Jan 30

When it comes to economics it does seem no matter how well voiced one is it’s hard to know what is right and we may choose our response on the basis of what we’d like to believe. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Oct 21

Paying back the deficit will be a lot like a Mortgage it will appear like the amount is static before it dips. Thus in the early years the difference between brutal cuts and measured cuts will be small. Indeed the biggest danger to reducing deficits is another recession which by its nature will be prolonged.

Thus in many respects the Ed Balls keep spending policy is not so flawed except that it’s a policy  that never finds a reason and leads to a creeping public sector and a private sector that is at best moribund. It produces an economy that produces nothing and consumes a lot and eventually one assumes there will be a reckoning. The other flaw is that using Govt borrowing as a stimulous is OK when people will consume but if they save the money and are buying foreign goods, as they are, the Accelerator effects may not even outweigh the drag of Public Sector spending.

Essentially a position of no cuts is to defend the world of Gordon Brown where everyone is expected to doff the cap and be beholden to the magnificence of Govt. To have the Russian view of we need a strong leader and to be told what to do. Indeed the behavioural aspects of Brown’s National Social Democracy are disturbing. Britains litter everywhere despite bins. Despite London having more street furniture than the rest of the non UK world combined people hurdle barriers and Jay-Walk. Train stations are an unpleasant cacophony of announcements about what you should not do – as though you planned to forget your bag or missed the hundred no smoking signs. Brown and Balls would have created a dead world of form filling compliance and one must fear that Ed Say Anything is of that ilk.

Nonetheless just because Labour is an unrepentant party of dictatorial and depraved dislike of anything human does not make Osborne right. Given the difference in interest is so small over the next few years with the Darling  plan then the additional hundreds of thousands on the Dole is an unnecessary risk. The Darling plan is what Labour would have done. What the politician Johnson has come up with about merely taxing the Banks is of course focus group led nonsense. as Ed Miliband said Labour are only about positioning for electoral advantage and hence will make statements made of pure air.

The kind of neo con neo liberal neo stupid policies of Osborne have not worked very well for the most part. They have utterly reduced Iraq to a militia state. They did not work in Russia and led to the ‘Brownian’ Putin taking command – some tongue in cheek there for the sensitive Brownites out there.

I can understand Osborne’s ideas and drivers but all policies like his do is cement the position in society of a few rich people at the expense of jobs and industry. Sure the opportunistic and frankly hypocritical Keynesian arguments of an infantile left allow him space to get away with it but it’s far too risky a policy.

For the first time I question why the Liberal Democrats see this as necessary. It comes across as a fait accompli and there are reasons to think we need it. However  like most extreme politics this is based on believing the worst can and will happen.

Sadly for me I have to advocate a middle course and would suggest the Darling plan was the best. Precisely because unlike Osborne or Brown Darling was a career politician and as unreactionary as we can get.

Osborne actually agrees with my view we need to produce more in Britain and we need a more dynamic private sector. However this is not achieved with unrelenting economic gloom as I experienced growing up when the nightly drops in the £ and FTSE and rises in unemployment were as much as back drop as Punk and the New Romantics.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Jul 26

Reading other left websites I’d love the readership, the links and fellowship of my fellow bloggers but then I’d probably be re-tweeting the banal like me(s) of Ed ‘The Bland’ Miliband. I’d have to temper my critique of Torture and Rendition’s ‘Pied Piper’ Straw cos his son works on one. I’d probably be mildly distanced for liking and agreeing with Cameron’s description of Ed Balls as the Alf Garnett of British Politics for his ‘it woz the imi-grants wot dun it’ rants. My view that relative to the accepted standards of this country that Brown, Straw and Blair and all the acolytes like Miliband (x2), Whelan, Balls et al were all depraved would not be popular.

Not when Labourites are wrapping themselves in the sanctimony of not being the party of austerity – no just the cause! When Brown has found a whole continent to patronise. Indeed Brown’s dislike of working people with views and lives and his preference for mere victims reliant on patronage which he can give sums up the duality of New Labour pretty well.  Instead they want to give you pensions and child tax credits and you to be grateful and shut up about furriners, going on strike, human rights, excessively rich people paying no tax, education biased to the middle classes, health biased to the middle classes and Police brutality. For instance last week’s Brian Clough documentaries showed him as the kind of confident outspoken working class hero so despised of New Labour.

Leaving aside personal disgust for the nasty creeps in the Labour Shadow Cabinet, almost all soiled by acts and association, the fact I view no policy they have as positive would be a deal breaker. Labour policy is universally derived from electoral advantage internally and externally. Labour policy is even after the defeat a series of statements and pledges with neither coherence nor depth. They are un-vote-able for by anyone who wants a positive long term future for this country.

That does not mean I accept the depth of cuts. Merely that a party who ran the Health Service for 13 years and spent massive amounts on it but killed thousands with re-organisations and a failure to do what was obvious in 1997, clean the damn hospitals, is a not a  party interested in results just electoral advantage. To answer the question the Lesser of Two Evils is still the Lesser of Two Evils I would answer

Are They? Prove it.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

May 09

True to form Eurocrats rushed out to blame the markets for Greece’s problems.

This is arrant nonsense. Greece’s problem is that it spends and consumes more than it earns. The markets therefore with no real austerity package and even less will in place will not lend it money at interest rates below 9%. Frankly the markets are being over generous I would want 20% a week. Indeed I would be QuickQuid or Wonga to their worker short at the end of the month and breaking out the APR of 2365% or more. The real issue is why would anyone back Greece when it seems unwilling to live within its means?

Greece is in the Euro and so are many other over consumers and that is why their currency is dropping. The only thing preventing complete meltdown is this fact and hence Greece is actually protected from the markets.

The worry for us should be the plight of the UK? It has debts like Greece and is not protected by other bigger and stronger countries. It’s already got piss poor pensions and welfare payouts. It’s already got a retirement age of 65 and rising. It’s workers already work the longest hours in Europe. We already have the smallest houses and biggest quality of life issues of any major economy.

Quite how Britain’s austerity program will bite should be causing more concern than whether Nick and Dave consummate their affair. Given we already have sold, mortgaged and given up everything for a pile a debt.

Where can the British state cut back?

Will anyone retire before 70 who is not rich?

This is Brown ‘s legacy.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , ,