple and as crude as that.
GE - I have commented about in the previous post. One minute people are saying BoE policy is politcally driven and the next somebody is saying a GE doesnt matter.
59 Mr T
Labour due to internal struggles were at the point of lurching left when Brown brought back Lrd Mandelson. They are likely to lurch left again shortly as internal struggles again develope. They cannot move right or stay as is, so it has to be left. Tories to consolidate on centre ground, caring and sharing baby blue. LibDems who knows, maybe influential or maybe a parrot on somebody elses shoulder, I have no idea, they are just there like a mystery shopper, you know theres one about but you can't be sure and you can't really identify them but you are sure they are jolly nice.
Gotta go.
Complain about this comment
#61 glanafon
I agree with everything you wrote apart from this: "because business never usually is allowed to get its own way" Alas, there have always been favoured businesses, like banks, and the Road Lobby, with embedded links in government, whereas others have been out in the cold, like manufacturing and (in the UK) smaller scale agriculture.
Ah well, like you, loads to do. Computer's off for a day now (I hope!):-)
Complain about this comment
Britain should adopt the Euro
Complain about this comment
John_from_Hendon (#45) & MrTweedy (#59)
Time to call in the Vogons?
Is Labour trying to do a purge? How come my satire was blogdogged when she says it too? Is blogdog in on this?
PS. Head_in_sanders, see end of yesterday's blog for further enlightenment/punishment ;-).
Complain about this comment
No. 63. LordGreenShoots
Well said.
At last someone is talking real sense on here.
(Nudge, nudge, wink, wink)
Complain about this comment
The releases of statistical information from the Governent and others bear out the downgrade (regardless of what you feel about these rating agencies - who I notice regardless of all the comments when this whole mess hit the fan, "were going to feel the full power of the law" FBI investigations etc! And most certainly haven't. WHY?).
Why Stepanie have you nor Robert Peston commented in any of your articles on the movement of crude oil and fuel prices - not only in the last two and half months, which don't tally with any of the drivers of movement - but more especially what happened between 2007 and now (why did the price start rising rapidly as it became obvious in the states(and to the global bankers) we were actually in serious trouble)? And it wasn't just oil what about all the other commodities?
Also what is happening with commodities currently - look at your own website graphs on one month & 12 month commodity movements (based on what dramatic improvements in demand? Especially if the inventories look anything like oil (going through the roof)).
May be you could expand on why specialists in these fields are questioning the movements and trends, which bear no resemblence to actual market conditions (Supply and Demand)! Plus; making comments on the involvement of large(mutual & other) funds/organisations in markets they have never been involved in before. Arbitrage at its worse - trying to claw back the losses, so many of these large organisations have incurred through abysmal management (as in these elites with huge volumes of funds to play with. Are the Pension funds being questioned? I think not).
Finaly WHY are the Insurers both here and more especially in the US delaying and fighting over the claims by financial instutions who have insured their debt (at very nice premiumes when the world was all go,go, go)? Do they not have the funds? AIG is not the only one caught up in this really serious mess (and its captian for the disaster is leaving - A sinking ship? Why are you and Preston not reporting and keeping us updated on these facts?
Complain about this comment
No.67. JadedJean wrote:
"How come my satire was blogdogged when she says it too? Is blogdog in on this?"
We don't want people posting any old stuff on here; a lack of control by the Blogdog would simply allow anarchy to flourish unrestrained.
Standards in blogging must be maintained through benign intervention by those with proper authority.
Complain about this comment
People, people what is the obsession with general elections?
If the tories win what will they do? They need to cut spending and raise taxes. What happens if Labour win? - they need to cut spending and raise taxes
What happens if someone else wins? - They need to cut spending and raise taxes.
What happens, if for whatever reason, any government refuses to do this? There will be a major run on stocks and the currency. Large companies, like big oil and pharmacueticals will relocate somewhere else. The IMF will step in, and compel any government to cut spending and raise taxes.
A lot of the debt exists because it has been raised to support banks. Most likely more money will be required to support banks. No one will refuse to support banks unless and until the US allows some of its banks to fail. If big US banks are allowed to fail - then big British banks will fail the next day.
Look at the US - what is difference between the economic policy of Bush and the economic policy of Obama? - Answer there is no difference at all.
This from Mr. Strummer
The voices in your head are calling
stop wasting your time, there´s nothing coming
only a fool would think someone could save you
Complain about this comment
Message 63 has a lot to lend to it. I have had this scenario in my mind for some time now and know it will quickly lead to terminal damage to the country. The present level of government debt is untenable; to add to it will be a disaster. Having said that though we all have to recognise that there are many who are very happy with the current state of affairs as it suits their interests.
I think the general agreement is that whichever party wins the next election, whenever that might be, has to raise taxes, cut spending and find some more assets to sell off in the hope of creating sufficient confidence to keep people offshore lending to the UK.
We have reached a cross-roads where what has been can no longer be but we have no ideas as to what will take its place.
Given that it took until 1941 to create full employment in Britain after the Depression we need to emulate the mobilisation of resources made at that time. Thankfully we don't have a major war to fight but we need to focus our minds in a similar fashion as to do otherwise will be the equivalent of surrendering to Hitler.
To rely upon international banking and insurance to pay our way out of this is just to add delusion onto illusion. These people cannot be relied upon as most of them are just fantasists playing with virtual money in a parallel world.
We need to get back to making things that other people will value so much they will buy them from us at good prices; and we can also make things for use at home rather than import from elsewhere. Then we need to make lots of whatever it might be to keep the factories going in our own country. R&D needs to be funded and investment in factories and machines encouraged. This is just the start but if we don't start soon we will be in an even deeper mess.
This is why we need a General Election soon so we can start again. It matters not who wins as there is only one possible set of policies going forward
Complain about this comment
stanilic (#72) "This is why we need a General Election soon so we can start again. It matters not who wins as there is only one possible set of policies going forward"
But aren't those policies precisely what successive governments have not been implementng by design for decades? Do you see anyone other than Old Labour (or the BNP) pursuing them?
Complain about this comment
I was in Australia when this first broke, and now I'm in Italy. From outside, your debates have an air of unreality to them. Australia is doing relatively well out of all this (the reasons are not difficult to understand) and the Italian economy is sliding off the cliff (again not difficult to understand). We're somewhere in between. Could we have sense of perspective, please?
And when you've adjusted your binoculars, have a look at how Fiat is financing its expansion. If economics is about expectations, it must also be about knowledge. Why are markets willing to accept Fiat's debt? Do they think Berlusconi will underwrite all this with public funds? Do they know?
Complain about this comment
#72 stanillic,
That what has gone can not be returned to is accepted by most of the bloggers - hooray would echo a number of us.
The proposals in yor 3rd paragraph sound very similar to the protectionist policies that I advocated months ago on Peston's blog. I would go even further by requiring all new investment (public and private) to have a mandatory element of R&D and training built into it. If we are going to re-build our economy then it has to be for the long term. I also believe that there is an argument for bringing the forme public utlities back under government control at least for the time of the 'crisis' so as to control prices. What little finance there is available should be removed from the banks and directed towards the identification and sustainance of new industries (probably environmentally focused) and the assistance of stratgically important organisations and industry sectors.
Please note that I am not proposing some form of centrally controled economy. I am however, demanding that the government take a lead in directing the effort to re-build our economic structures. Neither Labour or Conservatives appear to be offering any real long term choices.
In your final paragraph you say that there is only one set of possible policies. That fortunately is not true. There are a myrad of different policies available - some more radical than others. We need to explore them all in order to decide which will be the most appropriate.
For me, a new economy has to be based upon a more equitable balance between capital and labour. It also has to focus upon the growth of real VALUE rather than on money. It isimperative that mony is put back into it's true role as merely the oil of economic activity rather than the kingpin of the whole economy.
When I have expressed these types of views before, I have been condemned by some as falling prey to the politics of envy. I would counteract that by saying that I am not anti-capital. I am actually proposing turning the Thatcherite Dribble Down principle on its head. I would welcome investment from the likes of Warren Buffett, George Soros and their UK equivalents provided that those investments were primarilly aimed at the growth of UK propserity first and their own enrichment second.
So, what would the reaction of the international community be if we persued such policies? Initially strong condemnation. However, as we proved that we were commited to our policies as sneeking regard followed by general acceptance and support.
Complain about this comment
75 fdd
The best protectionism is to produce something that people want to aquire.
Protectionism as such is not allowed by the EU and is limited by World Trade agreements.
Forced R&D will not work. To start with what would be R&D. who would assess the compliance.
Training is all very well but trainees, who are actually paid very little and exempt from the minimum wage are being dumped. The public sector which has been largely unaffected has taken 2 percent new apprentices on under Browns scheme the rest habe been moved internally.
I doubt there is the cash to buy out shareholers of the utilities at present, it would mean more not less debt.
W Buffet et al are prepared to put cash up if the returns are likely.
You are proposing the equivalent of martial law.
It is well intentioned but I dont think it would work.
Complain about this comment
glanafon,
Let's take a cold hard look at the UK situation. Even if this depression were to last for a decade throughout the world then, the UK would still be like a rudderless yacht - still floating but going nowhere, a danger to itself and other shipping! The rocks are clearly visible and if we don't take action now then it will be too late.
You once accused me of concentrating upon what I would LIKE to see. I accept the charge happily. By so doing, I hope to provoke participants to start to THINK about how we can get ourselves ('cause nobodyelse will) out of this mess. The more ideas that are floated from the sublime to the ridiculous the better - with a litle luck a synthesis will emerge into which the majority can buy.
However, to answer your points:
"the best protectionism...." At the moment we don't know what that is and our present export results on't really give us a clue.
"not allowed by the EU" Agreed. However, experience shows that when pushed hard enough the EU will allow a derogation. We may even get support from both France and Germany. As for the WTO, who really cares?
"Forced R&D will not work" You cannot say that as we have never tried it. Perhaps some, if not all of the requirement could be met by the sponsorship of University research programmes. As for the compliance, I will leave that to the initiators.
"Training". You are using a very narrow definition. Less than half of our managers and supervisors in the UK have had any formal training. It could be a requirement that all specialist are enroled in professional institutes qualification programmes or if already members their liftime learning programmes. Non-specialists to achieve the relevant NVQ qualfication. So I'm really refering to a Learning Organisation.
"Cash to buy out shareholders" I quite agree and a waste of money. On an emergency basis the government takes rsponsibility for MANAGING the utlities not owining them.
"Buffet et al" Read again. At present their investments are return first and foremost. Nobody would ask them to invest in proposals that were not likely to make a return. However, I am toying here with concepts of equity - parity of esteem if you wish. Investing money gives no more than equal rights in the project. The level and pace of return is not driven by the investor. That may sound crazy at first sight but look at the way China, Russia and Brazil are approaching inward investment.
"Martial Law" NO WAY I am proposing that government takes a lead and is clear that any organisation taking support will be required to meet the conditions. Individual firms can do a Barclays if they so wish.
Would it work? I don't know but at least it's worth thinking about even if you decide against it. More importantly it offers more for the future wellbeing of the nation than what either party is presently proposing.
Complain about this comment
foredeckdave (#77) ""Training". You are using a very narrow definition. Less than half of our managers and supervisors in the UK have had any formal training. It could be a requirement that all specialist are enroled in professional institutes qualification programmes or if already members their liftime learning programmes. Non-specialists to achieve the relevant NVQ qualfication. So I'm really refering to a Learning Organisation."
A reminder of why it's all far more of a challenge than you credit (even leaving Leitch (2006) aside).
Complain about this comment
foredeckdave (#77) Two heuristic questions for you:
1) What is 'learning'?
2) Why is 'shared-environment' considered so unimportant today?
Complain about this comment
Some Proposals (just to get things going!)
1. Publish the full income details and full expenditure details of everyone receiving an MP's salary or more.
2. Wealth Tax on everyone worth as much as or more than an MP.
(NB above points - tongue firmly in cheek)
See what I mean - public outrage, and the present polled desire for an election now from two out of three of the polled population - what can it achieve? Except, that is swapping one set of self publicists for another whose financial credibility may or may not be just as suspect!
The people want vengeance - I say let them have vengeance - fire the Bankers and 'Wise Men' who created the crisis that is at the root of all this. The government's, and opposition's, mistake is to ally themselves with the troublemakers just because they want a job with them when the 'retire' from parliament - which may be quite soon for many of them. Both parties can redeem themselves by taking it out on the Governor of the Bank of England, the MPC, the FSA and the Treasury Mandarins. If they fail to do this they will inevitably inflict damage on the country far long lasting than that on the economy. (See Archbishop's of Canterbury's statement.)
Complain about this comment
77 fdd
You are setting a monumental target which is likely to fall over before anyone gets remotely anywhere near achieving it. Meanwhile one in five children live in this situation -
''Today, children in Britain live in more fear and ignorance of each other. The well-off are ferried around by car, told not to walk down the wrong street - and, if they do walk, told that other children are dangerous and not to be mixed with. Poorer children are told they are worth less in comparison with others. They are labelled as failures in a country where we avidly count academic qualifications. Poor children are told that they are poor due to the fault, failure and the lack of "responsibility" of their parent(s).'' extract from the Guardian.
Does anybody seriously suggest that the 1.2 million that will lose their jobs in this mess are freckless benefit scroungers. They will however be poor. This is in addition to the 1.8 we started with. The benefit scroungers image is just an excuse to scapegoat.
This oppressive situation for a large number of kids is hardly helpful in developing capability and success in later life. this is one of the reasons for the under acheivement in this country. This is why many kids go through education but end up underachieving. Why we then end importing people from overseas to do skilled work - its easier than sorting the problem of the countries own children. It is a ridiculous waste of resource. But when some of the older ones in a population want to act like teenagers and it is adulated what do you expect.
Anyway to try to answer some of your points.
I do not share your enthusiasm for conflict with the EU and the rest of the world on trade. The UK has to trade with somebody. The issue is reducing imports and that is happening. If the UK has to be poorer to reduce imports then that will happen. If protectionism was introduced then multinationals would look hard at being here.
R&D - I have worked in R&D, it is expensive. A large business will only usually spend a few percent, 3 or 4 max of turnover on R&D, although there are a few exceptions. This means that you need large businesses to fund large R&D programmes it depends on the sector. Small businesses can be innovative which is slightly different but they will never fund large R&D programmes. So where is the new R&D to come from. Particularly as large companies are shrinking. The cost of R&D is why cross national programmes have developed, relating to the very protectionism you want to introduce. Protectionism would probably stop this sort of R&D.
How does taking control of utilities help, particularly if ownership remains private. It would be challenged in court anyway, and quite rightly. Further the government has no expertise in managing commerce. The problem with privatised utilities is they demand dividends paid to shareholders so cost more. And you can only sell them once.
Training - well uni fees are set to rise probably to 5K pa. Fees havent stopped people going to uni they say but I do believe they do, and they clearly impact on choice with students who are poor making decisons because of funds not ability. Apprenticeships are in trouble. And by that I don't mean burger outlets, I mean old fashioned trades. Apprentices are being laid off or not taken on. Browns initative has had very little impact it would seem. On the job training is usually very limited. It may be worthwhile but it is limited. As soon as anybody attempts to learn anything serious it needs the support of the employer which is often absent and you cannot force support anymore than you can legistlate ageism away.
Investment etc W Buffett. The government has no money spare. EU funds are conditional and limited. You cannot expect to gain private funds without relinquishing control and giving a return. Innovation is difficult and not all propositions work so VC demands high returns to cover losses elsewhere. They will not get involved without prospects.
If you are referring to the way the MIT (ministry of industry and trade) in Japan was reported as working (1970s) - that worked at the end of the manufacturing line, ie attempted to say to Japanese industry - you produce and we will help with disposal, ie effectively dumping of excess units. It ran into trouble due to resistance to dumping in Europe and the US but did help investment in production units and hence R&D. It was a device of its time. It could not work now in all probability.
Would your strategy work. Sadly, Probably not, that is the reality, most developments do not work. That is why innovation is difficult, it inevitably involves failure. Even when failure is advised as likely those involved in support expect a different outcome then get disapointed. Do you think failure is helpful in a crisis. You are seeing many initaives failing at the moment. It all weakens credibility. Particularly when it is politically sold as an immediate solution.
The issue is growth. Not stability, not decline, growth. Once you have growth then if the growth continues you can end up with something worthwhile. The recession will create opportunity but if growth comes it has to be slower than many will want, but that is reality. Benefical intervention in processes is very difficult. Making money available really means making public money available and that diverts resource from elswhere. Funds will not be made available casually. Further - Simply the fact the money is made available will create ghost activities which are designed to look like whatever the funding is for simply to get the funding as an end in itself. This is IMO already an effect with some public funding. And sometimes those involved with dispensing funds end up being pressurised into the game to meet targets IMO.
Prof D Blanchflower has said the issue is a lost generation, and I agree but he has not said how the issue can be dealt with other than it will demand money. You are probably looking at the need to create publicly funded work and training programmes to keep people occupied. The dangers are it becomes permanent and that the support structure cannot be put in place properly so it descends into Millibands unemployed loft lagging crews for other needy groups. Which moves dangerously close to a new ecomonic casts system.
The problem is this country has lost its social conscience. It is not an economic problem it is a social one.
We are in all likelihood looking at the Japanese economic experience, the lost decade. So take a look at the outcomes in Japan, I doubt you will like them. I would guess at increases stratification of society and commerce, polarisation of classes of people. More embedded negative attribuites, less social mobility. Reduction of public funded programmes. In commerce the likely outcome is more very small businesses and very big businesses with a pancake structure rather than a pyramid structure. The big guys seeking economy of scale but lacking innovation and the small guys trying to fit in the cracks and be innovative.
I went through many scenarios during the last recession trying to second guess outcomes in order to plan what we currently do. Growth, flexibility, innovation, ethics, sustainability, future heritage, overhead avoidance, state of the art comms, came out on top and still do, although others are welcome to disagree.
Apologies for length of post.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#81) "'Today, children in Britain live in more fear and ignorance of each other.'
I hope you don't expect The Guardian to tell you why that is so. They don't want you to know what 'shared environment' doesn't account for either.
It's 1950 UNESCO thing.
Complain about this comment
82 jj
yes I know
but you have yet to suggest much of an populist answer
shame about the tea party : )
but your nefarious rhetoric is definately improving, you havnt been at all guassian l8ly
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#83) What's wrong with a bit of state-driven family-planning? It's all the rage in China. Note how UNESCO takes a subtle, even-handed, approach to these matters?
Complain about this comment
84 jj
State driven - Nothing to object to provided it is above board and not coercive (the term was coined by Edgar Schein in 1961 in relation to his study of Chinese POWs' indoctrination)
BTW subtle is not necessarily a good word, it can imply a near neighbour, subtefuge
Your faith in the state is most reassuring
I see no fear of carrots only sticks
You do seem to enjoy a sterile debate : )
Complain about this comment
#81 glanafon. You can actually sell utilities more than once - British Energy being an example.
The Japanese example is not directly comparable. Japan was operating in an environment when most of the rest of the world was doing OK. Japàn had, and has, a modern and extensive manufacturing base, high net savings, and had minimal expenditure on weapons and defence. Even with these advantages the experience was not positive - even on a best case analysis it will be much worse in the UK.
You may not be a fan of protectionism - but you are going to get it anyway, this time through the mechanism of competitive currency devaluations.
#82 Jadedjean - This is all rubbish. You are occupying the worst of all possible positions. Even if you are right you are still wrong. The problems are all upon us right now - even if you have identified a problem there are no short term answsers, so your problem is a problem without a solution, and is therefore an irrelevant problem. Any possible solution to your problem would create more severe problems than the problem you are seeking to solve.
In fact you are probably worse than wrong. Elsewhere on the BBC there are people whinging about preceived shortfalls in the luxury transportation offered by British Airways. These people are unlikely to know how to deal with what is coming. If any refuge can be found it is likely to be in the third world, where people already know how to cope with an absence of luxury and do not have any expectation that they deserve to be hand fed roast swan (or whatever these people want to eat), and who do not have any desire to consume thousands of calories a day that their bodies do not need.
Complain about this comment
86 arm n leg times
I see you are fully charged and in full optimism rebuttal mode. It is good to see such energy about.
I am sure many are going to be introduced to the bear necessities of life. That is their problem.
JJs hope - it would appear - is that somehow somebody elses 'snip in time saves mine'
I see a few peaceful protesting Tamils, 45 days and still going has absorbed most of the police in London.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#85) "You do seem to enjoy a sterile debate : )"
Kids are for life.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#86) "This is all rubbish. You are occupying the worst of all possible positions. Even if you are right you are still wrong. The problems are all upon us right now - even if you have identified a problem there are no short term answsers, so your problem is a problem without a solution, and is therefore an irrelevant problem. Any possible solution to your problem would create more severe problems than the problem you are seeking to solve."
China is addressing it. Only Centrally Planned governments can effectively do that. Take note. Unless it is addressed it will just get worse. Read what Herrnstein and Murray proposed. Herrnstein knew a thing or two about what matters in the control of behaviour and economics (behaviourists talk in terms of parameters of reinforcement), most people don't, they beg all the critical questions.
Complain about this comment
glanafon,
Don't worry about the length - at least 2 of us are thinking about where we actually are and what we may be able to do to get us out of the mess.
I do accept that we have a major social problem and that it impacts directly upon our economic condition. Up to the 80s, it was defined by the British class system and elements of that still exist. Since Thatchers war on society the concept of working class has all but disappered to be replaced by an under-class who (depending upon your standpoint) are disadvantaged or work-shy scroungers. However, if we are to address these issues effectively we do, as you point out, need financial resources. Hence my concentration upon organisations and their development.
The investment issue is of particular relevance. Harry Enfield's 'Loads O' Money' has come to typify the UK national approach to wealth and economics. This reached its zenith last year when some think tank actually reported that the UK should abandon large areas of the country because 'wealth' was really only generated within a 50 mile radius of The City. This is such obvious and arrogant nonesence but it passed relatively unchallenged! Money was,is and will continue to be merely a process of exchange. In itself it has no value or power. However, we have built a massive industry on the back of an assumption that money is actually the prime product.
