|
Post by lenny on May 12, 2017 18:06:16 GMT 1
Yes. And as for 'spending in the right areas' Re-nationalising railways, forming state owned energy companies and of course shovelling more cash into the inefficiently run NHS is hardly going to 'stimulate demand and boost output' as you put it. It will certainly stimulate demand for more civil servants. It's the economics of the mad-house. Well clearly the first two would clearly generate revenue on their own bat. Indeed other countries' state-owned rail systems (which they run well) get plenty of profits from running our rail network - the Dutch state rail system operates a bigger network in England than it does in the Netherlands! Obviously, too, the benefits from this go beyond those purely of a macroeconomic nature and extend to consumers who will get a better service at a lower cost - our public transport is amongst the most expensive in Europe and compared to similarly developed economies is also amongst the worst. The NHS, aside from indeed as you note creating demand from civil servants (and any hiring increases at the moment will help to drive wages up, which have collapsed worse since 2008 than any other OECD country except Greece), is not something that exists to provide economic benefits. It exists to save lives and yet it's understaffed, overworked and creaking at the seams. Yes there are inefficiencies but try telling staff who invariably leave shifts at least an hour late without overtime pay that increasing hiring won't help. Now you may say it's the economics of the mad-house. Fine. I say it's the economics you learn in, you know, economics studies at any university. But the exact nature of these proposals isn't such that the economic benefits are necessarily the main thing to be debated. I merely pointed out the fallacious nature of your initial post which started off with some merit before descending into overstatement and generalisation about low tax always being better.
|
|
|
Post by servernaside on May 12, 2017 18:18:35 GMT 1
You're obviously not old enough to remember the good old, bad old days of British Rail - a largely appalling service, run it seemed, for the benefit of ASLEF and sundry other unions, but certainly not for the paying customer.
As regards studying economics at university, I take it that you were, you know, fast asleep at that time.
|
|
|
Post by lenny on May 12, 2017 18:28:24 GMT 1
You're obviously not old enough to remember the good old, bad old days of British Rail - a largely appalling service, run it seemed, for the benefit of ASLEF and sundry other unions, but certainly not for the paying customer. As regards studying economics at university, I take it that you were, you know, fast asleep at that time. So the reason that creating a state-owned rail franchise would be bad was because there was a bad one years ago? Why not look at the examples that have actually been provided - either the other countries who run our rail network - or indeed their own ones - or what Matt points out regarding a far more recent and relevant one. I see your arguments are of the Michael Gove school of "lalalalalala you're wrong". Well you don't have to take my word for it, I can direct you towards the concepts of moral hazard, deadweight loss and game theory if you'd like to investigate for yourself some economic concepts which highlight the trouble of private enterprises which are systemically important to a country. If you're going to sit there and say "high tax economy=bad" then again, what about all of Scandinavia, or Finland? The fact is simply that there is more than one way to skin a cat.
|
|
|
Post by servernaside on May 12, 2017 18:39:53 GMT 1
There are indeed many ways to skin a cat, but the usual slavish lauding of Scandinavian economies and social systems by so-called 'progressive' left-wingers, is clearly not the answer, otherwise the entire world would have adopted them. The reality is that all countries and economies are very different and ours has little in common with Norway, Denmark, Finland or Sweden either in size of populations, or in the structure of their economies.
