8 Comments

The never intended to make the investments and tax changes that would start the journey to equality amongst the people. Capitalism, as everyone knows, is a scam to enrich the few at the expense of the many. The game, according to capitalists like Starmer and Reeves, is to ruthlessly exploit others so you can claw your way into the club if the few. They will make some social changes that the Tories wouldn’t make just so their social democratic apologists will have something to use as justification for supporting them.

Expand full comment

Seems like they never studied history much. Do they even expect capitalism to work while people can't even afford food?

Expand full comment

Morning Both,

I think it's worth noting that the last 40 years have been the best in human history in terms of progress. In (almost) every measure, from poverty, life expectancy, and education, to child mortality and violent deaths - all have improved vastly. In my lifetime, extreme poverty has dropped from 42% to about 9%. Never in human history has this happened. We are truly living in the best time in human history.

All the best

Sam

Expand full comment

so no need for foodbanks then?

Expand full comment

Morning Kevin,

That's a straw man argument. Stating that the world has improved in most measures, as I did for life expectancy, education, child mortality, and violent deaths, does not mean these issues are solved, just a hell of a lot better then they were.

All the best Sam

Expand full comment

I suppose the incoming public pay rise won't fit with your narrative...

Expand full comment

Have you folks finally buried the ghost of "strategic" voting and started that new left party yet?

It'd be a good bit less impossible to nudge people here (US) towards the same idea post-November; if you led the way.

France and Brazil they can't relate to; but you in the UK they can.

Expand full comment

There is never a hole. Balance sheets balance. What Labour is saying is that the public sector is underprovisioned for what they have been asked to do. However if the public sector can actually hire the staff at the pay rates they have been using, then that automatically 'taxes' the private sector - since the private sector cannot then hire that person and must reduce output.

The inflation risk comes from the public sector pay increases and automatic indexation in government contracts. It is that, and the free money handed out needlessly as interest payments, that Labour ought to be targeting. Not fuel payments to old people.

If an individual who can't get their head around credits and debits wants to use the 'printing money' analogy, then **all** government spending is "printing money". That will cause about 85% of the "money" to be subsequently "shredded" by existing percentage taxation and the other 15% or so saved (ie "put in a drawer") by the non-government sector:

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/04/20/government-spend-precedes-tax-in-the-real-world-but-not-for-the-reasons-some-supporters-of-modern-monetary-theory-suggest/#comment-929480

https://mrkeconomicsmmtgeorgism.blogspot.com/2023/08/mmt-economics-basics.html

Expand full comment