The effects of this has totally undermined our economy. Everything is for sale to whoever has the MONEY. The pressure to produce dividend superceedes the future needs of the organisation. The pressure, to fund operational costs from debt rather than savings. All of these things have wrecked the very roots of our industrial/commercial enterprises. Hence my desire to put money back into its box as a first and essential measure.
We are never going to be able to compete on a cost basis whilst there are still developing nations. Germany has proven that you cannot over-rely upon technical exports (of existing technology). Hence I firmly believe that we need to foster a national passion for technological innovation and that this has to be protected. Sure we will sporn a number of dead ducks that comes with the territory.
A spin-off from that would be that the UK returned to smaller enterprise units. Much research has been done in the UK by Warwick BS, Manchester BS and Lancaster BS on effectice unit sizes. In the UK, we appear to be more effective in units of less than 300 people. It seems to be a cultural thing. So perhaps we need to re-look things like quantities of scale and synergy (can anybody actually show where synergy was ahieved via combination?).
Finally for JJ - tombs have been written on the meaning of learning and nearly as many definitions have been forwarded. I am not about to start trying to add to them. Just take my use as refering to the general 'public' understanding of the term.
Complain about this comment
#87 glanafon - I assume you to have heard of the phrase "Take the most from thine own eye" It´s a bit rich to accuse me of negativity given that you are (accurately) reporting that children in Britain live in fear and ignorance of each other. I do not think that I can compete with this level of desolation.
#89 Jadedjean - So when is China expecting to see the results of its actions? The western economic model has probably passed the tipping point - if it hasn´t then it will within 2 or 3 years at most. Nothing you say, even if correct, is relevant against this timeline.
Are you aware that the Chinese and the Russians fell out in the 1950´s. Stalin expressed the view that a Russian first strike would account for 250 million Chinese and Mao said OK go ahead that is an acceptable loss. You will forgive me if I don´t rush to laud the merits of Centrally Planned governments.
Complain about this comment
88 jj
Quite, and the problems of the parents should not be visited on the child.
There is a conflict in your position generally and that is that you basically complain about the infiltration of government by intellectual dwarves scuttling on board, yet wish for state intevention
Einstein was proposed to by a socialite who was good looking but not a brainbox. She said something along the lines of lets have children - with your brains and my looks they will be great. Albert replied something along the lines of what happens if they turn out with my looks and your brains.
So if the state is purged of dwarves and interventionist policy is enacted the question is how long before a new set of dwarves infiltrate and the policy is corrupted. As dwarves abound and are persuasive by your own complaint. Let alone the sociopath who you recognise is difficult to identify.
At that point you have the worse of all mix as Albert was suggesting to the socialite. There are more than one outcomes possible and you seem to believe there will only be one.
There is nothing wrong with policy where people are involved and educated and fully informed and have choice.
Complain about this comment
foredeckdave (#90) "Finally for JJ - tombs have been written on the meaning of learning and nearly as many definitions have been forwarded. I am not about to start trying to add to them. Just take my use as refering to the general 'public' understanding of the term."
But as the general public hasn't a clue, one must conclude this means that neither have you. So why are you not prepared to learn? Why is all that you are thinking fundamentally misguided?
These are genuine questions.
For example you write:
"Since Thatchers war on society the concept of working class has all but disappered to be replaced by an under-class who (depending upon your standpoint) are disadvantaged or work-shy scroungers. However, if we are to address these issues effectively we do, as you point out, need financial resources."
Do you see your naive assumption here which begs the critical question?
Why is shared-environment really not very important anymore?
Why are you incapable of asking/addressing the right questions?
Writ large, this is why these problems happen.
Complain about this comment
#77 foredeckdave - You ask who really cares about the WTO. I wish I knew, but someone does.
If you are a member of the WTO you cannot deny access to your country on religious grounds. Saudi Arabia historically denied access to Jews, and then it joined the WTO. Did it start admitting Jewish people? or did it issue residency cards in Arabic to people who could not read or understand Arabic and falsely identify some of those people as Jewish, and then use its residency card data to compile reports detailing the number of Jewish people within its borders?
Apparently the WTO is all about free trade, and free trade is good. Imagine what would happen to free trade and to "goodness" if you started to game its rules. I therefore conclude that Saudi Arabia must have opened its doors to Jewish people - because to have done otherwise would be bad, and Gordon Brown was fullsome in his praise of the rulers of the KSA, and he wouldn´t offer such praise to bad people as that may lead some people to conclude that he is also a bad person.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#91) "Jadedjean - So when is China expecting to see the results of its actions?"
You're already seeing them, or at least, almost everyone else is.
"The western economic model has probably passed the tipping point - if it hasn't then it will within 2 or 3 years at most. Nothing you say, even if correct, is relevant against this timeline."
How about a Democratic-Centralist revolution?
"Are you aware that the Chinese and the Russians fell out in the 1950's."
Yes. China thought Russia revisionist, i.e was giving up on Stalinism. (Golitsyn said it was a sham to fool the West..)
"Stalin expressed the view that a Russian first strike would account for 250 million Chinese and Mao said OK go ahead that is an acceptable loss. You will forgive me if I don't rush to laud the merits of Centrally Planned governments."
What about RAND and NATO's war game scenarios? Didn't they have similar calculations? You must not take Neo-Liberal (anarchistic) propaganda too seriously.
The UK's real government (Civil Service) has been systematically undermined by economic anarchists for decades. That has to be reversed. The BNP today is basically what Old Labour used to be, they're just not very good at it. What you are seeing at present is just theatrics.
Complain about this comment
91 arm n leg times
But I remain optomistic whereas you remain pessimistic, or perhaps just mystic, I don't know. I dont see much of a problem with a drop in wealth overall. I see problems with localised poverty. If people can only chose from a few types of bread rather than 20 to 30 different types what is the problem. Where is the disaster if air travel reduces. If you acknowledge the real problem is children disenfrachised for no fault of their own why are you so worried about a few pampered types having a wake up call.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#91) Read this and think:- high prevalence of subversive/narcissists/psychopaths. That's what the problem is. Care In The Community does not work here.
Complain about this comment
Just to clarify - I am not aware of any such phrase as "take the most from thone own eye" - I suspect it should read "...mote..."
Complain about this comment
98 arm n leg
I hadnt heard that one
I'll put it with 'take the moat from thone expenses'
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#92) "Quite, and the problems of the parents should not be visited on the child."
But they are, and there's nothing you can do about that - that's the point about shared environment not being what matters... behaviour is largely genetic (and environment covers everything other than the genes themelves!). What the general public (educated and lay) take to be common knowledge, is false.
There are two major opposing forces converging. One is the evidence from behaviour-genetics, and the other is the dysgenic mess which has been made through promoting naive equalitarianism and meritocracy.
You (and many others) will need to carefully think about the latter I suggest.
Complain about this comment
100 jj
There are many forces converging and you have no answers only problems. I doubt you know some of the forces converging or their effects.
The issue is not elimination but bringing forth what capability is there and education and support - help the individuals involved perform to their own benefit and that of society.
I fail to see why an entire section of the population should pay a price to allow the sleepy majority to be comfortable in some way they personally define.
What do you suggest is done with people you look down on, which could well include me. They are here they exist and they have rights.
I think you need to think carefully. You are a one club golfer. You have yet to do anything other than promote discord and possibly appeal to a very small number who are vain and think they are clever. You have no solutions other than coercion that I can see, and essentially you promote an experiment which would last generations with no forecastable outcome.
If the people you object to want to engage voluntarily with fully informed consent with your game that is their right. Otherwise they have rights not to. There are many inefficiencies in any society, why not concentrate on developing other strategems in parallel. You might find one that people respond to. Your existing strategy fails because it is entirely selfish.
No culture can expect to last forever and if this one fails it will be for many reasons not one. I find it quite extraordinary that you can even consider that Old Labour or the BNP are any sort solution in the face of the problems mankind face, are they really that good. If so why have they failed so far. Or are they just another bunch peddling a solution they believe in, which is what you accuse other groups of.
Complain about this comment
#101 glanafon,
Why so hard on Old Labour? Sure they didn't have all the answers but at least their thinking was loosely based upon an idea of society? The idea of Old labour that JJ promotes bears little resemblance to my understanding and experience of the socialist principles that underlay their proposals. It was only when factions started to play politics that the old Labour Party fell apart.
You may not agree with the political stances of people like Bevan, Gaitskell, Benn or even the much lampooned Kinnock but you cannot doubt their sincerity in championing a view of society. Today I see no such conviction in the leadersip of any of our political parties.
Apart from that I agree fully with the rest of your post. Too much time and typing has been wasted upon such a negative and minority viewpoint.
Complain about this comment
Life is going to be boring, miserable and increasingly hard until someone comes up with revolutionary technologies for production of energy and resources.
Complain about this comment
102 fdd
I'm not against Old Labour. They just went that too ginger at the end. He was never going to get the hot seat. And wasnt he smug on one of those quiz shows a while back. I'm just a wee tad tired of the issue of 'intervention'. In particular that there is a one shot easy answer.
It would be nice to hear something simple like Frank saying he has gone turbo. I see he is queueing. I'm off.
Complain about this comment
Going to the country?
There seems to be a simple economic consideration for Tory MPs whether to own up and repay their expenses or to 'resign the party whip'. If there's too much money at stake then resign the whip. If you would do better by staying on, then give back some expenses and stay in the party. A more difficult choice for Labour MPs as they also run the risk of not being re-elected. But then they have a middle choice of brazening it out as their standards of integrity are lower.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#101) "..."you have no answers only problems. I doubt you know some of the forces converging or their effects...
I fail to see why....
...You are a one club golfer. You have yet to do anything other than promote discord and possibly appeal to a very small number who are vain and think they are clever......... You have no solutions other than coercion that I can see.................. Your existing strategy fails because it is entirely selfish.... I find it quite extraordinary that you can even consider that Old Labour or the BNP are any sort solution in the face of the problems mankind face....."
Not a glimmer of awareness into your ignorance or what I have posted, just more aspirational verbiage which led to these problems which keep growing like Topsy.
Try to identify the driving variables when they are pointed out to you. Try applying a little science/logic instead of indulging in creative 'motivational' writing like foredeckdave and so many others of the lost, 'windy', neo-liberal, generations.
Complain about this comment
106 jj
Dear oh dear oh dear.
I am hearing from you to the effect that apparently the whole problem is down to a sub group of people - as categorised by you - that you appear to want to 'intervene' with by one means or another for the 'good' of the rest of the population. That seems a reasonable summary of your position.
This 'intervention' appears to have a downside for the group you wish to 'intervene' with. You have not once suggested that this group be party to the process of 'intervention'. That seems a reasonable synopsis also.
To justify your position you use a relatively recent invention called 'science' a branch of which you select to suit your arguement. You appear to believe this 'science' has the answer and that all that is needed to know is now known. Or else you would not be so confident in it.
That is an extraordinary achievement if it is the case, that in a relative blink of an eye in human history just a few people have identified definately the outstanding major problem that faces man. Such a development would better Darwin. Do you think you are better than Darwin.
If it is the case then in time it will be recognised. If it is ill founded that too will be found out. You could be Hooker, not Darwin. Hooker was a clever man and did some exceptional work but is now regarded as a clown. Time will tell.
In the mean time due consideration can be made without rushing, because if your solution is so effective it will still be effective in the future, otherwise it would not be such a great solution would it. Darwins stature has grown with time not diminished.
You should not be worried that your proposition has a 'date stamp' of opportunity of take-up on it. In fact if you are right the longer that is taken then the stronger the case. As per Darwin. So why are you so agitated about the matter. Do you worry that it is a matter of opportunity, of people being receptive.
So I guess there is no rush then.
There is nothing creative or motivational in what I write, just a wish that people are treated fairly and that if acts are undertaken against them that it is with their fully informed consent. There is the principle of the Hippocratic Oath, which whilst no longer sworn, still underlies the approach to western medicine, which is the area into which you are transgressing. I would at least like to hear what a specialist medical practiioner had to say about your proposition.
Are you by any chance becoming frustrated that there are so few people who appear to wish to take up your proposition. You should not be because if you are right then time will tell.
There you are, that all seems very logical don't you think. ; )
Complain about this comment
#95 Jadedjean - How can you be so confident that what is coming out of China is attributable to your theories. China has been the largest most advanced economy for at least 18 of the previous 20 centuries. Unsurprising really when you consider all that is China.
I see no great enthusiasm for revolution - and even if I am wrong beware, for todays revolutionary is often tomorrows reactionary.
What about the Rand Corporation and NATO - do you see me defending those organisations?
Your theories remain irrelevant because, as previously stated, even if they are valid they are too long term to address the issues before us. Western economies tend to experience problems at any time of oil price volatility - I have yet to hear any suggestion that oil price movements are correlated to IQ.
Complain about this comment
#96 Glanafon - You should see problems with an overall drop in wealth. The whole system is predicated on continious expansion and falls over if this cannot be maintained.
Obviously it will fall over at some point - unless perpetual motion really exists. Every time there is a wobble more and more extreme measures are adopted to try and maintain momentum.
In many ways people are subservient to the economy - and not the other way round. It is not much different to the Aztec cult of human sacrifice.
As the cult is revealed for what it is people will become unhappy and angry. You cannot predict how they will respond - but not well, and I think that is a given.
It is nothing to do with optimism or pessimism, but in trying to understand what is going on.
All those with power are desperately trying to reflate the bubble - there is no thought and no strategy as to what happens if this is not possible. Failure to reflate is bad - if there is a failure then some group must be to blame - and they will be identified and punished. That could be anyone - there is no logic and no reason.
How reasonable is it to suppose that reflation is possible? As far as the UK is concerned a first step is to identify what it is that can drive the economy forward. But the problem is no-one can.
The system has begun to eat itself - and if unchecked this has obvious consequences. The rich want to get richer and that is a given. There doesn´t seem to be any money available in real estate, debt and stock speculation - so they move to commodities. Oil is now over $60/bbl - there are no fundamentals to support this, it is driven by speculation. Those doing the speculation are aware of the fact that oil over about $50/bbl has material adverse economic effects - but they don´t care, they are economic psychopaths.
The political arm of the system has already been eaten. You want a general election - but what will it change? There is no developed and enunciated political programme for dealing with an economy that cannot remoreslessly expand. Everyone´s policy is the same - economic growth at all and every cost.
There is just a giant vacuum with regard to one of the two potential outcomes - i.e. economic decline, and this when you know that decline must set in at some point. But it is worse - it is not just that the downside is not planned for, it is completely ignored and it almost heretical to even mention its existence.
Complain about this comment
109 arm n leg
You can't chose what era you live in.
You comment that the 3rd world can cope 'better' if things go sour.
Those at the bottom of the stack here can't lose much more.
> If losses occur they will be higher up the stack.
100 years ago people did not consume so much and worked physically harder.
Why do you fear so much particularly when it is outside your control. That is not a homily it is just a fact, emotion does not help. In every case I have got emotional in decision making it has adversely affected my judgement.
A GE is a purge and a moving forward it will have a benefical effect.
It doesnt make much difference if oil is made scarce via speculators or by it running out surely. Goodness I like that one thats almost an arm n leg one.
> Values will change if the scenery changes.
But it might all come right conventionally anyway who knows. But even if it does then long term unemployment looks likely to be a problem with a probably trend of growing youth unemployment.
The desire to extend the retirement age to mitigate pension problems will probably come to fruition which will create as many problems as it solves if the amount of work in the sytem does not expand.
Quite extraordinary efforts are being made to reset things.
At some stage housebuilding will restart but prices are still to high. I would be surprised if a programme was not planned ready to go at the right time. If necessary a Freddie Mac Fanny Mae type deal will be floated to encourage buying via a medium term fixed rate package, that is my guess. Because it is something that was proved to have worked.
But who knows.
Why are you bothered about trying to understand madness.
Cheers : )
Complain about this comment
MrTweedy # 47
"The only solution is to flood the economy with liquidity..."
And where is all this going to come from?
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#107) "I am hearing from you to the effect that apparently the whole problem is down to a sub group of people - as categorised by you - that you appear to want to 'intervene' with by one means or another for the 'good' of the rest of the population. That seems a reasonable summary of your position."
No it is not. You've just fabricated rather than make any effort to grasp what I have said.
I advised you to read what Herrnstein and Murray recommended as social policies at the end of 'The Bell Curve' (1994). Look these up yourself. You will find that efforts have been made to implement these by governments on both sides of teh Atlantic, just not very effectively. That's neo-liberalism for you, you just can't herd cats.
Finally, a bit of irony. Few people know that Hitler was copying Jewish eugenics in the promotion of Germany nationalism
Complain about this comment
''The government is urging graduates to consider a spell working abroad, whether in internships or volunteering, to avoid the worst of the recession.'' BBC News
Complain about this comment
112 jj
As you are saying I have not stated what you are proposing can you briefly post your understanding of your own policy. Could I suggest less than 330 words a comparable size to the sermon on the mount. It shouldnt be a problem for a brainbox like you, and you have posted thousands of word todate on the subject. Thanx.
111 LibKurt
Interesting question. Coffers dry at sometime. The seriousness of the problem is leaking out with increasingly bizarre notions from HMG. Sending young people who want a job on self funded work experience holidays overseas being the latest. I thought we were told we were best placed for a downturn. HMG now as the Pied Piper. So we now have pensioners who have no right to work past retirement age, forecasts of a lost generation of school leavers, and a government recommendation that new graduates flee the country. And still no action on a expanding public sector. And protestations a rating agency has got it wrong when it looks at the sovereign rating. It is all moving faster than the establishment can respond and assess. Just like the audience on Question Time last night
Complain about this comment
#113
Well it would be the worst way to spark off a permanent brain drain. Once the average Brit gets out of their country and away from the usual Brit hangouts like Ibiza, they tend to suffer a combination of disillusionment and joy. The former at how rubbish the UK actually is, and the latter at the wondrous new life that lies before them.
Complain about this comment
GROUP POLITICS
armagediontimes (#109) "Your theories remain irrelevant because, as previously stated, even if they are valid they are too long term to address the issues before us. Western economies tend to experience problems at any time of oil price volatility - I have yet to hear any suggestion that oil price movements are correlated to IQ."
China is doing very well with ooal. What did Thatcher attack first? See Nigel Lawson(Enegery minsiter at the time) on all this. There is lots of coal. What is the anthorpogenic global warming 'story' all about? Could it be an effort to limit China's economic growth?
You are still not paying attention. Watch the video, read the report, and work through this. It's not kids' stuff. Why has the critical vangard of this always been Jewish? Might it just be that they don't want larger, able, groups amidst whom they have settled, implementing the very policies which their closely knit group practices, and thus compete with them for hegemony?
When better informed, post again ;-)
Complain about this comment
115 frank
Thats how I see it, once gone few to return. Economic hari kari, the youngest and brightest flown. And if things are better elsewhere then the message will come back to compadres. What is Brown up to. Does he even know. Zombi government
Complain about this comment
errata (#116) China is doing very well with ooal. What did Thatcher attack first? See Nigel Lawson (Energy minister at the time) on all this. There is lots of coal. What is the anthropogenic global warming 'story' all about? Could it be an anarchistic effort to limit China's economic growth which is excellent advertising to the Third World for statist Democratic-Centralism?
Glanafon (#114) Show a little more respect and I might be a little more helpful. As it is, your behaviour in response to constructive criticism/education is rude, ignorant and arrogant. It's time for you to do some work in your own interest rather than waffling about inconsequentials like foredeckdave.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#117) "Thats how I see it, once gone few to return. Economic hari kari, the youngest and brightest flown."
So long as the young, brightest and conscientious stay, does it matter? We want rid of narcissists and psychopaths surely, just as we need a reduction in low-skilled immigration and family sizes in the underclass.
Complain about this comment
118 jj
Another no show then. Cul de sac. Diversionary tactics next. Why are you so afraid to state your policy in short form when you so extensively post. I'm not surprised. But it is a mistake not to state your policy because the main conclusion can only be that it is a problem if you post it.
Diversionary tactics - Coal. Yes of course Thatcher decided in the 1970/80s that the main strategic weapon to use against the Chinese was the UK to stop using coal. I understand now.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#120) Look up the links that I have provided, or stop wasting my, and other people's time.
Complain about this comment
122 jj
Please post a summary of your policy or stop promoting it.
This is a public forum and I am entitled to post on it within the rules, as is anybody else. It is up to anybody such as yourself who is repeatedly posting to the effect that they have a policy they want implementing to state what it is.
You are the one who has to justify your position not me.
The fact you cannot or will not summarise your policy within the size of the text of the Sermon on the Mount which is only a few hundred words long when you spout endlessly and obliquely on the subject says you do not have a policy or your policy is not sound.
Your posts today in the last couple of hours far exceeded the size of the Sermon on the Mount, so you are quite capable of making a summary of that size. Until you clearly state your policy you are the one who is wasting peoples time by promoting something which you are not prepared to state clearly.
Complain about this comment
#120, #122 etc glanafon
You are self-evidently a kind, decent and reasonable individual, but I think the time has come to stop feeding the mad TROLL. I think we've got the classic symptoms here?
It's a beautiful day, I'm doing some gardening and going to the beach. Have a good 'un and relax! :-)
Complain about this comment
122 erratum
reference to 122, should be reference to 121 (118 etc), but I would have thought it was obvious.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#122) Read the links in #116. Carefully. You don't appear to have a clue what has been pre-occupying policy makers for decades.
Sashaclarkson (#123) Was that that really necessary, or helpful? He hasn't a clue, nor do you it would seem. This has all been driving policy one way or the other for years (see Murray on Losing Ground). You both need to wake up. What I have been refering to are the long-brewing consequences of neglect/subterfuge.
You are lost in your own fantasies/ignorance.
Complain about this comment
123 sasha
Funnily enough the garden and beach are calling also.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#124) Here's some further help/context when you read the link(s) on Herrnstein and Murray and policy.
Complain about this comment
THE PEOPLE WHO DON'T WANT TO KNOW
That's how anarchism works - subterfuge.