I repeat again, low tax rates to encourage economic activity are the best method of producing greater tax revenues.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 12, 2017 19:03:02 GMT 1
You're obviously not old enough to remember the good old, bad old days of British Rail - a largely appalling service, run it seemed, for the benefit of ASLEF and sundry other unions, but certainly not for the paying customer. As regards studying economics at university, I take it that you were, you know, fast asleep at that time. Are you aware of Southern Rail or East Coast Mainline ? Or indeed in our very own region, Arriva Trains Wales ? Are they run for the benefit of the paying customer.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 12, 2017 19:05:56 GMT 1
You're obviously not old enough to remember the good old, bad old days of British Rail - a largely appalling service, run it seemed, for the benefit of ASLEF and sundry other unions, but certainly not for the paying customer. As regards studying economics at university, I take it that you were, you know, fast asleep at that time. So the reason that creating a state-owned rail franchise would be bad was because there was a bad one years ago? Why not look at the examples that have actually been provided - either the other countries who run our rail network - or indeed their own ones - or what Matt points out regarding a far more recent and relevant one. I see your arguments are of the Michael Gove school of "lalalalalala you're wrong". Well you don't have to take my word for it, I can direct you towards the concepts of moral hazard, deadweight loss and game theory if you'd like to investigate for yourself some economic concepts which highlight the trouble of private enterprises which are systemically important to a country. If you're going to sit there and say "high tax economy=bad" then again, what about all of Scandinavia, or Finland? The fact is simply that there is more than one way to skin a cat. You'd be wasting your time trying to have reasoned debate with this extremist. He has no cognition of day to day life
|
|
|
Post by lenny on May 12, 2017 19:20:57 GMT 1
Yes, in Denmark, for example, the majority of the population lives in one city. It's a finance and technology dominated economy with a skilled, educated workforce. They rely on services. They have high taxes and it raises huge revenues. Britain is bigger, yes, but its disingenuous to suggest that the difference is so large that no points can be taken from it. The main reason it's not been adopted is that the up-front cost required (I.e high taxes without the immediate return) is not one that is palateable to politicians in most countries.
You also seem to miss the point that I'm not suggesting we move to a Scandinavian style economy. Merely that it's evident that there are many examples of how high tax rates actually do increase revenues. The differences between these actually broadly similar countries doesn't prevent concepts from being transferable.
Simply repeating an opinion (which when extrapolated leads to the conclusion that tax should be abolished altogether to promote highest growth levels) with nothing provided to back it up does not make it a fact, as Theresa and co are busy proving.
|
|
|
Post by servernaside on May 12, 2017 19:22:55 GMT 1
Ah Insults. The last resort of the inarticulate.
Keep paying your Momentum membership dues, Comrade.....not that you are an extremist or anything.
|
|
|
Post by frankwellshrews on May 12, 2017 19:30:30 GMT 1
Ah Insults. The last resort of the inarticulate. Keep paying your Momentum membership dues, Comrade.....not that you are an extremist or anything. You're just the gift that keeps on giving aren't you? You're obviously not old enough to remember the good old, bad old days of British Rail - a largely appalling service, run it seemed, for the benefit of ASLEF and sundry other unions, but certainly not for the paying customer. As regards studying economics at university, I take it that you were, you know, fast asleep at that time. Your post from about halfway up the page where you started dishing out the insults. Anyway, you aren't old enough to remember the good old days of BR either. Struggling to keep track of your various online alter egos eh? Think you might have to send this one the way of lsf/gebba/Leicester etc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 19:35:20 GMT 1
There are indeed many ways to skin a cat, but the usual slavish lauding of Scandinavian economies and social systems by so-called 'progressive' left-wingers, is clearly not the answer, otherwise the entire world would have adopted them. The reality is that all countries and economies are very different and ours has little in common with Norway, Denmark, Finland or Sweden either in size of populations, or in the structure of their economies. I repeat again, low tax rates to encourage economic activity are the best method of producing greater tax revenues. You have just argued for us not to embrace a Scandinavian style system because we are not similar in population or economy and then without any sense of self said the argument of 'it's so good why haven't other countries done it' Are you capable of walking forwards or do you constantly spin in circles? In previous posts you have criticised the NHS ignoring the fact that a good health service with higher capacity means people get better quicker and are back to work quicker . Increased productivity. You want higher economic activity and higher tax takes. What is the single strongest way to do that . Government investment
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 19:41:29 GMT 1
I think I've said this before, but Corbyn is no more a socialist then Farage is a Fascist.