Complain about this comment
#118 Jadedjean. I do hope that your message is not intended to imply that Thatcher first attacked coal mining and coal miners. Because if it is it would reveal a very weak grasp of contemporary history - and may have implications for the intelligence that you purport to revere so much.
As a matter of historical fact Thatcher first moved against steel workers (1980), followed by the Argentenians (1982). Coal mining was attacked in 1984/5.
Coal mining was attacked in order to pave the way for the large scale exploitation of UK North Sea gas reserves. I think you will find the law changed shortly after the defeat of the miners to permit the burning of natural gas for power generation purposes. The introduction of gas into the power generation mix facilitated the privatisation of the electricity supply industry.
Those are the facts - the attack on coal mining had nothing whatsoever to do with China. To suggest otherwise is as fantastical as it is inaccurate.
Complain about this comment
# glanafon. It pains me to see you vilified as rude, ignorant and arrogant. Let me help. I can explain Jadedjeans position in terms that are understandable.
Over time the economy becomes more technically complex, and hence over time more and more people find themselves locked out of any meaningful participation in the economy because they are not intelligent enough to participate. This is fairly non controversial - I do not imagine I would have much to contribute in a theoretical discussion between say Einstein and Newton.
The economy could develop much more effectively and efficiently if the non participants could somnehow be removed. Here we are travelling down a well known street. It is the same street that the Khmer Rouge and the Algerian GIA identified.
Now we encounter another problematical group - weak people, people that are too squeemish or too indoctrinated to do what must be done. So the enlightened few must lead from the front. Often times the squeemish and the indoctrinated are considered far more problematical and dangerous than the originally identified problem group.
When the implementation of their policies fail to produce the results they expect, the answer will be (because it always is) that they are proceeding with insufficient vigor and if they just step up the pace of reform all will work out in the end. Some people will lack either the motivation or the capability to step up the pace, and hence those people will also become part of the problem.
This is precisely the same logic that drove the GIA. Drove them all the way to the final inanity of concluding that only about 6 people in the entire country possessed the requisite level of enlightenment to move forward to the promised land.
As for your final question embedded in post #110. I try to understand because I saw the disbelieving bewilderment and desolation of those that were left after Mr. Pot was removed from the pot, so to speak. And I saw the enlightened munficence of the GIA in action. I do not delude myself that they will not reemerge in different form in a different place.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#129) "the attack on coal mining had nothing whatsoever to do with China. To suggest otherwise is as fantastical as it is inaccurate."
You've missed the point (again). Thatcher was anti-statist. She was taking apart the UK's nationalized 'means of production' as created by Old Labour from the 1940s on. The miners were a strong Stalinist union. Steel, coal, gas, electricty, transport were all sold off, the state continues to be eroded via PFI and poor staffing, high immigration, education, education, education etc. Anarchists/Trotskyites like Thatcher and backers/friends (same goes for New Labour) are anti-statist. They are pro free-markets and anti-regulation. Is that clear?
China today represents the best model (for developing countries e.g. Zimbabwe, Venuzuela) of successful Stalinism/statism.
The Cold War did not finish in 1989/91 (see the SCO membership).
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#130) "It pains me to see you vilified as rude, ignorant and arrogant. Let me help. I can explain Jadedjeans position in terms that are understandable"
Evidently you can't.
1) See links you did not read/understand.
2) See the PRC.
Complain about this comment
"In an interview on BBC1's Andrew Marr programme today, Cameron said he did not want parliament to be full of "robots".
The Guardian Sunday 24th May 2009
Of course he doesn't, the more anarchists the better. Only statist parties require 'robots' aka Vogons and strong Civil Service. Vote for Cameron's lot and you'll just get even more deregulation aka 'freedom'.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
A POTTED GUIDE TO RECENT HISTORY (FOR THOSE WHO HAVE NOT LIVED IT)
Sadly for dreamers, and non-empricists in general, truth is not established by consensus - that's just something which (largely Liberal-Democratic) politicians try to spin to get power.
Sadly (as can be seen by behaviour in this blog) it appears to be ever more the case that petty social-bonding and other short-term egotistic interests are far more important than what's in people's collective longer term best interests - which is probably why we're in this deteriorating, anarchic, mess today. People won't vote collectivism - even the CofE is now warning people against that via smears (where do they get their facts from?), which is hardly surprising, as they're losing their membership in droves to the Catholic 'Nazi' Church too (who are also Christians of course, just not the 'Trotskyite' neo-liberal type...).
Complain about this comment
"
""The miners were a strong Stalinist union."
Don't talk about things of which you have no knowledge or
understanding. The National Union of Mineworkers and NACODS were a
very diffrent beast to that presented by Arthur Scargil. You really
need to look far more closely at the culture within the mining
communities and the internal workings of the NUM.
If you had made that coment in the 1980s they'd have laughed you owt Club!
You are so predictable in your responses - boreing really
Complain about this comment
"Thatcher was anti-statist. She was taking apart the UK's nationalized 'means of production' as created by Old Labour from the 1940s on. The miners were a strong Stalinist union. Steel, coal, gas, electricty, transport were all sold off..."
Correct! And we all know (or should do!) why!
Complain about this comment
rofl
You wouldnt be a
Bit
Non
Political
would you
Complain about this comment
foredeckdave (#137) But it clearly isn't predictable is it, as you keep getting it all wrong. You've learned to write this way because you think it clever. Here's a tip: clever people say something clever. You, sadly, do not.
Try to take this on board: Nationalisation of the means of production and central planning are statist, i.e socialist (i.e. 'Stalinist' in today's vernacular), policies. Old Labour and the Soviet system shared common objectives, the means of achieving them just differed, Old Labour sought to do it via reform rather than revolution.
It seems to me that hordes of people like yourself were once encouraged to do subjects like 'Business Studies' and MBAs in the late 70s and 80s/90s because that was good for anti-statism, i.e. it was good anarchism. It did not mean that such courses had any positive intellectual merit mind you - in fact, they were subversive, much like the sociology courses of earlier years (they tended to favour Trotskyism), they were like the junk peddled as undergraduate and postgraduate degree courses by 'universities' today.
Again, whilst not specifically directed to you, on the subject of nationalism, socialism and empirical facts, voluntary repatriation has been Home Office policy since the 1971 Immigration Act. See the last entry at the Border Agency. Racism is proscribed by law in the UK and EU, and rightly so. How can the BNP possibly have racist policies? Do they plan to repeal all the Race Relations legislation? These are the sorts of questions which the public should be asking. The BNP should be challenged directly, not smeared.
Complain about this comment
130 arm n leg times
I am of course absolutely mortified with the comments made and I will endeavour to become more correct. : )
Anyway - madmen, you are worried about them and their impact on economies, and seek to understand them.
I would suggest that you have to be a madman to understand a madman. Not a good route. All you need to know is they have nothing to do with reason, they are unreasonable. There are no rules. If you use reason they are soon exposed as unreasonable so you know what you are dealing with. Many are clever with their presentation and my guess is they are entirely self centred.
By definition you can't reason with unreasonable people. It is a good way of recognising them. They don't like being challenged as I understand it.
There will always be types like that about, you can bump into them anywhere. : )
I did suspect your resolve was based on first hand observation.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#139) A revealing perspective promoted by Scargill.
Complain about this comment
Message 75 fordeckdave and others
I am sorry to have been missing from the discussion but I have had other priorities to address.
My concern is that the world is still stuck in the dogma of the past. Something fundamental is taking place and we need to address that rather than anything else. In my view theory has always followed action and not the other way round.
When I was coming of age some forty years ago the state was seen as the facilitator to the economy. In other words it intervened to achieve positive economic outcomes. There were good and bad points to this and as time went on there were more bad points than good. As a consequence, other than that time when Heseltine was at the DTI , the state has been largely passive in its support for industry. Now I dislike Heseltine intensely but even I could see the benefits he generated when he was President of the Board or Trade. We need to recover that spirit.
We don't need dogma now, we need things that work. We need to mobilise our workforce in some way otherwise the growing unemployment will lead to extremism of one kind or another.
The rakes progress of the public sector needs to be curtailed on the one hand and redirected on another. When you consider that billions have been spent supposedly improving schools yet the outcomes are usually poor and suggestively overblown. For this to happen one can only conclude that there has been something fundamentally wrong going on. It must be stopped.
Despite the apparent debt the state can provide exceptional resources if it is properly focussed. Even a libertarian such as I can see that and wonder why we cannot set out a programme of works that will provide employment, provide training and begin to regrow our economy from the bottom up. If we just started on the water supply and sewers this would provide immediate benefits. I also think that we should build those aircraft carriers and get some decent kit out to the troops in Afghanistan if for no better reason that it will create work at home.
There is too much concentration at the moment on making the past work all over again as if the bust had never happened. This is a ridiculous strategy which reminds me of that old cliche `those who refuse to learn the lesson of history are doomed to relive it'.
As a nation we just cannot afford a further deterioration in our circumstances. The money has run out and the credit card is maxed. The social-democratic state in the UK has failed quite fundamentally. It cannot be fudged any more. We must face the truth we have been running away from since 1945. We are no longer a productive country, there is no easy living to be had and we need to get off our backsides, pull our fingers out and get to work. Things have to change and even though we don't know what we want we must surely appreciate what we do not want.
We still have time to put matters right: if we don't then poverty and extremism is all we will have to look forward to. We won't have the time or the money to be high-minded then.
Furthermore, if our domestic arrangements do not suit our friends and allies then perhaps having explained the matter to them and they remain obdurate then we set out to re-equip ourselves with more useful friends and allies.
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 131
First of all, I would not describe Thatcher as being anti-statist. It is true she believed in smaller government and from a libertarian perspective this was and always will be a welcome move in the right direction. Whether Scargill and McGahey - representing the leadership of the NUM and the majority of the rank and file of the membership were Stalinists is open to debate. However, as life-long committed communists they certainly believed that they were engaging in a classic Marxist class struggle of the proletariat over the bourgeoisie.
Nevertheless, leaving political ideology aside, one cannot, in retrospect, deny that the coal industry like other state-owned industries at the time was inefficient, unproductive and badly managed incurring massive losses of taxpayers' money. Thatcher and Joseph recognised this and brought in Ian MacGregor (from British Steel) to shut down unprofitable pits and privatise the profitable ones. This, of course, makes perfect economic sense; however, it was precisely this essential point that was lost in all of the rhetoric and emotion that was emitted when the miners' strike subsequently took on a life of its own.
Complain about this comment
JadedJean,
Your postings today clearly show that you have very limited knowledge and warped understanding of recent history and life - all cloaked in mock impiricism. Quite frankly you are a joke - but not a very good one!
Complain about this comment
stanilic # 143
"We are no longer a productive country, there is no easy living to be had and we need to get off our backsides, pull our fingers out and get to work. Things have to change and even though we don't know what we want we must surely appreciate what we do not want."
Yes, I agree but the unproductive government/state as a wealth destroyer cannot help us in this respect; only the unhampered productive free-markets create wealth and prosperity. We need to see through the smokescreen that government and the media are creating and recognise that laissez-faire capitalism is the only way forward.
Complain about this comment
stanilic (#143) "Even a libertarian such as I can see that and wonder why we cannot set out a programme of works that will provide employment, provide training and begin to regrow our economy from the bottom up."
Look at the data presented on human capital (IQ) in the links I've provided. Dump your preconceptions. Leitch (Treasury 2006) and the OECD euphemize this (as does ETS) as 'skills'. The bottom line is that power is shifting East because of the higher mean IQ of China, their large population and their control over the population/economy. To do what you aspirationally desire would require a miracle in these global markets. Watch the ETS video, they use the manufacturing of DVD technology as a simple example. Most readers who are posting/arguing here just don't grasp the basics, but our politicians do! We have, by acccident or design, engineered dysgenesis, and this is reinforced by Neo-Liberalism via the demographic forces which I have mentioned many times now (over education of above average females being the most destructive). Nothing else basically matters as it's largely a matter of genetics driving behaviours. If these forces are not population managed there is nothing to be done. Ironically, market-forces (Natural Selection) will see to that. Don't make the same mistake as others here do, read the links, lok at the data trends - this is all sadly descriptive, not theoretical or ideological. It only seems theoretical to some because it is unfamiliar to them. To many, it is all too concrete. There really are some very silly people posting to this blog. Silly becaue they ignore the facts which their politicians are all too aware of.
LibertarianKurt (#144) "..one cannot, in retrospect, deny that the coal industry like other state-owned industries at the time was inefficient, unproductive and badly managed incurring massive losses of taxpayers' money."
We disagree mainly on how language is used. The purpose of state managed means of production is not profit and efficiency but the satisfaction of community/social needs. Of course things can always be run more efficiently, automation and science/technology will always dictate that will be so, but if the purpose is to give people work and viable, safe, communities, these may not necessarily be either 'efficient' or 'profitable' as it si the entire population which is in the frame, not a select few. This is why one must look at populations in terms of the Gaussian genetic distribution of skills. That is, one has to look to balanced, mixed-skill communities. The neo-liberal systems don't work, they are divisive. This is why Michael Young criticised Blair for abusing the term 'meritocracy'. It is the same criticism which Herrnstein and later, Herrnstein and Murray levelled at naive or egregious equalitarians. Once you understand this you will see that neo-liberalism is in fact predatory/subversive. It will end in tears for all.
Complain about this comment
LibertarinKurt (#146) "Yes, I agree but the unproductive government/state as a wealth destroyer cannot help us in this respect; only the unhampered productive free-markets create wealth and prosperity."
The objective of statism/socialism is not the creation of wealth and prosperity for individuals but the establishment of social stability and human welfare for all. You can't fairly judge one in terms of the other for this reason.
Complain about this comment
146 Kurt
This is the reason why we need to dump dogma and surrender to the practical.
I agree that the state we have had has been a destroyer of wealth but we are where we are and have to move towards where we wish to be by a staged process.
In my view the first task is to refocus the existing resources of the state onto public works. This will generate incomes and improve infrastructure. As markets recover and self-sustaining growth returns then the size and shape of the state can be reviewed. This will be lengthy process.
However much we might wish to move to a more liberal environment this could not be done without further major upheavals which the public may not wish to happen. The process has to be a conducted in a delicate and controlled way otherwise the only consequence will be in extremism.
A good parallel is the collapse of the Soviet Union. Our current circumstances are not dissimilar which is why I speak of the collapse of the social-democratic state. The sudden shift in the countries of then former Soviet Union from the joke of a planned economy to laissez-faire capitalism was even more traumatic than the collapse of the Soviet system. As a consequence they now have an oligarchical tyrrany in Russia wholly dependent upon the natural resources of the country for its income. Not a good outcome so I suggest you modify your programme.
The case of the failure of the state has been made and made well but the reconstruction of a freer society will have to be a delicate process. It will take time.
Complain about this comment
#131 Jadedjean. It is a common theme to your musings that they are prone to obvious error. When these errors are pointed out to you, your response is either to ignore the point or to dismiss facts as irrelevant.
What is a person to conclude from your referencing of an article concerning Venezuelan arms purchases from China and Russia. What is so interesting or surprising about this? Russia, China, the US, the UK and the EU are the worlds major arms exporters. Do you really think the US would sell arms to Venezuela? Do you really think that any US allies would step into the breach? That really only leaves Russia and China.
Why might Venezuela want arms? Maybe because a former US Presidential candidate reports having a dream whereby God came to him and urged him to do all in his power to have Chavez assassinated. Maybe the Venezualans have noticed their physical proximity to Columbia and maybe they have worked out that the Uribe regime is pro US.
So what are we left with: An obvious explanation as to why Venezuela might consider that it requries the means to defend itself, the self evident fact that China and Russia are able to supply these arms, and strong reason to believe that other potential arms sellers would turn down the business. For their part Venezuala has large hydrocarbon reserves and China has an ongoing demand for hydrocarbons.
Do you think there is any possibility that the foregoing may explain Venezualan arms purchases.
Complain about this comment
stanilic (#149) "This is the reason why we need to dump dogma and surrender to the practical."
No. What you appear to want to do is ignore what other people have said, abandon reason altogether, and arrogantly pretend that none of what you find difficult or inconvenient matters. You wnat to dump other people's views but peddle your own dogma. Classic.
"A good parallel is the collapse of the Soviet Union. Our current circumstances are not dissimilar which is why I speak of the collapse of the social-democratic state. The sudden shift in the countries of then former Soviet Union from the joke of a planned economy to laissez-faire capitalism was even more traumatic than the collapse of the Soviet system. As a consequence they now have an oligarchical tyrrany in Russia wholly dependent upon the natural resources of the country for its income. Not a good outcome so I suggest you modify your programme."
Tell us - why hasn't the largest communist country in the world, the PRC, which criticised the USSR in the 1950s for not being Stalinist enough, collapsed from "the joke of planned economy"?
What you are writing is just wrong. Does that matter to you? Or are you going to persist with your dogmatic views because you can if you want to?
Complain about this comment
The objective of statism/socialism is not the creation of wealth and prosperity for individuals but the establishment of social stability and human welfare for all.
Complain about this comment
#143 stanillic,
My call above exactly matches your thoughts. I too want the government to re-take the role of facilitator. The track record of our administartions in doing that is poor - as you point out with Heseltine and even earlier with Benn's 'White Heat of Technology'. However, unless the government (of any hue) takes on itself this responsibility then only further stagnation will take place.
At the same time we do need to take action on our social issues. For too long we, the general public, have stood back and merely observed the decline in standards in education. It may be an over-statement but education has never been the same since educationalists took control of it. Theories and experiments have come and gone to be replaced by more theories and experiments with no appreciable gain.
Thirdly, I believe that we are on the cusp of major technological change. At present it would appear that 'green' technology is the most likely area to see such a tehnological breakthrough. If so then we need the resources, human, physical and financial to be in place to maximise our opportunities.
Finally, I agree that we do need to get off our backsides and back to work. To do that we need not only to have the work to go to but also create a new rationale for work - not just to buy stuff and pay taxes an other bills! We need to look again at Herzberg's Hygene Theory and find ways to make work itself motivational.
There must be something in what we are saying when we agree on the outlines of what has to be done - you from a libertarian standpoint and me from a generally socialist one.
Complain about this comment
"What is a person to conclude from your referencing of an article concerning Venezuelan arms purchases from China and Russia."
That's a tough one. Do you mean a reasonably intelligent person, or a pretty clueless 'unskilled' person who doesn't know much about geopolitics?
Do you know much about 'Satanism'?
Complain about this comment
#
"No. What you appear to want to do is ignore what other people have said, abandon reason altogether, and arrogantly pretend that none of what you find difficult or inconvenient matters. You wnat to dump other people's views but peddle your own dogma. Classic."
POT BLACK AND KETTLE come to mind - now that's CLASSIC.
GO AWAY LITTLE PERSON
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 148
"The objective of statism/socialism is not the creation of wealth and prosperity for individuals but the establishment of social stability and human welfare for all."
Social stability and individual human welfare starts with the individual - by satisfying his/her needs, improving his/her economic circumstances through voluntary exchange and social cooperation of the free-markets. There is absolutely no need for the state/government to interfere in this activity. The duty of the state (protecting property rights) is to its people not the other way around.
Complain about this comment
#136 Jadedjean. Good to see that two new enemies have been identified - the Church of England and the English language.
The Church is a religious body - hence they do not rely on facts, as they are a faith based organisation. Perhaps you have more in common with the Church than you realise.
Complain about this comment
stanilic # 149
"In my view the first task is to refocus the existing resources of the state onto public works."
The state does not have any "resources" of its own; i.e., it does not have any money. In order to engage in public works projects, the state must divert real resources away from the private sector to the extent that it must forcibly take - in the form of confiscatory taxes (now and in the future) - from one group of people and give to another group.
If you seriously advocate this, then you are walking along the same path as the Keynesian followers.
Complain about this comment
#151 and #149
First to this comment:
"
"A good parallel is the collapse of the Soviet Union. Our current circumstances are not dissimilar which is why I speak of the collapse of the social-democratic state. The sudden shift in the countries of then former Soviet Union from the joke of a planned economy to laissez-faire capitalism was even more traumatic than the collapse of the Soviet system. As a consequence they now have an oligarchical tyrrany in Russia wholly dependent upon the natural resources of the country for its income. Not a good outcome so I suggest you modify your programme."
Tell us - why hasn't the largest communist country in the world, the PRC, which criticised the USSR in the 1950s for not being Stalinist enough, collapsed from "the joke of planned economy"?
What you are writing is just wrong. Does that matter to you? Or are you going to persist with your dogmatic views because you can if you want to?"
JadedJean, the PRC may be communist but the USSR never was, it was at most Socialist. The PRC can hardly be called communist when it's major sources of income, eg: Hk, Shanghai, Beijing, Taiwan and so on are operating in a laissez-faire manner. JadedJean, the author of post #149 has a valid point, and your rebuttal is nonsense - the PRC does not have a planned economy, cannot be compared to USSR (demographically, resources, population density), and is irrelevant to the point. The failure of "social-democratic" states could well result in some equivalent of "oligarchic tyranny". That is the point. Focus on state controlled fiscal stimulus, public works, etc., is an almost unavoidable necessity in this crisis. You must agree.
Your accusations of dogmatism also seem to be unjustifiably hostile. The difference between dogmatism and pragmatism lies in a purely *subjective* interpretation of what is useful. If your opinion is that investment in public works is of a net social utility, then you are compelled to agree that the view is pragamatic. N'est ce pas?
Complain about this comment
#115
Absolutely. But it doesn't matter when you are in the EU. We all benefit, and we should all encourage mobility. Let the UK abandon it's incestuous island mentality- the Empire is history and the monarchy is a farce. There is no point in adhering to a delusional sense of national grandiosity when your cars belong to your adversaries and your cuisine to your slaves.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#157) "Jadedjean. Good to see that two new enemies have been identified - the Church of England and the English language."
But do you understand what is logically wrong with (intensional) English language and what's wromg with the CofE? have you noted how the Pope is careful over 'the Holocaust' and how Islamic Fundamentalism and Catholicism is rather close to National Socialism/Stalinism/Baathism?
Not all is as simple as it seems. The Iranian revolution owed as much to Sartre's Maoism as Islam.
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt (#156) "Social stability and individual human welfare starts with the individual"
That's the narcissist's error. It begins with the (nuclear) family - the mini state.
Complain about this comment
The 'individual', what a joke. Oo look. My turbo is getting nearer.
Complain about this comment
REALPOLITIK
FrankSz (#159) I'm pragmatically using Statism, Planned Economy, Command Economy, Democratic-Centralism, Stalinism, National Socialism, Socialism in One Country, even Old Labour at a pinch, in much the same way here. This is the way that the real world works politically. Neo-Liberal parties are anarchistic. It's as simple as that.
Look a the SCO (and its wannabe's) for what's really going on geopolitically, and see the link to Scargill's party for a perspective on the EU and NATO.
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 162
"That's the narcissist's error. It begins with the (nuclear) family - the mini state."
On the contrary, this is the statist's error. Individuals (for that is how we all start off as) and families are NOT states; mini or otherwise. Why? Because individuals and families DO NOT coercively impose their morals in the form of codified laws and regulations on other individuals and families as the state does.
The question that needs to be asked is: Who came first; man and his economic use of scarce resources or the state?
Complain about this comment
JUST dropped on to see whats going on.Just at Stuggart Airport.I see its
a LITTLE heated on here.
I hear Darling is STICKING to his forecasts HA HA?? PSBR is going over the edge. . .
The BNP are BITCHING the CHURCH & they the BNP so WHO will win i wonder
NuLabour have done it PROUD?
Meanwhile the jobless total RISES as UK PLC does a TITANIC. . .
Gordy stll clings to the stern and the deck chairs pass him into the SEA.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#165
Top down or bottom up? False dichotomy. There is simultaneity. Communities exist because of hostility. Dogs go in packs for protection and increased likelihood of resources. I don't believe resources for early man were short - he lived in abundance, but the risk of being killed by other predators was high.
Complain about this comment
"I'm pragmatically using Statism, Planned Economy, Command Economy, Democratic-Centralism, Stalinism, National Socialism, Socialism in One Country, even Old Labour at a pinch, in much the same way here. This is the way that the real world works politically. Neo-Liberal parties are anarchistic. It's as simple as that."
You are right. You have defined the totally misguided view of an abstarcted theorist who merely wants to pedle their own pet theory. You have no conception of how the REAL world works politically, socially, commercially and economically you merely pontificate from a theoretical standpoint. Pity the theory is totally wrong!
Complain about this comment
#161 Jadedjean - Of course there is something wrong with the Church and with the language - that is why you have identified them as enemies.
Fear not, for as I have already told you, many new enemies will appear. It is always the way. The world may run out of oil or money or credit but you and your ilk will never run out of enemies.
Somethings are much simpler than they seem. The Iranian revolution, for example, has far more to do with the Anglo/US overthrow of a popular government and installing a fascist regime in its place, than it does with Sartre. Still I suppose that would be far too straightforward an explanation with far too many checkable facts for it to appeal to you.
Complain about this comment
CHICKENS AND EGGS
LibertarianKurt (#165) "The question that needs to be asked is: Who came first; man and his economic use of scarce resources or the state?
Indeed Indeed, and Reich's 'The Invasion of Compulsory Sex Morality' is worth a look too.
The Jewish Bolsheviks/anarchists made an mess of things in the 1920s - too liberal on purpose? Stalin of course came to Russia's rescue.
Don't we need to be rescued now for the same reason that Hitler tried to rescue Germany?
Behaviour is driven by genes, but it takes two to make an individual - you need to take that on board. Skinner's 'On Having A Poem' might appeal to you if Engels doesn't. I don't suppose Hitler's perspective appeals to you?
We do live in remarkably similar times I fear :-(
Complain about this comment
FrankSz # 169
"Dogs go in packs for protection and increased likelihood of resources. I don't believe resources for early man were short - he lived in abundance..."
Two points:
1. Human beings are NOT dogs! We have survived and improved our hostile environment (the earth) because we have the innate ability of thinking rationally (not instinctively) and acting to improve our circumstances.
2. If early man lived in abundance (The Garden of Eden), then how come we are not living like that now?
There is no dichotomy, false or otherwise!
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 172
"CHICKENS AND EGGS"
Fact or fiction?
Complain about this comment
#172 Jadedjean You just cannot help yourself can you.
I have told you repeatedly that your position demands the constant identification of new enemies. To prove my point you now post a link detailing how even when in its death throes a previous regime in another land still mustered the desire to identify new enemies.
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt (#172) The Skinner article (audio if you can find it, is fact and well worth the time (60 minute audio).
FrankSz (173) "Human beings are NOT dogs! We have survived and improved our hostile environment (the earth) because we have the innate ability of thinking rationally (not instinctively) and acting to improve our circumstances."
Some more than others. We do have a lot in common with other pack mammals. Hence 'man's best friend'. Some say men are very like dogs. See how useless Natural Language is?
2. If early man lived in abundance (The Garden of Eden), then how come we are not living like that now?"
People like Bush spoiled it for them? Some moved on, some stayed behind? Living in The Garden of Eden today is certainly no picnic today. IEDs, suicide bombers etc. That's what one gets for threatening The Chosen Ones?
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 176
"Some more than others."
Sorry to "pop that [statist] bubble" of yours but, like it or not, that is what makes us all individuals; we are not all the same - like packs of animals!
"People like Bush spoiled it for them? Some moved on, some stayed behind? Living in The Garden of Eden today is certainly no picnic today. IEDs, suicide bombers etc. That's what one gets for threatening The Chosen Ones?"
This is a non sequitur, my dear. Your conclusion does not follow from my premise.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#175) "new enemies.
New? From Germany's perspective, WWII was opposition to the COMINTERN and its backers.
Stalin was busy purging Jewish Bolsheviks in the 30s too.
Why was that? Where did they flee too?
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt (#177) Same difference... What has logic got to do this when langage has gone intensional? ;-)
You didn't read 'Two Dogmas' did you?
Complain about this comment
Yee haa
Better than watchin an old cowboy n indian film. Thurrs trouble wif the stagecaoch tonight. Thurr shootin from the left n shootin from the right, thurr shootin from the centrist. Glad I got off the stop befurr.
Jeez we are in a mess if the church is coming into economics. Its holiday guys.
Complain about this comment
Frank
I am glad to here your turbo is gently moving into reach like a spare for the shuttle in space. You need to make a move at the right time before it floats off out of reach.
Post 169 Early man did not live long, father at 15 dead by 30. Few women reached menopause. The earliest modern health problems, eg diet, heart disease) occurred with the Eygtians (approx 4 millenium ago) with the upper classes.
Complain about this comment
Glanafon (#180) "Jeez we are in a mess if the church is coming into economics. Its holiday guys."
It's only the Anglican church. They are anarchists and are always getting themselves into trouble. Gays, women - see - they're a trouble magnet.
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 179
Look, what we are arguing about here is essentially who has primacy; the individual or the state? For me, it is unrestrained (within limits drawn around us by the equal freedom of action of other individuals) freedom of individual human action through voluntary exchange that guides us all to prosperity. For you, it is the "beneficial" role of the state that must inculcate, by force, a sense of duty and collective values in order to achieve a regimented society.
You can send me all the links, in your posts, you like (I do read them by the way!) but you are barking up the wrong tree!
Therefore, you have absolutely no hope of converting me, and likewise, I have no hope of converting you. Let us simply agree to disagree.
What do you say, JJ?
;)
Complain about this comment
GARLIC AND STUFF
Addendum (#187) Now the Catholic Church, that's a very different matter. Even Israelis doesn't push their chutzpah with The Pope (although they are prone to get a bit cheeky with dissident bishops if they think they can get away with it. I suspect many Jews have seen The Exorcist and may be a bit wary of Holy Water and other special powers, although they seem to have left out the Austrian and Chicago Schools of economics, New Labour, Neocons, many NGOs and LibertarianKurt at 4. The best the Anglicans seem to be able to do is threaten to stop investing in CATERPILLAR, which nearly caused an international incident on Newsnight at the time - I recall they had Beelzebub on the programme to make the case for Israel. He reasoned much like LibertarianKurt. The Anglicans didn't stand a chance.
Complain about this comment
glanafon,
"Jeez we are in a mess if the church is coming into economics."
The church has always been in economics for one simple reason - believers live and work within the economy, even in the PRC!
As usual MyopicJean cannot see that the Church of Jesus Christ is not the same thing as the denominational entities commonly refered to as churches. As for the statement by the Church of England (again not the same thing as the Anglican Communion) then if he/she did his/her homework properly he/she would see that their statement was biblically not politically based.
Complain about this comment
183 jj
I am surprised, only one religion is a problem, I am sure you will find more if you really look. I can think of a number that probably do not fit with your ideas.
I should have realised gays and women were a problem as it has been raise in earlier posts, but they have never bothered me. I find the idea of the average woman interesting, I have never met one. This society you yearn for is a fantasy. It will never happen.
Of course the Anglicans where born as a breakaway movement, even if it was centuries ago, I saw them as rather establishment by now. That St Augustine was a real anarchist though. You just can't get the saints these days, or even those days. Standards were slipping even then.
When you have eliminated Anglicans, women, other racial groups, low intelligence people - by your definition not mine - Jews I think come up regularly on your aversion list, etc etc, the list goes on and on so I can't recall them all, just who do you think your ideas are going to appeal to, other than the Chinese who you seem to think are hot diggerty. How much you really know about the Chinese I am not at all sure. You might find it a bit different living there rather than living in the West with freedom of speech and high salaries and so on.
But please, please, please, keep posting because I can think of no greater deterrent for your policy than for you to keep pumping this stuff. Brilliant work.
Complain about this comment
183 Lib Kurt
There will be no agreement. You are attempting to reason.
Complain about this comment
#181 - glanafon
Yes, I think 10CZK to the USD is pushing it a bit. I'll hope for a drop to 13 in the next 6 months.
#173 - LibKurt
1. Human beings are NOT dogs! We have survived and improved our hostile environment (the earth) because we have the innate ability of thinking rationally (not instinctively) and acting to improve our circumstances.
Well no I don't agree. I have seen intelligent birds (Kea) act rationally, I have seen squirrels plot their way to a goal, dogs act logically etc. I also do not agree that the individual's ability to think/act rationally (which, by the way, is debatable) is what has led to the taming of nature. What assisted the taming of nature was weapons technology, the scientific establishment, the ability of a society to support industrial research and so on. So in essence, it was the innate ability of humans to form functional, regulated organisations that allowed them to tame the environment.
2. If early man lived in abundance (The Garden of Eden), then how come we are not living like that now?
There is no dichotomy, false or otherwise!
Complain about this comment
#186
I have met several people who suffered from mental illness in my life. Some had a physical defect - there was a hereditary problem with schizophrenia for example. All the others had as the core problem one thing: arrogance. They were arrogant enough to believe their own incorrect proposals, thus they convinced themselves of things that were wrong and went off on crazy trips of their own, isolating themselves and believing things that could not be true (like that somebody was trying to kill them, that someone was unfaithful, that someone hated them etc).
Arrogance is a dangerous thing. The root of the problem is the capacity to be soundly convinced that one is "right". It relies on the notion of the 'absolute'. Religions and cults, the grand advocators of the absolute, institutionalise collective insanity.
JJ thinks s/he is 'right'. The strategy for dealing with the likes of JJ is to ignore them.
Complain about this comment
189 Frank
1930s
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt Follow the links at the end of #116 paying particular attention to what Hernstein and Murray set out a policy recommendations. One has to also bear in mind that Herrnstein was professor of psychology at Harvard at the time, and that Behaviour Analysis (his area of expertise) is the most deceptively simple, and yet most technical and intellectually demanding field of psychology. He succeeded Skinner. Listen to 'On Having a Poem'. You talk of individuals, but look at the mean IQ of Sub Saharan Africa compared to say China (or HK, or Singapore, or Korea), then think about +/-1, 2, 3 SDs. It is genes and gene-barriers that accounts for this, not economics. Have you seen many Chinese and other East Asians with Africans as partners? How much Afrcian immigration is there to to far East? Where is the talk of racism? Why not?
Michael Young warned of the danagers of individualism and meritorcracy in his 1958 satire. Anyone who truly understands the nature of human behavioural-genetic diversity will understand the problems which come when one promotes meritocracy and individualism. Individuals are indeed not all the same, but they do group and mate according to similarity (although MHC (histocompatibility/immunity) chromosome 6p21 diversity). People ignore individual differences because it is politically/economically convenient (see the CRA fiasco in the states and sub-prime). It is, in fact, a pernicious lack of discrimination. Natural Language is an impediment here. Most critics in this blog simply don't understand and persist in arguing from ignorance.
Complain about this comment
#188
2. If early man lived in abundance (The Garden of Eden), then how come we are not living like that now?
I forgot to respond to this one too. The answer is 'irrational' behaviour of the individual. For example, when there is a shortage of resources and high risk of death, people tend to reproduce more, presumably to ensure their future through battling the odds by having more children.
The end result is mass starvation. China has a command economy out of necessity almost. If there was not a strict authority in place that regulated reproduction, then we would all suffer from disease etc. The same fate lies before all of us. We will either give birth control over to the state, or die.
Complain about this comment
#190 Come again?
Complain about this comment
#190 Never mind - I see what you mean I think. Well as long as speculation exists and prices depend without regulation on other people's expectations of future prices, then that is what we will get - collective delusions.
Complain about this comment
WHY IT'S SO DIFFICULT
"JJ thinks s/he is 'right'. The strategy for dealing with the likes of JJ is to ignore them."
Interesting ;-).
This is what ETS said their major problem was. That's what the experts in the field of Differential Psychology says the problem is:-
Denial.
Complain about this comment
#195 Jadedjean. For another perspective on denial try Mr. Strummer:
"deny
you're such a liar
you won't know the truth if it hits you in the eye
deny
you're such a liar
you're selling your no-no all the time...
do you think i'm a raving idiot?
just got off the boat
step in line, sign this form - you ain't got a hope
baby ain't got a hope - you ain't got a hope"
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#196)
Pretty much the same idea I suggest - the second verse's conclusion follows rather inevitably from the second verse's premiss does it not?
Most people are biased towards believing/stating what they think is socially desirable regardless of whether it's true or not.
What I have been telling you and others is true, it's just not very socially desirable ;-)
Individualists make rather bad parents and societies.
Complain about this comment
#197 Jadedjean. You just don´t get it do you. Even if anything you say is true it is still pointless. Some people are ugly - what is the point of going up to ugly people and saying "You are ugly"? - They probably know this anyway, what has been gained or achieved. If you find some ugly big guy, and impart your "truth" chances are he will make you ugly as well.
Unless of course ugly people are also constituents of your`preceived problem groups
Complain about this comment
THE COGNITIVE ELITE
glanafon (#186) "Of course the Anglicans where born as a breakaway movement, even if it was centuries ago, I saw them as rather establishment by now."
All the work of (some) Jews if you think about it. Puritans loved the Old Testament and were Trotsky's model for his army (which was funded from Holland. It was how they got around the 1290 expulsion). Subversives/anarchists/Levellers/neo-liberal free-marketeers. Plus ca change.
Complain about this comment
Following on from 143
Oh what a lot of things have been said.
The regime in China declares that it operates a system of `socialism with Chinese characteristics'. In many ways it is a muddle like most human relationships but it seems to work to a point although there are winners and losers within that arrangement. Once in discussion with a member of the Chinese Communist Party I suggested that Europe too could benefit from 50 years of Communism. He understood the joke and my estimation of him, his party and his country went up a very large notch.
My origins are in Kropotkin's anarchism which is why I am not that far away from both foredeckdave and Libertarian Kurt. I know this gives Jaded Jean ingrowing anguish so I enjoy it all the more. Whilst I grew up in a dysfunctional family a leading practitioner of applied economics was a family friend. So to a degree I sucked the milk of Keynes as a child. I have a first edition of his General Theory on my bookshelf, though I am not conceited enough to be an economist.
Yet whilst we all have our philosophies and backgrounds we must address the situation in which we find ourselves and it is dangerous. The country has run out of cash and maxed its credit card so the only way the prevailing systen can go forward is to mortgage the future. This is not an option. As The Who said in 1971 `change it had to come'.
In my working life I have on occasions been invited into businesses which are in trouble. Usually this is because the management have lost the plot. Our country is in much the same condition. The way to deal with a broken business is to identify those products which have a future, establish a dialogue with the customers, begin to change the culture, clean out the management and establish funding streams. This is what we have to do with our country before we can begin to get any sort of return.
However, this is far more easily said than done when you consider that about half the population of the country thinks that money just grows on trees and that the salary cheque will be available at the end of the month regardless. This is why there is this consistent failure to connect with our reality.
Whatever we do to correct our current circumstances we have to confront the fact that we can only proceed in step-changes and describe to the people just what is going on, the inputs that are required and the anticipated outputs. It will require objectivity, patience and a certain degree of disappointment and frustration. It will be no quick fix. There will also be those with a keen interest in wrecking any progress.
In my view the first job is to clear out the management and get someone knowledgeable to go through the books and tell us exactly where we are. Then we must get to work and not stop until we have got to the other side. Whether you are of the Left or the Right it doesn't really matter at this juncture; all one can ask for is energy and good-will.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#198) "Some people are ugly - what is the point of going up to ugly people and saying "You are ugly"?"
Has it occurred to you at all that you may not have understood what you have read?
Have you read those links I suggested yet? It will require some hard work on your part, I caution you. This is not obvious. I tend to make things sound very simple because I know what I am writing about, but what I write about is not simple at all.
It is important though.
Complain about this comment
#189 FrankSz - I don´t think ignoring these types is the best way forward. They are not necessarily mentally ill, although some are, but they are true believers in their particular dogma, (Exact dogma varies by time and location), and never accept any possibility that they could be in error. Ceaseless proslytesing is another common trait, as is the endless identification of new enemies.
In times and places where they have come to the fore their record is not good, and this does not bode well for the future.
Despite the wealth of historical evidence which transcends cultures and which uniformly points to unremitting disaster their siren song retains, for some, a seductive quality.
Complain about this comment
Anyway
''Life is pretty simple: You do some stuff. Most fails. Some works. You do more of what works. If it works big, others quickly copy it. Then you do something else. The trick is the doing something else.'' Leonardo da Vinci.
Complain about this comment
202 arm n leg
They cannot be ignored else every dogma has its day : )
Complain about this comment
200 stanilic
At present the cat is being killed with cream, rich and thick.
The issue is the conflict between those who wish to reform in diferent directions. The environment has been created where change is likley. But all points of view are just one point of voice and all manifestos end with the same rationale. I do not underestimate the desire for parties from all points of the compass to sieze opportunity, all claiming sound argument and science on their side. That is without the majority holders of the status quo reinventing personas.
If policies are not correct then the pressure grows and the stresses grow. It is a self correcting mechanism. The process was in place through out Browns boom that was not a boom. His manipulation of the economy obscured it for a relatively short period and it is now back on downward track. So I am fairly relaxed about it. Reality cannot be denied for long. It is keeping reality from people that is the danger. The problem remains that in a tax shrinking situation those who benefit from higher not lower public expenditure have to vote for lower expenditure. Logic would suggest that this will be repackaged as ethics and efficency. The problem remains even if it is ingeniously put in the background - turkeys have to vote for xmas. So will abstention win or a desire to ditch the incumbents.
Complain about this comment
#200 stanilic - All good motivational stuff. But it begs the obvious question, what are the products that have a future?
Given that these products need to carry 60 million people forward they must either be pretty big products or there must be lots of them. I do not see any big products around, and I don´t know that many people doing small scale things that are booming away.
North Sea oil and gas was pretty big, but that is in decline. Financial sevices appeared to be big - but is now being revealed as not so big.
Maybe house prices will recover - but a lot of money in this area was consumption expenditure masked as investment expenditure by collective delusional thinking. Delusional thinking is big - but I don´t see a long term future in that.
Unless and until someone can articulate what it is that a nation of 60 million people can do that will keep them in a lifestyle to which they have become asccustomed then the future looks bleak.
Complain about this comment
#201 Jadedjean. If I were the worrrying type then I would worry about you.
In #197 you write:
"What I have been telling you and others is true, it's just not very socially desirable"
It does not appear linguistically complex and does not really lend itself to interpretaion. So, the answer to your question is: No it does not occur to me that I may have failed to understand the meaning of this statement - the statement to which I replied seeking to evidence both its irrelevance and its dangers.
But please do not take my word for it, just go outside and find a very large, very powerful, very short tempered ugly person and tell them that they are ugly. Think of it as a scientific experiment.
Complain about this comment
#200 stanillic,
Good Who reference! However, to continue we need "won't get fooled again" and not "meet the new boss, same as the old boss". Perhaps we even need "let's see action".
Looks like a number of our experiences are fairly similar but never thought of myself as an anarchist - more of left-leaning searcher.
Galanfon is worried about the comsequences of failure in taking action. However, the effects of taking a 'natutalistic' leave well alone and it will work itself out is I fear more fraught with danger. I accept that this depression will have a rythum of its own. However, that does not mean that we should not start to plan now to take advantge of the possibilities that exist. Change will only take place in step-form and therefore results will not be seen overnight. We must go forward we can't go back and the present policies are merely marking time. Should the required change be of a first or second order nature? At this point I do not know but I doubt that either would/will happen if left solely in the hands of the politicians.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
206 arm n leg times
The collapse due to the recession has been triggered. Nothing can be done to stop that process. All efforts seem to be oriented towards trying to help recovery not stopping slide.
The economy has shrunk, debt has been incurred, therefore the public sector has to shrink also.
The wealth is created by a minority, not majority of the population. One simply has to wait for the growth to occur. There has to be a suspicion that big business is not going to provide much growth. Small businesses will seek to avoid overhead which will not help tax revenues. HMG does not appear to understand the impact the internet will have in cutting overheads. Growth has to be based on innovation and innovative efforts will also focus on reducing overhead so growth will not necessarily give automatic historic benefits. Any attempt to restrict the internet will simply hand advantage to other countries and prompt those using the internet to move away.