Corbyn is a social democrate, there's a difference.
|
|
|
Post by returnofthehype on May 12, 2017 19:47:42 GMT 1
I think I've said this before, but Corbyn is no more a socialist then Farage is a Fascist. Corbyn is a social democrate, there's a difference. Corbyn is a Tory plant....only logical explanation. I have commented before that we need a much stronger and realistic alternative to the Tories. The danger of an unopposed Tory leadership will be the risk of diluting policies to centre ground,
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 20:03:50 GMT 1
I think I've said this before, but Corbyn is no more a socialist then Farage is a Fascist. Corbyn is a social democrate, there's a difference. Corbyn is a Tory plant....only logical explanation. I have commented before that we need a much stronger and realistic alternative to the Tories. The danger of an unopposed Tory leadership will be the risk of diluting policies to centre ground, Well, personally, there's a lot more to be worried about with an unopposed Tory leadership than the risk of diluting policies to the centre ground. Education, the disabled, housing, and investment in skills just for a start.
|
|
|
Post by returnofthehype on May 12, 2017 20:24:53 GMT 1
Corbyn is a Tory plant....only logical explanation. I have commented before that we need a much stronger and realistic alternative to the Tories. The danger of an unopposed Tory leadership will be the risk of diluting policies to centre ground, Well, personally, there's a lot more to be worried about with an unopposed Tory leadership than the risk of diluting policies to the centre ground. Education, the disabled, housing, and investment in skills just for a start. Apologises if you have misunderstood....all the areas you have mentioned, are of course singularly worthy but the direction a party leans too, be it left,right or indeed centre will impact on all areas.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 12, 2017 20:52:27 GMT 1
I think I've said this before, but Corbyn is no more a socialist then Farage is a Fascist. Corbyn is a social democrate, there's a difference. Go on then. I'll bite !
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 12, 2017 20:56:37 GMT 1
You're obviously not old enough to remember the good old, bad old days of British Rail - a largely appalling service, run it seemed, for the benefit of ASLEF and sundry other unions, but certainly not for the paying customer. As regards studying economics at university, I take it that you were, you know, fast asleep at that time. Are you aware of Southern Rail or East Coast Mainline ? Or indeed in our very own region, Arriva Trains Wales ? Are they run for the benefit of the paying customer. I would add Northern Rail to the list. Still using 30 year old pacer trains on many of our local services. No better than cattle trucks....
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 12, 2017 21:06:35 GMT 1
Apparently, most voters still haven't a clue as to what is Labour's policy with regard to Europe.
I don't think they had during the Remain/Brexit Campaign either.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 12, 2017 21:12:24 GMT 1
Are you aware of Southern Rail or East Coast Mainline ? Or indeed in our very own region, Arriva Trains Wales ? Are they run for the benefit of the paying customer. I would add Northern Rail to the list. Still using 30 year old pacer trains on many of our local services. No better than cattle trucks.... I used the BR service from Chester to Altrincham every weekday in 1987/88. Not once was the train late.
|
|
|
Post by Matster on May 12, 2017 22:09:34 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2017 6:07:46 GMT 1
Well, personally, there's a lot more to be worried about with an unopposed Tory leadership than the risk of diluting policies to the centre ground. Education, the disabled, housing, and investment in skills just for a start. Apologises if you have misunderstood....all the areas you have mentioned, are of course singularly worthy but the direction a party leans too, be it left,right or indeed centre will impact on all areas. No, I understand, I just don't think the centre is that bad.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 13, 2017 6:08:41 GMT 1
I think I've said this before, but Corbyn is no more a socialist then Farage is a Fascist. Corbyn is a social democrate, there's a difference. Go on then. I'll bite ! What that Farage isn't a Fascist.
|
|
|
Post by jamo on May 13, 2017 7:36:28 GMT 1
What that Farage isn't a Fascist. No. That's a given. That Corbyn isn't a socialist.
|
|
|
Post by servernaside on May 13, 2017 9:32:27 GMT 1
I understand that Dianne Abbott has now completed her detailed costings of Labour's manifesto pledges.
The poor thing has been working so hard over the past few days that she's had difficulty sleeping. Apparently she tried counting sheep in an effort to drop off, but....... well, you probably know how that went.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 14, 2017 6:52:23 GMT 1
What that Farage isn't a Fascist. No. That's a given. That Corbyn isn't a socialist. That depends on how you want to define Socialism. But, I don't see Corbyn wanting to overthrow the Capitalist system, but instead re-introduce a Keynesian economic model. I don't think I've read, or heard that he wants to control the means of production just to meet our basic needs. What he wants is what every social democrat wants. A regulated and fairer capitalist system. Farage is just a free-market, eurospectic right-wing Tory who got the hump. He's no more a fascist than you are. But, again, that depends on how you want to define fascism.
|
|