Browns debt in 4 years time - because there is still borrowing scheduled in the pipeline - amounts to something like 600+ Bill GBP - some 30k to 50k plus interest costs per head of population working in the private sector. This looks much worse than the last recession. Because there has now been a long period of expanding the public sector the mentality there is they have a right to money. This is the area which has a problem brewing. The outcome has almost inevitably to be more means testing as they fight contraction, so more individuals will have to pay to prop up the deal they want. You are just talking about those who have been the beneficaries of the mechanism for decades having wealth siphoned off to reset the balance. It is implicit in the situation that something has to give and the political objective will be to spread it as thin as possible. This is till a better deal than the victims in a recession get, because the recession mechanism is arbitary and hits a relative few. I dont see a problem with the idea that the wealth reduction is spread wide.
The internet is the growth area. It is also international, you dont need to be big to have a multinational customer base. It is however independent of location. As usual HMG are behind the curve, where BO has made it a priority - Brown is trying to keep public money out of any upgrade so the system will be patchy, just another reason to relocate the sort of activity that is the likely to be the growth source. Madness.
Meanwhile big squeaky wheels like auto makers get taxpayer funded scrappage schemes which simply pull sales from next year and are highly unlikely to make any difference other than clearing some of the backlog in stock, much of which is imported.
Complain about this comment
FrankSz # 188
"Well no I don't agree. I have seen intelligent birds (Kea) act rationally, I have seen squirrels plot their way to a goal, dogs act logically etc. I also do not agree that the individual's ability to think/act rationally (which, by the way, is debatable) is what has led to the taming of nature. What assisted the taming of nature was weapons technology, the scientific establishment, the ability of a society to support industrial research and so on. So in essence, it was the innate ability of humans to form functional, regulated organisations that allowed them to tame the environment."
Frank, there are two inconsistencies in the above argument that really call for comment. Therefore, I will begin some questions: Are you seriously suggesting that animals are capable of reasoned and intellectual thought? In other words, are they capable of significantly adapting their surroundings, discovering new natural resources and developing them as industrial factors of production in order to improve their environment? Are they capable of performing fantastic feats of engineering or developing agricultural production techniques in order to feed millions of their fellow animals? Indeed, there are some irrational individuals; however, they are, by far and away, outnumbered by the acting of rational ones.
The second point I shall address is your conviction that man is a social "animal"; I have no argument with this. It is indisputable that humans will gravitate towards forming social units. However, it seems to me that you are putting the cart before the horse by inferring that humans can only act as a collective whole; this is quite clearly wrong! All human action starts with individuals. Here is Mises to explain it succinctly:
http://mises.org/story/3409
Complain about this comment
208 foredavedeck
But government is the only route available to you in terms of governance. So the issue is better governance, ie communication with government. look how much things have sharpened up since the message started to get through to government that the public were narked. Boot fillers are queuing to get off the cruise liner or being made to walk the plank, me hearties.
Government role primarily is regulation and tax collection and the provision of public services in compliance with statute. All difficult to change overnight. All change fought bitterly by the beneficaries of the expenditure. They will not go gently into that night. I assure you.
And there is no limit to how many worthwhile things they can always think of. A business, unless it is fraudulent has to provide something in a marketplace, in competition, to get money. The public sector does not, in reality it just says - I am a monopoly, we have assessed a need givus the money. Most of the time they cannot even be civil taking your money off you. They have no competition to modify their behaviour. Their customer is not the individual, it is the government, so they look at government and say are you satified, not the individual, they couldnt really give a damn about the individual, you often have to say a formal complaint is pending, or I am discussing this with my solicitor, to get what you are entitled to by statute. Half the time they do not even know the statute. And misinformation or disinformation is rife.
Business works within the regulation and innovates to expand. The roles of government and business are not a partnership, they are in conflict. It is because of a lack of govenance that we are here. HMG is the starting point.
And if HMG make the environment too tough then people leave, tradespeople in demand, graduates, business, individuals. It is very simple. This country is heavily indebt, public expenditure is high, the tax revenue has collapsed. Either services are reduced or tax rises.
You need to stop thinking that HMG will develope innovative growth in the business sector, they will not. They have nothing to bring to the table, they have neither the skill nor the experience. It is not their role. Business has to deal with growth not HMG. HMG has to regulate and sensibly control expenditure, it has failed on both counts recently. It is the continual lack of boundaries as typified by Brown letting the financila sector do what they want, culmulating with Lloyds takeover HBOS, waiving anti-competion objections, to create a monster, that is the problem. Government has clearly, demonstably, not been governing.
Complain about this comment
211 Lib Kurt
Here is an example of social groups at work -
MP complains that the pressure applied to 600 people in jobs as MPs is extreme, dispite the fact if excessive expenses have not been claimed there is no pressure it would appear. Concern about suicide is expressed. Fair enough. Any extreme reaction is of concern.
However I cannot once remember a MP complaining about the risk of suicide amongst the 100s of thousands, over a million due, lossing their jobs due to failed policies.
The answer I would suggest is an individual is most concerned about impacts on the soical group they are part of. MPs do not appear to feel their constituents are part of their social group.
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes (#207) In #197 you write: "What I have been telling you and others is true, it's just not very socially desirable"
It does not appear linguistically complex and does not really lend itself to interpretaion."
I suggest you read the link to the potted version of The Bell Curve which I provided (critically linked to what ETS had to say), and that you focus on 'The Bell Curve' policy recommendations, as you do not appear to have grasped why I provided the link, or how/why it makes your 'interpretation' a fabrication of your misunderstanding. Whilst you're at it, look up 'The Principle of Charity'. Natural Language is intensional - it is very easy to misunderstand.
Are the Liberal-Democracies (East and West) the victims of demographic warfare?
China: population 1,100,000,000 Mean IQ 105 (and increasing)
UK : population 60,000,000 Mean IQ 100 (and decreasing)
Plug those into a Gaussian distribution and think skills, products, GDP.
Complain about this comment
glanafon # 213
"MP complains that the pressure applied to 600 people in jobs as MPs is extreme, dispite the fact if excessive expenses have not been claimed there is no pressure it would appear. Concern about suicide is expressed. Fair enough. Any extreme reaction is of concern."
Sympathy for MPs?
No-one held a gun to their heads and told them, "You have to run for parliament!"
Conversely, MPs stand there holding a big stick behind their backs and demand from the individual taxpayer (figuratively speaking, of course), "Pay me! Or you go to jail."
If an individual loses the means to support himself or his family, he is definitley not going to be concerned about which social group he belongs to. He will act (rapidly) to improve his circumstances.
Complain about this comment
'I BLAME THE PARENTS'
stanilic (#200) "My origins are in Kropotkin's anarchism which is why I am not that far away from both foredeckdave and Libertarian Kurt. I know this gives Jaded Jean ingrowing anguish so I enjoy it all the more. Whilst I grew up in a dysfunctional family a leading practitioner of applied economics was a family friend. So to a degree I sucked the milk of Keynes as a child. I have a first edition of his General Theory on my bookshelf, though I am not conceited enough to be an economist."
One of the paradoxes of at least the past half century or so is that many (especially Middle Class) families in Liberal-Democracies appear to have uncritically embraced environmentalism, taking it upon themselves to turn their childen into what they thought they should be rather than look to see what their progeny's genotype made them naturally best suited to be for fear of 'spoiling' them. Sadly, this appears to be not only a formula for adolescent Oppositional Defiance, but may adversely increase clinical risk at this second critical phase of narcissism/self-esteem/identity (the first being in the 'terrible twos').
Complain about this comment
#211
Hi Kurt
Are you seriously suggesting that animals are capable of reasoned and intellectual thought?
To some extent yes. Some animals have a degree of intelligence, they make choices, they plot and predict.
In other words, are they capable of significantly adapting their surroundings, discovering new natural resources and developing them as industrial factors of production in order to improve their environment?
Definitely. Some monkeys have adapted to new environments, set up small factories and so on. For example, there is a monkey colony somewhere I forget that has learnt how to mill some kind of nut, teaches its children how to crack this nut according to some special process, and defend the nut-cracking factory (which relies on some large specially shaped rock) from predators by climbing up the nearby cliff and throwing rocks down at the invaders. Monkeys learn and teach their children, thus forming communities that have unique industrial practices, methods and so on.
Are they capable of performing fantastic feats of engineering or developing agricultural production techniques in order to feed millions of their fellow animals?
Ants, termites, bees, etc. Well, I see what you mean, but human individuals are not responsible for this. It is the evolution of a culture, the scientific establishment. It is usually the case that inventions are made by different people at the same time in different parts of the world. Everyone is working off the previous peoples' achievements in the context of the last generation's efforts.
Indeed, there are some irrational individuals; however, they are, by far and away, outnumbered by the acting of rational ones.
I don't think anyone is rational. People, whether they like it or not, just end up in general working, marrying, reproducing and dying. Their behaviour is so determined by forces they are not aware of that to describe it as rational would have to seriously distort the implications of the word rational.
The second point I shall address is your conviction that man is a social "animal"; I have no argument with this. It is indisputable that humans will gravitate towards forming social units. However, it seems to me that you are putting the cart before the horse by inferring that humans can only act as a collective whole; this is quite clearly wrong! All human action starts with individuals.
Why stop with humans. Why not at the level of cells, and then atoms, and so on? What is so special about a collection of cells called a human that it should determine the behaviour of both its subcomponents and the structures composed of it? Do you think the human governs the behaviour of it's cells, and the society it belongs too, the star system it belongs to, the galaxy, the universe? It's anthropocentric nonsense that is rooted in religious thinking. You think humans are possessed of a supernatural soul that injects causality into this universe from another plane? You are intelligent enough to see that the Mises argument is too simplistic, I think.
Your original question was which came first - the individuals, or the state, in the context of an assertion by JJ that the nuclear family is the proto-state.
I say that in all probability pack mentality evolved along with us, and packs have leaders. Hierarchy and pecking order is just in our nature. It happened at the same time. Society being a fractal structure of hierarchies of hierarchies would seem natural.
The Libertarian interpretation of Austrian economics as anarcho-capitalism is an ideology divorced from reality. It ignores two main things:
a) We are hierarchical by nature
b) We need to address over population and resource shortages on a global scale - this cannot be achieved using free markets. Or rather it can, but we must leave it to disease and starvation to solve it for us.
Your
Complain about this comment
215 Lib Kurt
I have very little sympathy for MPs, however I do not like to see anybody seeking suicide as a way out. The caveat was speciifally made so nobody would think I consider any MP taking that route as a good idea.
The point as far as I am concerned is an MP in a group of 600 odd MPs is worried about their welfare, about the risk of suicide. The same MP will have a 100,000 population group they are meant to be representing, that is the job. Out of that population group approaching more than 600 will be losing their jobs, and there will be the definate risk of suicide, yet I have not heard a single suggestion from any MP that there should be any concern about the risk of suicide in the public. This tells me that the MPs probably see their social group as other MPs, not the group they are supposed to be representing. As the job is specifically to be the representative of that group, to have close association with the group. to me it just highlights the us and them attitude which has beset Westminster.
BTW. What seems to be glossed over in this whole expenses business is that the Speaker was responsible for the administration of the Fees Office, these expenses have been authorised. Cheques do not just get issued they need approval. And the Speaker may work under approval of MPs but who has the most MPs. According to Martin Bell on Question time, this growth in expenses is a relatively recent thing.
Anyway to return to the social group topic. People do cluster into social groups with a broadly common platform, and I am suggesting that they then disassociate from the needs of other groups and look inward on the groups problems real or imaginary.
Complain about this comment
#212 glanafon
The only organisation in the country tha has the money and means to give a lead is the government. For too long our governments have abrigated thier responsibility for the development of the nation to private industry and the complained because industry and commerce looked after its own interest rather than the nation's.
Government can give a lead and set a tone for the nation to follow. It can and should foster developments. In the 1980s, the UK had a better managed and developmental nuclear power industry than any nation in the world. Following privitiseation that industry beam diminished to the point where we now need to import technology from France. Now why is that? Private generators did what was in their own best commercial interest and that did not include continuing to develop a technology that we are now returning to in the nations strategic interests!
You state "Government role primarily is regulation and tax collection and the provision of public services in compliance with statute." here I totally disagree with you. That may be the limit that you wish for government. To me government has a PRIME RESPONSIBILITY to ensure the long term wellbeing of the country. At the present time I believe that via policy decisions that prime responsibility should be idntified in a developmental economic policy.
In response to your statement in #210. The Internet is far from being the only growth area. In fact it may have already passed its zenith in its present form. There are many areas for growth potential e.g. the development and production of viable fuel cells, generating technologies (wind and wave), carbon capture, etc. etc.
Complain about this comment
216 JadedJean
''One of the paradoxes of at least the past half century or so is that many (especially Middle Class) families in Liberal-Democracies appear to have uncritically embraced environmentalism, taking it upon themselves to turn their childen into what they thought they should be..''
This is just so much guff.
Take a look at Easter Island, one outcome. Take a look at New Zealand where a very similar process was in place, but where they pulled back from the brink and adopted an environmental approach, pre european contact, another outcome. Then take a look at the air pollution data for the UK associated with the loss of heavy industry here, it is quite remarkable. Then take a look at the air pollution data for China urban areas, or India urban areas during the period pre industrialisation to today, I think you will also find that quite remarkable, the inverse of the former data set. Or you could always look at the data for the high atmosphere pollution plume from the Indian subcontinent that heads out towards the Maldives and is affecting continental precipitation. Or you could consider that some estimate that 90 percent of all airborne pollution emmitted in the Industrial Revolution may still be up there airborne in the atmosphere. Quite a figure don't think. Particularly as so much else has been ejected into the atmospher in the meantime and also must be also steadily acculmulating. For micro particles behave like fluids and do not necessarily fallout. I am sure you will find it all somewhere on the internet. After that come back and talk sense instead of gaussing off all the time. Theres a good chap. ; )
Complain about this comment
Foredeckdave
You need growth asap.
You do not get growth from R&D, you get growth from the commercialisation of R&D, it is one step removed. You havent even got the R&D in place yet. You are talking of years and years, and there may even be technolgy leap frog so the R&D is not necessarily guarenteed commercialisation, that is the way R&D works. Right now we need growth. You will only get growth now from something set up and ready to go. I know the R&D expenditure 20 years ago - in the figures of 20 years ago was over 60 million spent in decades of effort (so a lot more now in todays money) for battery R&D at a major blue chip multinational, with no new product forthcoming. Breakthroughs occur when they occur not because you throw money at them.
You have seen the fact that governments are rubbish at commercial decision making yet you still want them to get more involved. The nuke plant thing is a mistaken strategic decision made because we had N Sea Oil and Gas. The UK public didnt want nuke anything so the government said nukes are v expensive and we have oil and gas. The French said - No oil, no gas, no choice, and stuck with nukes. They have come out on top as it happens. Once you have scrapped an industry it is always easier to buy in tech support than retrain.
Re internet trading. It is still in strong growth, something like a 1/3rd up last year. Like fairtrade, even now that is in growth 16 percent per annum even in this lot. The one thing government should be doing is enabling infrastructure and they are not even up to that.
The long term well being of the country is helped by the government governing not by the government acting in a commercial role. I cannot think of one government commercial involvement which has been a long term success. As for a country the size of the UK taking on the big boys - If you want to see a money drain look up the NASA budgets.
Complain about this comment
Stephanie,
Re: my comment at #16, the BoE published their lending report on 21 May. There are serious implications for the economy and current policy in the latest trends which tie in to the BoE Inflation report. Is this turf for Robert Peston at the Beeb or you?
Complain about this comment
FrankSz # 211
I think you have missed the point completely when you try to compare human achievement to that of monkeys, termites, bees and ants. I don't know if you have noticed but humans have moved on quite considerably from existing on what only nature can provide us free of charge: your monkey "nut-cracking factory" illustrates this perfectly because we can safely assume they have been doing that for hundreds of thousands of years!
Secondly, your Malthusian notion that the world is over populated is a common misconception peddled by eco-cranks and equally loud, obnoxious voices in certain sections of the mainstream media. For example, if one was to give every man, woman and child in China (Pop. 1.3 billion or nearly 20 percent of the world's total) 1.38 m2 of space, they would be able to fit into an area the size of Queensland, Australia. Interestingly, China is only the 73rd most densely populated country in the world.
Thirdly, in order to counter any perceived global shortages of resources, we must increase productive efficiency through the unhampered free-market's use of existing resources. We must restrain governments interfering in businesses exploiting untapped energy deposits currently locked away deep inside the earth. A good example of this is the US government's continuing refusal to allow US oil companies to drill for oil in Alaska.
Finally, although I am not naïve enough to believe that disease and starvation throughout the globe can be cured in an instant by free enterprise, I do believe that protectionism and "free trade" agreements concocted by governments exacerbate rather than ameliorate the problem. What is required is true, unrestricted, unequivocal global free trade between peoples of any nation who wish to participate and which is free from all [inter] governmental intervention.
Complain about this comment
MAD PEOPLE
There are a lot of them about. Really.
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt (#223) ".. "nut-cracking factory" illustrates this perfectly because we can safely assume they have been doing that for hundreds of thousands of years!"
Have you done much travelling? What do you think groups with mean IQs of about 70 are capable of in terms of production and infrastructure? How will you improve their IQs and productivity so they can enjoy the merits of Liberal-Democracy?
Complain about this comment
#219 foredeckdave You talk about nuclear, its decline, and the relationship to privatisation. Here is some history:
In the late 1980´s the government manipulated and fiddled the costs of nuclear power in the hope that it could be privatised. It was intended that National Power be privatised to include nuclear - that is why NP was so big, it was an attempt to create an entity that could cross subsidise the nuclear business. It did not work and nuclear remained in the state sector.
The state owned nuclear business engaged in cost cutting, which effectively destroyed its capacity ever to build new nuclear, and the government more overtly assumed responsibility for decommissioning costs. Privatisation was then tried again.
The privatised British Energy found itself with a 100% nuclear production base, and hence it could only operate in the base load market.
The government then orchestrated a review of electricity trading arrangements which had the (predicted) effect of lowering base load wholesale electricity prices to below anyones cost of prodution. This resulted in the bankruptcy of British Energy and a number of independent generators. It also hurt the two big generators - National Power and Powergen (although they avoided "meltdown" due to their portfolio flexibility and consequent ability to operate in the more profitable mid merit and peak markets).
British Energy was rescued by the government and returned to effective state ownership. Low electricity prices depressed the market value of National Power and Poweregen - and at the nadir of their market value (a nadir created by the government) the government sanctioned the sale of these companies to RWE and Eon respectively.
Sometime later the government initiated an energy review which was widely seen as being an attempt to produce the intellectual justification for a return to nuclear. At precisely the time the government was persuaded of the case for new nuclear it sanctioned the sale of Westinghouse - thus removing the last indigenous nuclear engineering capability.
The only vehicle for new nuclear was the state owned British Energy - but that lacked both the financial and technical capability to develop and construct new nuclear. Therefore a partner (new owner) had to be found. The only possible choice was EdF, something that was well known to EdF and hence guided their negotiating strategy.
EdF now have control of British Energy, but the government retain a lot of responsibility for "guaranteeing" the consenting process. Nuclear remains controversial, and will be opposed by sophisticated pressure groups. Nuclear is also very expensive, and remains expensive even with an assumed oil price of above $200/bbl (currently around $60/bbl). These facts give the government problems in terms of its policy for encouraging or allowing new build for other large plants utilising a fuel other than nuclear.
Almost all nuclear plants everywhere have suffered construction delays and cost overruns. The government took over a year to determine 4 potential sites for new nuclesr - something I could have done in less than half an hour. Not because I have any special gifts but because it always obvious that the new sites would be sites that host existing nuclear slated for closure.
All of the problems and issues described above are real problems and issues - and all are directly attributable to the actions and inactions of the government, and have substantially nothing to do with private enterprise.
It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that over the last 20 years the government has consistently operated a policy to destroy that which they say they want to develop. You seriously think the government is capable of offering any lead with regard to economic development? The lights will go out, it will be the fault of the government and huge efforts will be undertaken to persuade the populace that it someone elses fault, or that it is a problem that could not have been foreseen.
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 225
"Have you done much travelling?"
Yes, quite a lot in fact. Have you?
"What do you think groups with mean IQs of about 70 are capable of in terms of production and infrastructure?"
I really have no idea. You're the expert, you tell me!
;)
Complain about this comment
armagediontimes # 226
Nice one!
;)
Complain about this comment
#224 Jadedjean - Unsurprising to learn that another day produces another enemy. Don´t you think you may have found enough to be getting on with for a while.
Complain about this comment
#226 armagediontimes
"You seriously think the government is capable of offering any lead with regard to economic development?"
On this occassion show me another body that can take the initiative.
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt #228.
"armagediontimes # 226
Nice one!
;)"
really?
armagediontimes #226.
I suppose you're right in saying "..attributable to the actions and inactions of the government, and have substantially nothing to do with private enterprise."
but "It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that over the last 20 years the government has consistently operated a policy to destroy that which they say they want to develop" ignores the conflict of government of the day vs the state/military establishment. where would we get our plutonium w/out the nuclear power generation infra-structure?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
JadedJean #224.
followed your link to 'Mad People', given your #216, am I correct in thinking that you disagree with Watson? in principle, or only in particulars?
(also, read, well tried to, Quine as per your earlier suggestion, he struck me as being sardonic.)
Complain about this comment
# 223
Hi Kurt
your monkey "nut-cracking factory" illustrates this perfectly because we can safely assume they have been doing that for hundreds of thousands of years!
Well that's beside my point. What I was trying to say was that these monkeys learn and adapt and use the same basic thought processes to tame the environment as we do. The monkeys were not milling these nuts for thousands of years, but probably a few decades. There is the story of Emu the monkey and the potatoes in the sea water for example:
http://www.widdershins.org/vol5iss8/06.htm
Secondly, your Malthusian notion that the world is over populated is a common misconception peddled by eco-cranks and equally loud, obnoxious voices in certain sections of the mainstream media.
Well again that's beside the point. At some point, whether it be now or in a hundred years, the population of the world will need regulation. Then what?
Thirdly, in order to counter any perceived global shortages of resources, we must increase productive efficiency through the unhampered free-market's use of existing resources.
I don't understand how a market can be free. A market relies on the use of at least some currency and a legal framework that must be enforced. I don't think markets have been or ever will be free.
We must restrain governments interfering in businesses exploiting untapped energy deposits currently locked away deep inside the earth.
"We" ? What is "we" ? Some collective effort organised by who? Or is it a wish that suddenly everyone will adopt the same approach without orchestration of any kind?
A good example of this is the US government's continuing refusal to allow US oil companies to drill for oil in Alaska.
..or continuing permission to drill for oil in Iraq.
Finally, although I am not nave enough to believe that disease and starvation throughout the globe can be cured in an instant by free enterprise, I do believe that protectionism and "free trade" agreements concocted by governments exacerbate rather than ameliorate the problem.
Actually I agree. One thing that the WTO needs to do is allow developing nations to subsidise their agriculture, instead of being forced to take on dollar based debt and 'aid'.
Complain about this comment
#35 "This is not just unskilled people. Its people who are leaving the universities of Glasgow and Edinburgh and London and Exeter."
And this is answered by yourself in -
"I hear increasingly of young people fleeing the UK. Brilliant. That is really going to help just around the corner."
This is what is *NOT* stated when discussing the "millions of young unemployed" !! Those that are employable are already employed and it is the unemployable (i.e. those with irrelevant degrees) that, in the good times, were swept up just to make up the numbers of graduates, that are now falling by the wayside. My youngest offspring just left university and is gainfully employed and is being reasonable remunerated; in the City, of course, following in dad's size 8 footsteps :-)
Ten interviews and it's a done deal. Many of her classmates are also in the same position but a lot more of her year-mates in other degrees are finding it harder to get the very essential first job. There is a serious lack of demand for philosophy graduates while they are still crying out for more young doctors, dentists, etc. !!
Is it any wonder that most of these young people are fleeing the country ?? They are a very mobile lot these days and many will go where the pastures are greener !! Add to that the recession and near-certainty of higher taxation and the decision to flee is not that hard to make !!
Shades of the 70s !! The brain-drain has started *again* !! I'm sure Mr. Somali_pirate and his crew will want a few well-educated members to combat the array of modern weapons ranged against him !! And Canuckistan used to be one of the top destination for bright young Brits in the 70s !!
Complain about this comment
#46 "Most public funded provisions are paid on a rolling programme, ie out of current earnings. The illusion is money is put to one side for future payouts but it isnt, it never has been, it is funded by current income."
An absolutely perfect description of a Ponzi scheme !! I'm sure Mr. Madoff will be proud of it !!
Complain about this comment
235 ishkander
Size 8, City, you wouldnt be one of the Gnomes of Zurich by any chance would you.
Complain about this comment
216 Jaded Jean
Sunday is usually the day for preaching. I do not blame my parents.
I blame a certain A.Hitler who started a war which embroiled my parents to a level that by the end they neither knew they were coming or going. When my father was dying I sat with him and learned how it all went wrong for him. He was the bravest man I will ever know but he spent ten years from the mid-Fifties suffering from PTSD and could not hold down a job.
Now I perform the same service for my mother who having run a technical department in a leading university for twenty-five years has gone comepletely senile. Even she cannot accept what has happened to her. We are not in control.
My parents may have been outwardly middle-class as they got the scholarships but their experiences never allowed them to move that far from the artisan origins of their parents. Since I was largely raised by my three surviving grandparents neither have I.
Complain about this comment
Message 205 glanafon
I greatly enjoyed reading this comment. A very subtle statement of the processes that need to be experienced.
I hope that it is a self correcting mechanism as I would hate having to give the machine a quick and sufficient boot in its fundamentals. I have an enormous respect for the technical man.
Complain about this comment
jr4412 (#233) "followed your link to 'Mad People', given your #216, am I correct in thinking that you disagree with Watson? in principle, or only in particulars?"
Yes. Most people do not understand how radically different Skinner and Herrnstein's (etc) work in Behaviour Analysis (aka Radical Behaviourism, aka The Experimental Analysis of Behaviour aka Operant Conditioning) is from Watsonian or S-R methodological behaviourism. All that one should take from J B Wtson's work is his anti-mentalism. Operant conditioning/analysis practically analyses/manages behaviours as emitted (driven by genes ultimately) which have been selected by the environment and reinforced by their outcomes/consequences.
"(also, read, well tried to, Quine as per your earlier suggestion, he struck me as being sardonic.)"
In the audio at the SEAB site in his speech at Skinner's retirement, yes. Sadly, since then it appears the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.
All too few appreciate the import of this politically/economically.
Complain about this comment
Message 206 armagediontimes
I agree what are the products? We have to find some, hence my earlier references to R&D.
CO2 capture for coal fired power stations might not be a bad start. Also pharmaceutical manufacture might not go amiss either given the ongoing human capacity for generating pandemics.
Complain about this comment
stanilic (#238) "I do not blame my parents."
For most people, they get their genes (behaviours) from their parents/grandparents etc.
Complain about this comment
238 stanilic
The mind is vulnerable, the body is vulnerable, dignity is vulnerable. Your father did not learn to be brave he was built that way.
Complain about this comment
Message 208 foredeckdave
I think glanafon does have a point in that there will be an element of self-correction. It will take time for understanding to seep through but it will.
However, what drives me is the unemployment and the uncertainties it generates. Having been out on the cobbles, albeit for a short time in the Seventies I am very aware of what that condition can do to someone. I am also very aware that the social degradation that can be seen in all parts of the country derive from previous bouts of recession as not everyone gets to move out of the ghetto as it were.
This will not mend on its own and being aware of what happened in Luton this last weekend there are clear penalties in not attending to unemployment as a matter of urgency.
There are practical issues here that require flexible solutions. This is why I keep suggesting that all our dogmas are parked to one side whilst we focus on finding solutions, however temporary and interim. What I do know as a manager as you can do a lot with time and no money.
Complain about this comment
#231 jr4412. Substantially all of the military component of the UK nuclear industry is embedded in the Windscale (rebranded Sallafield) complex. This complex produces some power as a by product - but is not necessary. It could still operate with or without the broader civilian power base.
#230 foredeckdave. Whether or not anyone else can take the initiative is not relevant to an understanding as to whether or not the government is capable. The government exhibits a noxious mix of dogma and incompetence, and is largely detatched from the real world and hence has limited understanding. Look at the fuss over MPs expenses, and how the political class is struggling to comprehend the anger of the general public.
With regards to electricity it is the case that only the state can effectively backstop any nuclear component. This is because no private company would ever build nuclear because it is so expensive, and no private company could ever be capable of dealing with, and responding to, a worst case scenario. This is true the world over and does not just apply to the UK.
Safe in this knowledge the government decides through dogma to privatise the nuclear business. For the reasons set out above it cannot ever be fully and irrevocably consigned to the private sector. The giovernment responds by subterfuge, obsufication and kicking problems down the road. So much easier than just behaving rationally in the first place.
British governments go even further and spend years using their influence in the EU to try and force through pan european deregulation based closely on the British model. They specifically spend time harrassing the French and trying to force them to adopt the anglo saxon model. The French resist - in part because the population of France is far more engaged, and is capable of ensuring that most times the French acts in the best interests of the French people. (Something that appears so difficult for the British to understand). Some years later when the problems can no longer be kicked down the road the British government turn to the French for help.
Complain about this comment
#244
"What I do know as a manager as you can do a lot with time and no money."
Very interesting. When money is scarce or undervalued, the leader becomes a proxy for trust in other people. Belief in a leader can substitute for belief in money - they call it 'fiscal stimulus'.
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt (#227) "'What do you think groups with mean IQs of about 70 are capable of in terms of production and infrastructure?"
I really have no idea. You're the expert, you tell me!"
You said you were following the links. I did say you will all have to think carefully about this.
You are not making the connections. This is an intensional matter (Oedipus/Jocasta etc).
See glanafon, foredeckdave, armagediontimes and others for other instantiations of the scotomatic problem of intensional opacity.
One is judged by the company one keeps (hint FrankSz ;-)
Complain about this comment
When your customer base shrinks, so does your economy.
If a country has few products that customers wish to buy; then that country will experience unemployment. Only customers can bring jobs.
All employment stems from primary production (food, housing, raw materials extraction, energy, utilities); closely backed up by secondary production (computer hardware and software, transport, banking, insurance, defence); with service jobs (legal, pension providers, hairdressing, leisure industries) feeding off the primary and secondary wealth.
What can Britain do to attract more paying customers in the primary and/ or secondary sectors of production?
Complain about this comment
BRITAIN AND ITS PEOPLE
MrTweedy (#248) "What can Britain do to attract more paying customers in the primary and/ or secondary sectors of production?"
Is the answer that (as with the USA) it must stop increasing the proportion of low-ability/unable to produce much (except lots more low ability) people in its population?
Complain about this comment
#248
Why Britain? Why not the EU? As long as there is workforce mobility then local, national unemployment should be irrelevant, no?
Complain about this comment
'IT'S ALL (CHICAGO/AUSTRIAN SCHOOL) ECONOMICS TO ME'
FrankSz (#250) "Why Britain? Why not the EU? As long as there is workforce mobility then local, national unemployment should be irrelevant, no?"
Exactly. Irrelevant. Business can always bring in cheaper labour/more uncritical consumers. After all, all people are equals. Nationalism is the child of prejudice etc etc (excepting Israel).
A Stalinist's view on the EU and another point of view.
Complain about this comment
No.250. FrankSz
This is true, in theory.
It works for you Frank, but it won't work for everyone.
Personally, I wish to remain in Britain; as I enjoy its culture, its climate, its way of life, its history, its language, its countryside, its architecture, its artistic merits. I feel at home here. Despite its faults, I love it still.
My favourite EU destination is Italy, but I wouldn't really want to live there.
Therefore, I have a vested interest in Britain remaining healthy and wealthy, as I want to remain living and working here.
I enjoy the culture of Europe, but I can easily visit it when I want to.
I do lament the growth of "world culture", where everyone wears t-shirt and jeans, and slowly becomes a bland blend of liberal consumer. Such a culture is safer (less chance of wars), but lacks depth, as we all get blended and herded in the same direction, towards processed humanity.
But what is the alternative? There is no perfect social set up, afterall. Technology has made our lives better compared to the past, not political or social science.....
Complain about this comment
LAND OF THE STUPID BUT FREE? (FOR NON BUT THE BRAVE)
Addendum (#251) Ask where in the bell curve the dearth of births is, and where the excess. Then predict how the gap between indigenous and immigrant populations may shrink, not through raised achievement but through lowering ability (dumbing down) in the indigenous population.
Complain about this comment
248 Mr T
Market forces, responsiveness of business. Reduction in overheads. new ways of working.
Market regulation effective not ineffective. Clear rules. BTW This also implies prosecution. Keep the courts busy. Otherwise meaningless.
Control of public expenditure to keep the direct and indirect and stealth taxation and stealth under control. Stealth tax and stealth charges in particular needs stamping on as it is used to evade other tax reduction.
Greater use of comms, eg internet.
Low energy technology. Energy thrift.
Cultural change, more responsible consumerism.
The country has plenty of products people will want to buy, they are just not being produced yet because people and businesses are looking the wrong way. Booms stall progress because people become engaged in simply trying to shift stuff for the monster to eat. All development freezes. Stop the boom and progress resumes driven by need.
Transport - reduction not expansion.
Strategic infrastructure development.
A low FX and non volatile interest rates are helpful but not essential. The right products are not that price sensitive.
Not a complete list.
There are inevitably economic problems but there is also opportunity. The bigger problem is the social problem of participation in the economy and exclusion.
Complain about this comment
No.254. glanafon wrote:
"Stop the boom and progress resumes driven by need".
We could be on the verge of a better world, if we play our cards right.
The economic crisis gives us the option to re-focus away from over-indulgence and instead towards a more natural balance.
As you point out: the bigger the problem, the bigger the necessity, the bigger the opportunity for a better long term future.
Complain about this comment
#254 glanafon (aka slogansrus.com)
What are "market forces and responsiveness of business"?
Market forces decided that large global banks are finished. The response of this particular business was to compel governments to short circuit the market and bail them out.
Lower overheads sounds great but it means lower taxes and hence less public spending. Another highly entrenched special interest group who have no intention of going into that long good night, whether gently or otherwise.
I could go on, so I will (but only a bit). "transport - reduction" Not obvious to see how that fits with the bail out of large motor manufacturers and the creation of false incentives to encourage people to buy more cars.
This is long list of things that are not going to happen. it is not necessarily because they are wrong, but because they are perceived to be damaging to special interest groups. Any attempt to do introduce these things will be met with massive resistance - see how quickly the US congress caved in when the financiers threatened to bring down the entire system unless they were given someone elses money.
If you, or anyone else, really thinks these things are going to happen then stand by for crushing disappointment. If it looks like anyone is getting close to implementing these things then just stand by for crushing.
Complain about this comment
No.256. armagediontimes
The economic crisis is so severe, that change will come from it, no matter what.
The interest groups you speak of will only benefit in the long run if businesses and consumers resume spending. This will only happen if new efficiencies lead to better productivity, through better use of the world's scarce resources. Increased productivity will reduce overheads, and allow the debts to be repaid, whilst allowing sufficient levels of disposable income to support consumer and business spending.
We must become more efficient, or suffer years of stagflation and high unemployment. It's green technology or bust.
No amount of tinkering with the money supply, or governments spending more of the money they don't have, will solve the malais.
Complain about this comment
Stanilic, Glanafon, Mr T, Armagedionetc. enjoyed your debate and comments.
May I tentatively endorse a guided economic response that has a policy framework in the decades rather than parliamentary lifecycle. We do not have much time to reach a policy consensus (if that is even achievable as already indicated requires turkeys to vote for Christmas) and even taken step by step reconfiguring the UK economy will take decades. As we will be taxed to death ( my little hunch is a 20%+ VAT rate before too long, once the worst is behind us)I favour recycling (not just in a green sense) so that books furniture etc etc are reused rather than more flat pack cr@p imported Fashions change but utility is a constant need. We don't need the pickled sharks anymore. The economic impact of the recovery will be immense, culturally Uk will change dramatically.
Complain about this comment
MrTweedy (#257) "We must become more efficient, or suffer years of stagflation and high unemployment."
Look at the direction of US and EU demographic trends. How are either going to avoid the fate of the countries from which those who are now shaping those trends migrated, currently enduring? Is green technology going to help them?
Complain about this comment
#257 MrTweedy - You are correct insofar that change is coming. The only choice is to whether the change is managed and introduced on a more or less consensual basis or whether it sweeps in on a hurricane of chaos.
An anlaysis of either current policy actions or history does not suggest the first option to be the more likely outcome.
Only ordinary people will be looking at the long term. The attention of the financial oligarchy is exclusively short term focussed. It was this short term focus that precipated the current crisis and conditioned policy response. It will not change.
Your high level diagnosis is correct - but no policy exists to address the situation.
It is even worse. You have previously expressed a primary concern for the UK. You identify a need for better use of the worlds scarce resources. Many of those resources are not indigenous to the UK. For what reason is the best use of many of those resources to be found in the UK?
The game is up - the political establishment has atrophied away, and big industry is out for its own short term interests irrespective of consequence. Meltdown is coming, and for all practical purposes the tipping point has been passed.
Complain about this comment
256 armagediontimes
''....What are "market forces and responsiveness of business"?...''
If businesses do not improve their responsiveness they will go under. This implies more flexible manufacture and less volume. You are seeing a lack of responsiveness in the auto makers. I am not saying all will do it but some will. those that don't will fail sooner and later. Mass produced goods made in low labour zones are not going away therefore smarter manufacture has to occur.
''.....Market forces decided that large global banks are finished. The response of this particular business was to compel governments to short circuit the market and bail them out....''
Yes but that occurred because they were judged to be infrastructure. That implies they should not be free market or should be split into public and private, but that is outside my info levels. There have not been any other grandiose bailouts and they would have shown up by now in all probability. The banks will not be let off a tight rein again if anybody has any sense. So a one off.
''....Lower overheads sounds great but it means lower taxes and hence less public spending. Another highly entrenched special interest group who have no intention of going into that long good night, whether gently or otherwise.....''
Correct, but here will be little HMG can do about it, networking of small businesses team forming is a possibility. But overheads have to be dramatically cut to compete with low wage zones which will have to happen to some extent. Tax takes will fall. Inevitable. Try and get too clever on taxation and competiveness will drop and businesses will leave. The fact HMG is using the wrong model is not my problem. They are almost certainly banking on a resurgance of the old ways of doing things and I would not count on that being where growth comes from. Public expenditure has to drop and may drop more than many would like. It is implicit in the decline of the west and I don't think anybody has really considered it or wants to.
''.... I could go on, so I will (but only a bit). "transport - reduction" Not obvious to see how that fits with the bail out of large motor manufacturers and the creation of false incentives to encourage people to buy more cars....''
Why not go on, it does you good. lol. False incentives can only last for short periods. High energy prices will force transportation change and a switch ot virtual meetings and business. High energy costs will reduce mileage, the impact is there immediately there is a hike. Also electrical energy will rise in price in the near future. I'm not bothered if they build nuke power staions the unit cost will be stonking so consumption will have to drop. Don't build them and consumption has to drop because the supply isnt there.
''....This is long list of things that are not going to happen. it is not necessarily because they are wrong, but because they are perceived to be damaging to special interest groups. Any attempt to do introduce these things will be met with massive resistance - see how quickly the US congress caved in when the financiers threatened to bring down the entire system unless they were given someone elses money...''
I wouldnt count on it. Not many people thought the banks would bring themselves to their knees. Special interests have influence but only so much.
''....If you, or anyone else, really thinks these things are going to happen then stand by for crushing disappointment. If it looks like anyone is getting close to implementing these things then just stand by for crushing....''
But I'm not bothered if they are implemented, I just think they are likely. I'm fine. We have very strong demand. Sales all over the planet. how many customers does a business want, there are millions out there.
Value is realative. Sugar and salt used to be incredibly expensive. Aluminium cutlery was the preserve of kings.
You worry too much. Read a bit of Leonardo da Vinci. The american dream may have crashed ''As every divided kingdom falls, so every mind divided between many studies confounds and saps itself.''
Complain about this comment
We don't need to keep buying new cars, foreign holidays, new phones, new televisions, new clothes, new furniture, new computer games....
Maybe we should all just work 3 days per week, and share the jobs out amongst the population. Our incomes will fall, but then so will the price of assets (like houses). Modern technology will enable us to live within our means. We simply recycle what we already have, and only renew when really necessary.
Technology does the hard work and we scale back our spending accordingly, and enjoy a better life with more leisure time.
Tidal power will bring electricity for Britain, and there is enough land in the UK to produce food and water for our population, if we just use our resources better (forest farming, etc).
Complain about this comment
KILLING THE GOLDEN GOOSE
MrTweedy (#262) "Technology does the hard work and we scale back our spending accordingly, and enjoy a better life with more leisure time."
Which is pretty much what happened at the Demographic Transition, i.e when the population went exponential and dysgenic in post-indutrial societies. Technology/automation ever more obviates the need for human intelligent behaviour so the underclass swells childlike expecting ever more services from an ever more disenchanted and ever more numerically denuded (low birth-rate) elite.
Do you see? It's already been happening. This will just make it happen even faster.
One has to look at the nature of diversity, skewness and what pressures are working on the population. The current pressures are self-destructive. Most of the contributions being posted here are, I'm afraid to say, clueless.
Complain about this comment
#262
"Maybe we should all just work 3 days per week"
I don't know where to begin on this. I could rant for a year on this topic. I agree, but in a way I think every creative person for the last god knows how long would agree. You see, for years I and others have worked hard on new and/or better ways of doing things in various companies to try and make our lives easier. The end result though has been that the newly created time has been filled with artificially created work, or that the ideas were rejected as investment into optimisation that was never really desired.
All you need to do is look around in your own organisation, I am sure, and see that those who work 9 to 5 spend most of their days wasting time. When I say wasting time, I mean the following:
a) They are quietly tapping away on the internet trying to look busy and kill time, when they could be just going out for a walk or something
b) They are extremely busy working overtime rushing towards some artificial deadline because some boss is under pressure to deliver for no economically justifiable reason
c) People are doing things in really dumb ways because management do not have a macroscopic overview of detailed processes
d) Management do not have the right incentives so things get done in dumb ways
e) People waste time in long discussions because autocracy is out of fashion
f) etc
g) etc
I could go on and on and on
The main problem is: WRONG INCENTIVES. I am sure everyone would love to do things better, save time, save costs, save energy, but they are generally afraid of losing budget renewal and/or the jobs, so they don't.
Complain about this comment
#264
I mean, a slightly comic example is software development. I remember when those nutters in the US declared "war on terror". I remember thinking why do they bother - more money,energy,time and human resource is lost on poor software development process than on bombs and etc. There should be a war on poor software process.
Complain about this comment
Pleased to SEE that Stef changed OZZY'S photo at the TOP.
Complain about this comment
266 ac
Yes I think he's sayin' 'Yup Browns bubble is about this big now.'
Complain about this comment
glanafon,
"The fact HMG is using the wrong model is not my problem."
But it most certainly is your problem. If HMG continues to use the wrong model, then their decisions will become progressively more wrong perhaps to the point of armagediontimes forecasts. Now that really would put a pin in your let it work itself out bubble.
You really are limiting your thinking to yesterdays economics were money and costs were the primary driveforce of all of the Western economies. Slowly but surely there are signs that other strategic factors are coming into play. Just look at Germany's handling of the Opel affair as an example. Major change in the whole economic structure of the Western world is coming. I believe that it will be focused upon new 'green' technologies that will free us from the tyranny of oil and create new business opportunuities. Now I would prefer that these changes came about peacefully but they may need the stimulous of conflict to hurry them along.
China, India and the rest of the Far East can offer nothing but low labour costs. They have nothing that cannot be made in the West. Those nations that are dependant upon raw material sales will still be open to The West. Strategically therefore they are not a threat if we we change our focus upon COST and replace it with a focus upon VALUE. I am now more convinced that this change will come about in the not too distant future.
Take a look at the strategic advantages that are open to an innovator. However, for a company or a nation to take advantage of them it has to prepare. This is the essence of what stanillic is trying to say to you. It doesn't always need loads of money to be thrown at it. It does need to be recognised and fostered - hence my call for protectionism, training and the promotion of a culture of research.
In the UK we have a history of innovation and a failure to capitalise on it. We CAN change that but only if we plan now to do so.
Complain about this comment
#265. FrankSz,
Shouldn't you be saying this to Microsoft?
Complain about this comment
JadedJean #240, #263.
"Sadly, since then it appears the lunatics have truly taken over the asylum.
All too few appreciate the import of this politically/economically." and "Most .. here are .. clueless."
I don't understand, and the text linked in #224 has the same shortcoming, namely, the apparent lack of historical perspective. my reading of the situation is that 'the lunatics' are not a 20th century phenomenon. while recent (last ~90 years) events have led to a drastic deterioration of our prospects, history shows that we've sold "down the river" for very much longer, IMO related to organised religion (ie. 2000+ years) [realise is OT here but, since relating to sustainable development, could be discussed on R Black's Earth Watch?].
Complain about this comment
FrankSz # 234
"What I was trying to say was that these monkeys learn and adapt and use the same basic thought processes to tame the environment as we do. The monkeys were not milling these nuts for thousands of years, but probably a few decades."
Okay, Frank, you go and mill your nuts with the monkeys because you have quite clearly failed to see the point being made.
"Well again that's beside the point. At some point, whether it be now or in a hundred years, the population of the world will need regulation. Then what?"
Again, you fail to understand the point being made about increasing productive capacity and efficiency via the free-markets.
"I don't understand how a market can be free."
That is obvious!
"We" ? What is "we" ? Some collective effort organised by who? Or is it a wish that suddenly everyone will adopt the same approach without orchestration of any kind?"
Once you begin to grasp why what has happened has happened (i.e., the current economic crisis), then you will finally realise who "we" is.
Here's a hint: ABCT!
Endex
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
242 JJ
"For most people, they get their genes (behaviours) from their parents/grandparents etc"
Could you enlighten us as to where the others get their genes from ?
Complain about this comment
#261 Glanafon - It is possible to be both right and wrong at the same time.
It is true that ruling elites considered banks to be infrastructure and sold this story to the populace. However the only basis on which Goldman Sachs can be defined as infrastructure is the basis of expediency, sophistry and dissembling. Not a good basis for policy.
Bail outs have not stopped they have accelerated and changed form. All that has changed is that the media has stopped reporting it. The change in accountancy rules is a bail out by any other name, the proposed TALP is being hawked as free money for everyone that has a minimum $10 million entrance fee.
In the UK the government is, and will remain, an active impediment to the development of small flexible businesses. Most businesses (but not all) require access to start up capital, and most small busineses fail. Who will lend them money when the government is an alternative borrower with unlimited demand?
Not many members of the general public thought that banks would bring themselves to their knees - but pretty much every insider knew what was coming, and they nothing about it. Some of the smarter ones took their money and ran prior to the brown stuff hitting the fan. Not many members of the general public realised what MPs were up to with regard to expenses, but the MPs knew as did the people that administered the system.
People are begining to wake up as to what is going on. Recessionary effects are much more widespread than you may think. All property owners are losing, all savers are losing, all working people with private pensions are losing, all unemployed people are losing. In the future public sector wrkers will lose (because they must), and people relying on public services will lose. Some of these things don´t matter on a day to day basis - but it weakens the capacity to withstand further shocks. The crisis is not over and further shocks will occur, and hence more people will be without the capacity to survive unaided. People will demand change, and meaningful change will be resisted at all cost.
You should then be bothered about the implementation of change - as this is the area most likely to result in widespread violence. Once that starts no-one can guarantee either the outcome or their personal immunity.
Meltdown is coming.
Complain about this comment
Uhuru2 (#273)
Some people are adopted/fostered or not the progeny of one or more of the people they call their parents. These (non-biological) parents do not give them their genes (or their behaviours).
Complain about this comment
#268 foredeckdave. There is not much chance that the UK will have any meaningful role to play in your green revolution of change.
Judge them not by their words but by their actions. I know a guy who developed a new way of dealing with certain forms of industrial contamination. The Environemnt Agency (EA) insisted he desist and threatened him with prosecution and imprisonment. Within months of his final conflict with the EA he was offered a significant financial inducement to relocate to the US and continue his work there.
I know another guy who was trying to develop more cost effective renewable energy. No-one in the UK would even buy him a coffee, much less fund him. He is now in India having been lured there by significant financial inducement and ongoing development support.
You cannot change these kinds of attitudes overnight - it takes years.
Complain about this comment
jr4412 (#270) "I don't understand, and the text linked in #224 has the same shortcoming, namely, the apparent lack of historical perspective."
OK, here's one with some historical perspective...
Complain about this comment
LibertarianKurt - Here's another take on the infrastructure problem, and by implication, the ever more windy solutions one hears in this blog, and elsewhere. Until more people come to terms with the physical realities and constraints, things will just keep deteriorating - slowly, but surely.
Complain about this comment
Just listened to Straw YUK!!
All this PANIC over North Korea while PAKISTAN is about to IMPLODE it's
Pakistan we ALL NEED to WORRY about.The Chinese will deal with North
Korea.
MEANWHILE BROWN'S UK PLC SINKS FURTHER INTO DEBT,well WHY BREAK A 12
YEAR HABIT GORDY?
Complain about this comment
268 fdd
Good Luck.
It is most unlikely that any government will have a best fit model because it will be new terrain and they are not good at that. Inertia will inhibit any move too far from the existing model. Look at how far out they were getting to this point. Business is far more likely to move from what it has been doing faster.
If HMG are using the wrong model believe me it is not my problem, I am not the one setting the framework. You can see the global economy at work and the impact it has, you can see the way large businesses say if you want us you have to make an offer we like. That is what is going on with the automakers. The next step is for it to move down the stack to smaller companies. The problem HMG will have is hanging on to business. Make life too difficult and it will go. With it goes the tax revenue. because the private sector is the wealth generator. Therefore the wealth generator is welcomed elsewhere. Why do you think Mandelson is mulling over putting cash on the table to keep Vauxhall. Just as cash has been put on the table before for other multinationals. Not always successfully in the long term.
India China etc will start to move up the tech tree. They are quite capable people they are basically no different than us. In a generation they will be nearer. They have moved from paddy fields to factories in a generation. You are not recognising the technical mobility that is possible, they are even being trained in our universities. It is basically arrogant to think we are somehow better than them, we just had a headstart, and too many here want to picnic on the way now. Particularly those who are not involved in wealth creation and just think it is as natural as the sun coming up every morning. That there will be a constant and ever increasing flow of tax income.
Prepared. I am already prepared. That is the whole basis of what we are about. That is why we have growth. We are prepared to use any technology that will help us from mesolithic to modern.
I don't know what you mean by conflict may be needed, but it is not a way forward. I don't know what you mean by value. Value is like quality it is meaningless. You can produce consistent rubbish of a certain quality. What does value mean, much the same, usually cheap.
I am opposed to protectionism. This island cannot survive on a domestic only market. Protectionism would damage what is left of the UK international business sector not help it. It will not happen anyway, only to some extent by low FX reducing imports.
Training and a culture of research. Sounds like government funding to me. These have to be part of business not a bolt on goodie. First of all you have to have the business. You don't get the business through the training and R&D. The business has to be active first. Otherwise it would be easy. Fund this R&D and that training activity and bingo. Graduates are trained and the government is saying go away till things get better. Why is that - its not because they arn't trained - it is because there isnt the business.
Cost of a product. Well the only way you escape that is to produce something that cannot be compared to something else. That is the whole point. Money is tight on the shopping and you can compare two items. So you have to get away from goods that can be compared. Look at the supermarket figures. Money tight so the costcutters florish, response cut costs to recover lost sales. Meanwhile fairtrade imports grow, because they have no direct competition and are ethical. 16 percent per annum I believe, right now, as of last report.
There are no strategic advantages open to the innovator unless they can exploit the innovation. The reason innovations are not generally exploited here is because business here is poor at exploiting them so they end up elsewhere. That is a cultural thing. And culture is the hardest thing of all to change. You cannot expect growth from a business in decline because innovation management is a different mentality to decline management. So you look for growth and follow it. Trying to change the culture of a declining big business is like jumping in a descending lift. I know I've tried it. Innovate in design and just - in - time manufacture. Save 10 percent on production costs, increase forecasting flexibility to cut stockholding dramatically, 20+ percent, 24 months later you are back where you started. This is because they are not generating new customer bases, they are focusing on 'efficiency' because it is easier. Growth is growth and decline is decline. Higher efficiency decline is still decline. But you try telling a board that.
The bottom line is you have to supply something that somebody is prepared to make themselves poorer to obtain. The UK has been poor at this recently. That is why there is decline. Nothing to do with training and R&D. And if you think stuff like the Severn Tidal scheme is green innovation it is not it is infrastructure.
So I am afraid I do not agree. And I do not expect it to just magically all work out. What is needed is those who know what they are doing be left alone to do what they are good at, if they are good at wealth creation. And realistically growth takes time. And if decline continues with people who are stuck in decline than that is not the fault of people in growth. It is the people in decline who got us here. And passengers, well there are a lot of those, but when the Titanic sunk the passengers did not expect the same service to continue unaffected in the lifeboats onwards to America did they. Tickets may well not mean much.
Complain about this comment
274 armagediontimes
''It is possible to be both right and wrong at the same time.''
Yes I know that is why I am not bother if I am right or wrong. It saves having an identity crisis. What are you going to do if you are both right and wrong ; )
Insiders always know more than outsiders. That why there is insider trading.
Anyway Ali D in da House is sticking to his forecasts so it will all be over by Xmas, just slipped back from last Xmas thats all.
Complain about this comment
277 jj
This link looks weak, in fact I would say it is the weakest link. It pretty much starts by saying science is a western thing, sorry but what happened to the Arabs and the Chinese whose science predated western science. I switched off at that point. But it is from the land where creationism is held in high esteem from what I read somewhere. You just can't get the academics these days.
Complain about this comment
JadedJean # 278
"In the name of international trade, bilateral co-operation, globalisation and other subterfuges, the norm in the world today is for smart people to appropriate the wealth of other people for themselves and their countries. But more among the blacks than any other race, the practice is to steal from their own country and salt away to other people's country. Is it intelligence that our leaders steal billions of naira and hide in other people's country?"
I wonder what institution he is alluding to?
This is not another take; it is the same TAKE over and over and over again. It's what governments (irrespective of nationality or race) are good at!
;)
Complain about this comment
glanafon,
You're still 'sticking to the knitting'. Look at the range of opinions in this thread alone and then ask yourself why? There is only way one consistant factor - that things can't go back to the way they were before. Now that is not just a phenominum in the UK. It identifies itself in a range of ways in all countries around the world. In the West, I am begining to believe that there is a general feeling that it may be possible to replace the old with something better. I accept not today or even tomorrow but major change is coming.
At the same time as we have seen a collapse in confidence in the international financial system, we are also seeing the demise of globalisation. As more and more people become unemployed so the pressure will grow to find work for the people. In the end, it will be the pressure from below that will force governments to take action to stop the flow of jobs to low cost areas.
When I ask for government to take a lead in fostering a climate of training this does not necessarilly have to cost shed loads of money. It can include the re-direction of training and education budgets that already exist. It can be done by beefing-up inintiatives like Investors In People and making them mandatory for suppliers to central and local government (at least IIP is developmental unlike say ISO9000/1).
COST and Pricing. You are taking a very nieve view of the relationship between the two. Costs are purely the concern of the seller. The purchaser has absolutely no interest in your costs. His reference is to the PRICE. Now pricing and buying decisions are far more complex than just the monetry transfer. When comparing 2 products and 2 prices there are very very few buyers who will only consider the monetry value. The vast majority will also consider other elements of the product offering as well. Your exmple of fairtrade proves my point. There re many cheaper options than fairtrade products on offer but customers find a 'benefit' from chosing fairtrade othe than the purchase price. Whilst Costcutters et al are increasing their trade, I don't see Tesco, Asda and Sainsbury closing stores.
You really should do some more research on the strategic options open to innovators - particularly when it comes to pricing. For truly innovative products there are no price referencing points. I forwrded this point because I believe that we will soon be seeing what appear to be toally new products and not merely product adaptations or line extensions. However, I accept your point with regard to 'efficiency savings'.
As for culture then I would accept that, left to its own devices, British business would repeat it former failures when commercialising innovation. This is an area where government and finance must come together to form flexible partnerships to foster innovative organisations. From experience, it is likely that the most fertile companies for innovative technology are unlikely to be big business. They are not hidebound by the culture of big business and everything should be done to keep them out of the hands of big business whilst they grow and develop their own cultures.
Even during a depression there is still demand. The demand may be smaller but it is still there. Oh! and the Seven Barrage is surely an infrastructure project however the technology used to capture and transfrom the wave power will be innovative - that has to be concieved, designed and built by somebody.
If we just let things deteriorate on the basis that there's nothing we can do about it then somebody is going to try and take the military option and that could be catastrophic for us all. So better to try and fail than do nothing at all.
Finally, I never denegrated the skills and abilities of the Chinese. What I said was that they presently produce nothing that we could make back here. That is very different from saying that they are not able.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#281) "Yes I know that is why I am not bother if I am right or wrong. It saves having an identity crisis. What are you going to do if you are both right and wrong ; )"
Tragically, it depends on whether one takes it as a cue for change not. Oedipus allegedly wanted to have sex with Jocasta not with his mother. What does that tell you about psychological (intensional) contexts/states (like knowing, wanting etc)?
Do you know when you are confronting the unkonwn? Do you know how you behave? Do you actively connect pieces of what you don't want to hear/see because it exposes areas of your ignorance/false beliefs?
Complain about this comment
#271
Wahay! Kurt freaks out and evades the topic. Look, if you feel that questioning your Mises philosophy is too personal and close to your religious core then don't discuss it in public. I raised some interesting and valid questions and I understand a lot more than you imply in your response. As Spock would say, your response is 'emotionally compromised'.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
284 fdd
Talk is cheap. When most people go on about things need to change they usually mean somebodyelse has to change. They will all disappear into the woodwork as soon as they have to do something. It is easier to moan. It is reasonable to project that there will be more not less unhappiness amongst the passengers on the cruise liner Grate Britian. Whether that leads to genuine change and motivation for action is another thing. What is more likely is that things happen to people than people apply happening to things.
I hardly think we have seen the demise of globalism, the drivers are still in place. There has just been a temporary slacking of the pace.
The one thing which will not happen with the severn barrage if it goes ahead is innovation. The mechanisms are available and well understood. The last thing anybody involved will want is an experiment because that risks failure. The bigger the project the more certainty of outcome desired.
The UK has failed to produce enough products that people want for a variety of reasons. I can tell you now that few people work in the field of innovation, that tells you that there is going to be a problem. Cultural change is difficult and long term.
You are still bashing on about the government saving the UK via intervention in commerce that you are dressing up as training and R&D. This is despite the fact that the government is a major player in getting us in this mess.
I have said repeatedly that business has to develope products that do not have a high price sensitivity.
I cannot be bothered what 60 million odd other people do in the UK, I do not have the time. I post principally what we do here that works and gives growth, and our experiences. Growth that appears somewhat scarce elsewhere. I would prefer to live here but do not have to. Nor do my kids because they have marketable skills. The issue is the majority in reality live off the minority and marketable skills and wealth generation are in decline here and in growth elsewhere.
Complain about this comment
285 JadedJean
The reason I am not bothered I am right or wrong is because that is soemthing that only time can tell. I state what I have observed.
''Oedipus allegedly wanted to have sex with Jocasta not with his mother. What does that tell you about psychological (intensional) contexts/states (like knowing, wanting etc)?''
It tells me that if you are writing a story about a fictional character like Oedipus you can do anything you want in that story. And the main objetcive is to entertain.
Complain about this comment
286 franksz
Spock....
What is it with people quoting fictional characters as a reference point. first Oedipus and now Spock, the other day a link to a judge quoting words from Humpty Dumpty in court. Has the world gone mad that guidance is sought from fictional characters, I'll just ask Yoda, he'll know.
Complain about this comment
LIONS AND WILDEBEEST
LibertarianKurt (#283) "In the name of international trade, bilateral co-operation, globalisation and other subterfuges, the norm in the world today is for smart people to appropriate the wealth of other people for themselves and their countries. But more among the blacks than any other race, the practice is to steal from their own country and salt away to other people's country. Is it intelligence that our leaders steal billions of naira and hide in other people's country?"
I wonder what institution he is alluding to?
What this shows you, I suggest, is something very important about individualism/selfishness/narcissism and how it is usually controlled/managed by the family/state. Practically, look at the growth of th population of Nigeria over the last 50 years or so compared with that of the UK. It has tripled (so has Bangladesh and Pakistan). Plug in their mean IQs (about 70 and 80) and population sizes into a Gaussian distribution with Standard Deviations of 15 points. Then imagine giving freedom to 150 million children with predators outside the schoolyard. Think of the 'freedom' given to Blacks and Hispanics in NYC (cue Randy Newman's 'Rednecks').
See where 'freedom' leads - it leads all the way to the The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA) of 1999 and 'power to the people'.
Mad people eh?
Complain about this comment
#290
Spock fictional? What are you talking about? Spock is real! He is! He is!
In fact, accusing Spock of being fictional is, in the Great Stardate Logbook, written as being a cardinal sin, punishable by beheading.
You go ahead and ask Yoda, your Jedi black magic is no match for the Great Mind Melder in the Sky.
Complain about this comment
FrankSz
Germany already has a 4-day week, partly paid for by the government.
If they can do it, why not the rest of us?
In Britain we have "flexible working", which means workers come to the office on a Friday in casual clothes, do no work and then go home early.
The Victorians prematurely concluded they had enough technology and that life could not be improved any further. Maybe now is the time this really comes true. Leisure time is the new "must have" product.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#289) "Oedipus allegedly wanted to have sex with Jocasta not with his mother. What does that tell you about psychological (intensional) contexts/states (like knowing, wanting etc)?"
It tells me that if you are writing a story about a fictional character like Oedipus you can do anything you want in that story. And the main objetcive is to entertain."
Tragically, it illustrates something remarkable about the 'logic' of the intensional idioms of propositional attitude.....which include 'knowing'.
Your response illustrates why you post here, and why you should not be taken at all seriously.
Complain about this comment
Innovation in my view is a much overused word. It is shorthand for so many things (lots of postive growth thingy with lots of applied technology thingy and lots of government money and sage scientists telling us the future is like this for example)The economic problems are deep and mind bogglingly huge but does that mean we need large projects (eg Severn barrage or indeed seven Severn barrages)to fix the economy.We are not conspicuously successful in delivering large projects anymore. They tend to be overtaken by ego and develop a life of their own (e.g.IT projects as already alluded to). It is more difficult to achieve cultural innovation (renewal/revolution,whatever)than silver bullet projects. But a change in our whole cultural mindset is required to get over this economic crisis. Will the youngsters building the Severn barrage be allowed to use mobile phones when up to their waist in mud on the estuary?
Complain about this comment
JadedJean
There is no appetite for the state management of physical purity. It conjures up images of ethnic cleansing, and goes against the grain. Live and let live, dear chap. Harmony will result....
Complain about this comment
THE DARK SIDE
Understand it not, they will.
MrTweedy (#296) "There is no appetite for the state management of physical purity. It conjures up images of ethnic cleansing, and goes against the grain. Live and let live, dear chap. Harmony will result...."
'Conjured up' is a most apposite description, as it is undoubedly just pro free-market propaganda/PR.
No doubt we will continue on the road to ruin, especially if Citizen Cameron has his way.
Complain about this comment
Tonyparksrun
Perhaps, if the whole UK population was to work for a British mobile phone company, and we spend all our time ringing each other up on our mobiles, more an more often, this would generate enough circular flow of money to keep the economy in a full-employment positive spiral equilibrium.
We would simply import our food, clothing and energy; paid for by the profits of the phone company......
Complain about this comment
294 JadedJean
''Your response illustrates why you post here, and why you should not be taken at all seriously.''
I am not bothered about being taken seriously. It is up to individuals to determine whether what is posted is of any use to them or not. However I do not post fiction.
295 tonyparksrun
It is relatively easy to deliver something within fixed boundaries which is within experience. The more a one off soemthing is the more uncertainty has to be allowed for. The less the boundaries are fixed or determinable the higher the risk. Innovation is simply doing something in a different way.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#299) "However I do not post fiction."
You would only know that if you knew what was true, and by your own admission, you don't care enough to find out what differentiates fact from fiction. You write fiction and nonsense.
Perhaps you should do as you are instructed to see what happens?
;-)
Complain about this comment
300 jj
As usual you assume to much. And it is as usual amusing that you are convinced you are right and have apparently sought the mantle of the orifice that passes all understanding. I would suggest this is an unwise strategy. For you too cannot determine unknowns or where the boundary of knowledge is. Let alone wisdom which is a totally different thing. : )
Complain about this comment
#237 glanafon - Zurich ?? Do I look Kraut to you ?? Besides, all the German and French that I know are usually unprintable and not for polite company !! :-)
Complain about this comment
Mr T mobile phone companies are a case in point. Innovation is pursued seemingly just for the sake of it. The utility of mobile phones has not vastly changed since introduction. OK we phone/text/take pictures/e-mail. All that remains is for these things to be done faster, smaller, cheaper. LK and co will say we are free to choose what phone we have and how often to change it but really what is the point (and the cost to the world) of small incremental changes? Our economies are skewed by employing countless designers trying to innovate.
Im of the Sydney Harbour bridge party build it well (on Teesside) , build it once.
Complain about this comment
#293 Mr Tweedy
Hi. The 3 and 4 day week is here (Cz) too. Mainly for automotive related companies and factories. However, the management's rules in most places I have heard of are along the lines of "3 day week apart from exceptional cases". What this has resulted in is one-up-manship between management and now everyone is working unpaid for the remaining two days on completely synthetic tasks.
The inevitable end result will be at the end of the year when the foreign owners see that their 'cost cutting' has completely failed (factory operating at full tilt all year), they will just shut the companies down.
Complain about this comment
glanafon (#301) "And it is as usual amusing that you are convinced you are right and have apparently sought the mantle of the orifice that passes all understanding."
I'm an empiricist/extensionalist. Find out what that entails.
Do as you are told and read this. It should take a few days (at least) if you do it properly. Read around it too. It is in two parts, covering two dogmas.
It is an exorcism.
Complain about this comment
#265 "more money,energy,time and human resource is lost on poor software development process than on bombs and etc. There should be a war on poor software process."
Hear, hear !! I've been waging a guerrilla campaign against poor software development for about 10 years now !! Unfortunately, whenever suggestions are made for funding of proper procedures, they are usually shot down in flames by more short-sighted personal interests within the company. However, if it's done on a skunkworks basis, then the credit goes to the big boss and no new or more funding is available to do better !!
That's another reason I left the City for a foreign enclave where I set up my own "thing" with a couple of friends to build better and more efficiently planned and developed software. So far, it's still making money; not hugely but steadily (the preferred mode) !!
In the last couple of decades, Britain had become very initiative-unfriendly, largely driven the the Politically Correct Left and Right !! Much of the best of Middle Britain has departed for foreign shores !!
Complain about this comment
PURITY
MrTweedy (#296) How many do you reckon 'missed' this?
Complain about this comment
FrankSz
Sounds like an unfavourable outcome.
Instead of full employment, where everyone works only 3 days a week, you'll end up with a 3 day week "on average", comprised of 60% of workers in full time employment and 40% permanently unemployed......
Complain about this comment
#268 "China, India and the rest of the Far East can offer nothing but low labour costs. They have nothing that cannot be made in the West."
Wrong !! They have plenty that *cannot* be made in the West for just the very reason you gave as their strength - low labour costs. Until the people in the West are willing to make things at the same costs, they will be uncompetitive and, as exemplified by zillions of new cars parked in disused airfields, a waste of precious resources !!
Please notice that I used the word - cost !! As mentioned by others above, the one way to reduce cost is to work more efficiently and productively !! Unfortunately, our dinosaur unions will fight those initiatives every step of the way until the East catches up with and surpass us in technology and the rest will be in the hands of the Gods !!
Complain about this comment
#306
I can imagine!
People often fail to recognise how much is spent by companies on so called Information Technology. Banks, insurance companies, retail, you name it - processing information (invoices, orders, claims, etc) is primarily what the business operations are about and is usually the #1 expense.
It's my pet gripe that the process oriented thinkers who used to have input into the running of things(before the days of IT) are no longer in charge of operations and are confined to the world of software. Similarly business knowledge is being lost into automated processes, leaving people in 'business' in the dark too!
It's a total catastrophe! This where the world's time and money goes to. It's a Dilbert style rat race of corporate sub-optimal lunacy with no purpose and no sense!
Complain about this comment
305 jj
''It is in two parts, covering two dogmas''
But every dogma has its day don't you think. : )
Complain about this comment
#273 "Could you enlighten us as to where the others get their genes from ?"
Levi, Strauss ?? Sorry, got hit by a silliness spasm !! :-)
Complain about this comment
#308 Mr T
That was the point I was trying to make before - we could all have 3 day weeks for the same productivity and salary as today, but the incentives at the top would need to change. As Ishkandar concurs too, ground up optimisation is nigh on impossible to achieve.
Since most business is information technology and processing of information in semi automated, manual or fully automated ways, and most business expenditure is there, I would say the IT department would be one good place to start!
Complain about this comment
No.307. JadedJean
There is no need to concern yourself with such things.
Everyone knows it is possible for:
(i) All British workers to become successful entrepreneurs, running their own businesses and outsourcing all their labour requirements abroad and/or importing the required labour. All British workers will be Richard Branson. If he can do it, anyone can do it; that's the beauty of a liberal meritocracy.
Or
(ii) All British workers to be Formula One racing drivers. Most drivers do not win races; so the average driver doesn't need to be particularly skilled in driving. The really bad drivers will simply be provided with cars that break down after the first lap.
Problem solved - full employment for all 35,000,000 British workers.
Complain about this comment
312 ishkandar
Having read JJs views on genetics and IQ I thought my question would have provoked a discourse into cellular biology and genetic engineering with the ultimate redistribution of skew in the IQ Gaussian curve. However ball was kicked into the long grass. No need to apologize a bit of humor needed here now and again.
Complain about this comment
Armagediontimes
The BBC says the pound is now worth 1.60 USD because the outlook for the British economy is now much better. UK businesses are less pessimistic, according to the CBI.
It seems we were worrying too much, as the Quantitative Easing is proving to be a big success.
Everyone is fed up with being fed up; so things will automatically improve. Normal activity will resume shortly, do not adjust your sets.......
Complain about this comment
205 JJ,
Why should galnafon read the works of somebody who is either a hypocrit or a liar or both?
Quine was married twice and had 4 children. According to his colleagues he loved his family very much. However, Quine had no empirical evidence of the existance of LOVE. Hence, Quine is not true to his empirical philosophy and is therefore a hypocrit or he is simply a liar when he demands that ALL truths must be empirically based.
Ain't the real world wonderful - you should try it sometime
Complain about this comment
Uhuru2 (#315) "Having read JJs views on genetics and IQ I thought my question would have provoked...."
These are not my 'views', they're empirical facts. Many more people need to grasp the relative unimportance of 'shared environment' in behaviour, as it's this is the opposite of what most people take for granted. This has major implications for social/economic policy which have not sunk in yet.
Complain about this comment
FrankSz # 286
Evade the topic? Doesnt your two "well, that's beside the point!" responses at # 234 to the points raised at # 223 reveal to you an evasive characteristic on your part that you may not have hitherto noticed?
Frank, if you had difficulty in interpreting the answer I gave at # 271 to the first question you raised at # 234, then all I can suggest in the absence of me drawing you some little pictures is that you re-read the answer at # 271 or go back to # 223 and read the whole post again.
The answer I gave at # 271 to the four successive questions you asked at # 234 concerning government restraint might have seemed, on the surface, unclear. However, I would have thought a man of your vast intellect, using just a little bit of deductive thought, would have grasped the meaning quite quickly.
And whilst we are on the subject of emotional compromise, would you care to check this link:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2009/02/after_todays_appalling_growth.html#P76022978
Oh! Just one last thing. Please feel free to question any aspect of my Misesian/Hayekian/Mengerian/Boehm-Bawerkian/Rothbardian philosophy or economics and I will attempt to give the best answer I can I really have nothing to hide, honest!
Complain about this comment
#30 ishkandar,
"China, India and the rest of the Far East can offer nothing but low labour costs. They have nothing that cannot be made in the West."
Sorry mate but RIGHT. The Far East has no technological advantage and no unique skill sets that do not already exist in The West. It is the fixation about COST that has caused the major imbalance in trade and this has to be addressed as a matter of urgency.
If tomorrow all goods from the EAST were embargoed the void in manufactures would be swiftly met by Western manufactures.
What the West needs to address is it's greed and short-termism.
Complain about this comment
#276 "You cannot change these kinds of attitudes overnight - it takes years."
You hit the nail bang on the head !! That's why many brilliant ideas discovered/developed in this country are taken to the production stage elsewhere !! The mandarins and *entrenched* interest groups just simply *will not* have any change unless they have their noses rubbed in it !!
Complain about this comment
#280 Sound arguments that reflect my own views. If management (of any form) refuses to see the big picture, all the "efficiency drives" are meaningless !! The public sector seems to be experts in this practice. All their announced "efficiency drives" seem to end up costing more and involves an ever more bloated headcount !!
Complain about this comment
#282 "This link looks weak, in fact I would say it is *the weakest link*."
Eeeeee !! That's even worse than my sad attempts !!
Complain about this comment
glanafon,
"business has to produce products". And you are right BUT business will only produc products in a climate in which it is conducive to do so. It is the role of government to ensure that such climates exist.
You may feel quite happy in your product niche. You may feel that you have a 'perfect' pragmatic strategy and you do not need to know how or why customers (and non-customers) are making their decisions. To me that is a strategic catastrophe. What you are really saying is "if it all goes phutt tomorrow so be it".
Well, in terms of our present economy it is going phutt. Major change is on the way and it will not be the disaster that some people on here are predicting. I have considered it in terms of power generation purely because the major developments eg harnassing steam, electricity and the petrol engine have all facilitated major developments. It would seem likely that this pattern would be repeated. Whilst we are all looking towards wind and wave power someone in a university lab or even a garden shed is on the verge of cracking cold fusion.
The UK does have a good track record of innovation. They have a poor track record of commercialisation. Knowing this we are therefore able, should there be a concious effort, to learn fron history and rectify some of our faults. It only takes 1 person to invent something, it takes many more to commercialise it and thousands more to become purchasers of it and hey presto we have a new market segment!
Complain about this comment
#292 "You go ahead and ask Yoda, your Jedi black magic is no match for the Great Mind Melder in the Sky."
Ooi !! Jedi don't use black magic !! Jedi use the FORCE !! May the FORCE be with you !!
Complain about this comment
foredeckdave (#307) "Ain't the real world wonderful - you should try it sometime"
Aside from having already explained why he should read it, your ad hominem and non sequiturs, it appears you have never done a course in logic.
I suggest you give some thought to the state of the financial/economic 'real world' and that you too work through Two Dogmas of Empiricism focusing on what differentiates intensional from extensional sentences and why it is important to do so when one refers to truth and 'the real world'.
Complain about this comment
#320 "The Far East has no technological advantage and no unique skill sets that do not already exist in The West."
Not totally so !! However, as had been observed by others above, they may soon develop/acquire the technology that will take them up the food chain. Already, they are actively trying to acquire such technology by one means or another. One that they are very actively encouraging is to entice "foreign Chinese" back to the "Motherland" (although most of those "foreign Chinese" are born and bred locals in their own countries !! The reason for this is that the Chinese (government) realise that they need foreign knowledge and expertise that they cannot produce internally !!
Also, most people speak of the Far East as a technologically poor part of the world. Hello ?? Japs are *ALSO* Far Easterners, too !! And they have a well known track record in technology !! Samsung, LG and Hyundai are Korean companies and they too have fairly high tech levels too !!
As for locals taking up the slack if cheap foreign goods are embargoed, can that realistically happen ?? It may be theoretically possible but is it realistic ?? Will the local markets stand for paying 10x the price for locally produced goods than for imports ?? What of the economy ?? Price inflation will blow the hell out of any budgeting calculations !!
The choices are pointed out by many others above. Either the people have to reduce their standard/level of their living or they have to produce goods that are in demand elsewhere in order to pay for the imports !!
Complain about this comment
324 fdd
''You may feel quite happy in your product niche. You may feel that you have a 'perfect' pragmatic strategy and you do not need to know how or why customers (and non-customers) are making their decisions.''
We know why people buy because we communicate with quite a number of them even though the customer base is multinational. The activity is deliberately kept small and flexible. It cannot be big and responsive and flexible which is key as far as we are concerned. It cannot mass produce and stay in this country. We currently have a problem with demand so what people think who do not buy is a bit irrelevant. We could talk forever to millions of people who do not buy.
You are welcome to lobby for what you want to see but I have doubts.
With respect to inventors in sheds, whilst it is not impossible it is highly unlikely. Most breakthroughs are now the result of teamwork and financial backing. Unfortunately the East is not basic, with China for example they have achieved some novel breakthroughs, with more to come. Most mobile phones are powered by Chinese novel battery technology for example. They are now looking to take that technology forward for electric cars.
I am not sure that your confidence in UK homegrown invention is not soemthing from history. It would be nice if it was not.
I am not saying sit back and let it go phutt. What I am saying is that is what likely to happen. For example - Germany is probably putting billions on the table to try and hang on to GM europe. Even if Mandelson puts money on the table the likely outcome is Vauxhall goes, that is the opinion reported, because GM Europe is based in Germany and shrinkage will almost certainly have occur somewhere due to duplication in facilites.
The general decline in manufacturing over decades which has been deliberately allowed has left this country looking weaker as a option than elsewhere in Europe. It has not been helped by EU development funds being directed into other EU countries to develope subsidised brand new factories - for example auto factories built in Spain which produce essentially a car also produced in Germany with styling and badge changes in Spain. This 'every country should have a major production facility' has resulted in oversupply in the EU and has lead to the rundown of production units here as they have not been subsidised. These are all the effects of government (of various hue) fiddling or sitting by, the same government (of various hue) that you are now looking towards to sort things out.
You cannot leave things to stagnate for decades and expect to come back and pick up where you left off. If you underestimate the competion you selfharm. The decision to develope the City was probably the right one, letting it off the leash was the wrong one. The roots of the problem lie with Thaycher but the responsibility for a lack of control, which is the main problem, lies with Brown. You are looking at the task of unpicking decades of selfharm and vandalism to manufacturing, and the oppo will not stand still.
Complain about this comment
#324 foredeckdave. I do not understand how you can confidently predicit major change and yet discount the possibility of economic meltdown and consequent further material adverse effects.
You may be right, and you may be wrong. Some of the reasons that you may be wrong include:
The fact that governments and their agencies are telling you lies. Something over 300 US banks have experienced financial difficulties this year, and yet banking sector profits have raced away in Q1 2009. Does this not strike you as odd?
What is the deal with Quantative Easing? Look at longer term interest rates - they are rising. Governments tell you that zero interest rates are necessary to avoid economic disaster. Do you see any contradiction between the statements of governments and the signals being provided by the markets?
Governments tell you that protectionism is bad, and that any recourse to protectionism will have disasterous consequences. Governments are actively seeking a competitive devaluation of their national currencies for the purposes of a short term competitive advantage. Why is Germany taking the lead in seeking to define a future for GM Europe - could it be because they intend seeking to protect the jobs of German workers at the expense of workers elsewhere in Europe.
Government tells you that it necessary to have people inspecting your rubbish bin because of the dangers of global warming. Governments are in the process of funneling money to motor manufacturers so that they can produce cars that people do not want to buy.
Some serious economists are predicting that the US and its satellites will suffer Zimbabwe type inflation. Most people dismiss this prospect out of hand. Why? Could it be that people have more in common with Jadedjean than they think. Is there something genetic that prevents the white man from causing and experiencing hyper inflation?
One fast way of experiencing catastrophic disaster is to deny the potential for that disaster.
This is an extremely serious economic crisis - and yet there has not even been the most cursory discussion of policy options. Policy has been handed to governments by the financial oligarchy together with an instruction to implement those policies. Policies are exclusively designed for the short term benefit of large financial organisations.
Complain about this comment
#327 Ishkander - You fogot to mention that the DPRK is also in the far east and also seems rather keen on a certain type of technology.
Complain about this comment
329 arm n leg times
re looking into wheelie bins
You forgot to mention that ALL wheelie bins in this country are sourced from Germany. Who buys them, UK Local Governments with taxpayer money. The UK is no longer capable of manufacturing something like a wheelie bin either by restriction in paperwork or technology or price. There currently is a backlog in deliveries because the factory in Germany cannot keep up with orders. I find that all rather, well, quite odd.
Complain about this comment
#319
Kurt
Man. I am too drunk right now to re-read all that we've discussed. But looking at your response, I get the impression that you're kind of pissed off. Also, I think you've misread my "That's beside the point" quotes. None of that stuff was intended ad hominem or in a personal dig kind of way. That was all intended with full respect to mean a genuine sense "That's beside the point I intended to make". I'm too tired and drunk to read that again, so please do me a favour and check it once more - I think I was trying to make some kind of valid point and have a normal discussion.
Complain about this comment
Dear oh dear. The USD just took a jump. But who would have provoked such a thing? Somebody clearly got worried about the USD's slide. It might take the wind temporarily out of GBP or EUR's sails, but give it a day or two and we'll see the USD start to fall again, and the GBP will make inexplicable gains. By the way the USD is strongly but inversely correlated with oil price. However the correlation is causal in one direction only - a drop in USD causes oil price to go up, but oil price going up doesnt always cause USD to go down. Watch oil price drop until next week.
Complain about this comment
RE Manufacturing in the UK.
Theres no support from any quarter in the UK,thats why i shifted all my production activities overseas ie China Poland Czech Republic & now Russia.
Thats NOW A TOTAL OF 7,000 JOBS which could be over here?
All i can say is god help Vauxhall Workers. . . . give it 2 years MAX.
Complain about this comment
Dear Mr Tweedy
Re your comments on global identity and loss of the intrinsic Britishness....
Just returned from a jolly holiday in Portugal where we saw a show based on James Bond movie themes. An excellent dance show, but their vision of us Brits is bowler-hatted, brolley, suit wearers discussing the weather with wonderful politeness! Whilst it was funny, I was also relieved that this is how we're defined rather than the laddish lager louts like those running around recently in Greece dressed as nuns!
We have friends in several countries around the world, and they all say that the manners of us Brits put their countries to shame. Apparently, even the best British linguists always say please and thankyou in a foreign language which identifies them as British.
What a great thing to be renowned for-good manners!
Hard to believe in the supermarket queue sometimes, but i'm proud that our courtesy is so world renowned.
Now here's a thing-how can we export that?! Our new exporting industry perhaps?!
Complain about this comment
TigerjayJ
Where have you been ? WHILE ROME BURNS!!
Complain about this comment
FrankSz # 333
Re: USD jump. Looks like Uncle Sam has managed to find some more bondholders willing to take on US debt. This will be the next big bubble, Frank.
I suggest a better inverse correlative of USD (in fact, of any fiat currency) is the price of gold.
Complain about this comment
#330 "You fogot to mention that the DPRK is also in the far east and also seems rather keen on a certain type of technology."
The DPRK is a basket case country that depends on China for much of its day-to-day existence. It is in the total control of its elite who, in turn, is in the control of the Chinese. All the current news is sabre-rattling. It is also a message to the current hard-liner leadership in the South that they are making a big mistake in canceling all reconciliatory moves towards the North !! Mad Southerners thought it was great fun to release millions of balloons carrying messages to the North demanding "their" way of government. If the Southerners can send inflammatory balloons North, the North can send troops and nukes South !! That is the message !! The South Korean entrenched interest groups will act to deal with any moves and anyone that threaten their livelihood !! They will act to squash the "peaceniks" (read "CIA stooges") !!
The Americans tried to "police" (read "control") the whole area for their own benefit and the DPRK is used by the Chinese to upset them. If you look at the news carefully, the Americans have tried to "sanction" them into submission and yet allow, nay encourage, full-scale nuclear development to go on in Pakistan !! Which is more dangerous ?? Nukes in DPRK, under Chinese control or nukes in the hands of the Taliban in Pakistan ?? And yet nothing is mentioned about the Pakistani nukes despite it being so obvious a situation !!
One attack in Mumbai had seriously rattled the Indians and who's to say a nuke might not "go missing" in Pakistan only to resurface as a mushroom cloud over Delhi ?? That's why the Indians are very worried but we hear little or nothing about that here !!
Meanwhile, DPRK still has a long way to go to, even, just match the current Pakistani arsenal.
"Defence officials in Russia say it (the DPRK test) was an explosion of up to 20 kilotons, making it comparable to the American bombs that flattened Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945."
Kilotons equivalent ?? Pakistan has *megatons* equivalent stuff !! It would be truly worrying if the Taliban trade Pakistani nuke tech for DPRK arms !! *THAT* is the nightmare that most people will dread most !!
Of course, one night, Rambo will charge in, destroy the DPRK nuke facilities, run off with their beautiful, sexy nuke scientist and everyone lives happily ever after !! Hollywood says so, therefore it *must* be true !!
Complain about this comment
#331 "I find that all rather, well, quite odd."
What will be even odder (if there is such a word) is when the "bear-skins" worn by the Guards regiments are sourced from South Chinese makers of mock fur materials !! I've seen mock leopard skins and mock tiger skins, so why not mock bear skins ??
Complain about this comment
#335 Tigerjayj - Welcome home to warn, sunny Blighty !! I hope you have been helping the local economy by ingesting large quantities of Port !! They need the money, you know, poor things. Not that our quantitatively eased quids are all that popular any more !!
Complain about this comment
#337
(Slight hangover by now) I very strongly suspect that we will witness increasing currency turmoil as time goes by and yes Gold should gain strength against failing currencies. I think the central banks still have some gold reserves so they still have the ability to sell and devalue gold if necessary, especially China.
I personally think that a return to Gold or something that serves the same purpose (and it could be a fiat, but global) would remove the one main underlying cause of instability in the global economy.
Complain about this comment
FrankSz (#341) "I personally think that a return to Gold or something that serves the same purpose (and it could be a fiat, but global) would remove the one main underlying cause of instability in the global economy."
LibertarianKurt's subliminal Austrian/Judaic School anarchistic/Bolshevik propaganda seems to be working on you - or is it just cell-death? ;-)
Complain about this comment
BRANDING
Here's a basic rule of thumb (heuristic) to follow. The attack on the Tzar using disaffected Pale of Settlement anarchists was initially a ploy of the German High Command to get the Russians off their Eastern flank in WWI. When ousted by the Russians again (Stalin) in the 20s and 30s, they set up shop as anarchist groups with make-overs in Germany/Austria/London/USA. We are still having to deal with this today. It is always anti-statism which is basically subversive of the nationalist status quo as this constrains minority economic/political groups - and for basic democractic reasons ironically. It's never names which matter, it's actions and their consequences. Names/images are constantly changed in order to seduce - this being essentially a female-brain 'cosmetic' ploy. Many cultures have tried to curb this behaviour over the centuries - it being described as Satanism, witchcraft etc ;-).
Complain about this comment
Forget your artificial exchange rate mechanism (the gold standard); just stop lending money to people who can't pay it back, and focus on keeping necessities affordable, and then we'd be on to a real winner.
The old British quality of restraint is all that's needed. There's nothing wrong with being sensible. Sex, drugs and rock'n'roll just seeks to cover up deficiencies and ultimately leads to an early death caused by over indulgence......
Complain about this comment
Well, for example have look at the link on the top right of this page to "SDR and the IMF" . I have mentioned many times on this blog, that the main advantage of gold standard was that it had an inherent mechanism for regulating international t