Economy is worse under us, says Cable

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by mertle

There should be a balance for sure but the public sector jobs there because private sector dumped a load of jobs. Yes there should be essensial service but at what costs. Thats why its needed balance.

Not saying welfare payments increase drastically to claiments but merely pointing out we all contribute whether we work, ill, elderly or unemployed. They pay taxes not direct but inderect.

I agree Corporitsm is biggest obstacle set new thread about book coming out about RACE AGAINST the MACHINE comes out monday done by 2 MIT researchers. It worryingly what they say.

Not saying it was right to create the quango culture be it came about as many taxpayers moaned or merely papers championed a cause. That peple should work do something useful rather be on dole. Government struggling to get private sector come up with jobs so the quango culture came about. Government embarked on inflating public sector workforce job creation to get people work rather then let them sit around. Afterall people wanted it.

Now poeple moan it cant support it I agree the balance maybe wrong

However there many calling people who not working too now we have situation they dont want them on dole either what is government supposed to do if private sector wont employ in the quantities required.

They probably want to do what america has done.

Time limited benefits then homeless or family cover living costs. Basically cut the weak off. We slowly heading there as currently on average we having a welfare reform every 4 years. Capitalism has simply moved on from benefiting this country. Shareholders want max profit, thats all they care about. Now manufacturing and employing workers is cheaper in asia than the uk. So ultimately job creation here will be limited. If someone ever invents teleportation mcdonalds will employ in asia and then teleport the food over, we would really be screwed then.

[Ignitionnet]

Not a lot has changed, and we were no different from our cousins across the Atlantic. Shame the current lot have no interest in letting things adjust.



---------- Post added at 12:44 ---------- Previous post was at 12:36 ----------

Originally Posted by mertle

There should be a balance for sure but the public sector jobs there because private sector dumped a load of jobs. Yes there should be essensial service but at what costs. Thats why its needed balance.

It's a tad late for that, Keynesianism discusses stimulus for capital projects and infrastructure, not for state employment during bad times for business as usual activities.

There is a big disconnect between jobs.

Originally Posted by mertle

Not saying welfare payments increase drastically to claiments but merely pointing out we all contribute whether we work, ill, elderly or unemployed. They pay taxes not direct but inderect.

By that token if I take say a tenner from you and give you a fiver I've contributed that five pounds. Let's stick to net contributions if we're going down that route, it's unfortunate but the majority are not net contributors and never will be.

Originally Posted by mertle

However there many calling people who not working too now we have situation they dont want them on dole either what is government supposed to do if private sector wont employ in the quantities required.

A few things - going back to keeping people employed unproductively isn't one of them. Some construction and other infrastructure work would be good right now mind you.

[denphone]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...plan-b-economy

A hundred leading economists have made an impassioned call for the government to step back from the brink of a new economic crisis and back a Plan B to save existing jobs and create new ones, amid growing fears of a double-dip recession.

Condemning the intransigence of the chancellor, George Osborne, as he pursues the coalition government's austerity programme, the economists write: "It is now clear that Plan A isn't working. Wave after wave of economic figures… have all concluded the British economy is faltering." And they warn: "Doing nothing is not an option."

Wouldn't be the same economists that were once praising him for his policy because it would stop the uk getting downgraded. Being honest i am a bit sick and tired of econoimists who say one thing one week and something totally different the next when things appear to change. So easy to be an expert when you only have to think short term or week by week bit harder though when you have to plan years ahead.

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

So easy to be an expert when you only have to think short term or week by week bit harder though when you have to plan years ahead.

Even moreso I'd imagine if you were the third choice for the job of shadow chancellor, had practically no business experience, no qualification in and precious little practical experience of economics and are too pig headed to take advice from people who are qualified to afford it to you.

No, they would be the same economists that read the Grauniad and the Observer on Sundays and therefore are unlikely to be saying anything they haven't been thinking all along anyway.

Note, they haven't 'told the chancellor' anything - they wrote a letter to a newspaper. Nothing to see here, except the same people saying and doing exactly the same stuff as usual.

The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable - John Kenneth Galbraith.

[Traduk]

Originally Posted by RizzyKing

Wouldn't be the same economists that were once praising him for his policy because it would stop the uk getting downgraded. Being honest i am a bit sick and tired of econoimists who say one thing one week and something totally different the next when things appear to change. So easy to be an expert when you only have to think short term or week by week bit harder though when you have to plan years ahead.

The problem with economics is that it is dynamic. In order to attempt to manage something which is made up of multiple variable inputs, only averages of all the often changing inputs, which happen every millisecond can be used. The longer the average the greater the room for error.

Chancellors have for many years been using relatively short term trends to organise fiscal policy often five years into the future. We are reaping the results of the grossly incorrect use of the averaging tool whereby Brown expected the good times to roll way beyond the normal cycle and borrowed against a rising graph line which nose dived off a cliff.

The other problem with economics is that from all the multiple factors, the selective use of what is good can be trumpeted whilst counterbalancing bad ignored. Common practice with politicians who invariably have a social agenda and cherry pick what suits the agenda.

I read the article putting forward their ideas and in theory I can see where they are coming from but it is all based on a false premise. They want a transactional tax on all financial transactions passing through the city of London. That is dubbed the Tobin tax and if the experience of Sweden is anything to go by it will kill the city of London stone dead with those trillions of money flow heading abroad. Sweden actually lost shed loads of money in taxes when they tried it and had to stop the Tax in order to get the other taxes lost to return. They were net losers big time and had to scrap Tobin to get back Capital Gains Tax.

We already have a stamp duty tax on paper transactions on shares and a comparable one on electronic transactions. A move beyond those taxes would be counter productive and as we are a clearer of transactions second only to the USA, it would be devastating. Those taxes are either global or not at all because electronically a transaction competed in milliseconds can be done anywhere in the world and they will be done where the host country is most tax friendly.

Within the fast changing dynamics of global economics the Eurozone crisis saw the can kicked down the road last week and the markets applauded the avoidance of immediate crisis with an almighty push skywards. The major indices have been plodding up the hill from three weeks before the outcome of the meeting with exhilaration at any news which although bad is not dire. It is called "climbing a wall of worry" but realistically everybody and their dog knows the the waffle and arm twisting in Europe solves nothing at all but at least sovereign debt CDS didn't get triggered which could have called time on the busted "fiat" system. The patient lives on and the life support systems are are in place but postponement is not cure.

The ongoing crop of problems swirling around the globe have exposed the underlying problems of globalisation coupled with politically inspired agendas particularly in Europe where strong and weak have a massive disparity in earnings but not aspirations. Until the financial elite and mega corporations work out how to re-organise their priorities it is best to do absolutely nothing to become insular and thereby anti competitive unless a willingness to be marginilised into third world country status is desired.

When a group of academics et al come up with anti competitive ideas it is obvious that although they may have impeccable credentials in some areas of economics they are obviously myopic when viewing the big picture. It works well if you are an island unto your self but not when you are a hub in a global network.

[Chrysalis]

these economists are not really any better than the average guy guessing whats right or wrong.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

these economists are not really any better than the average guy guessing whats right or wrong.

Nail on HEAD felt that from day one that got air off read few books in university come out think gods gift to the economy.

Thing is this is NEW problem but they trying to go through ABC guide how to solve a crisis it just might not fit all the eyes and dots but they will try hardest to force it.

Now all these countries followed there advice off squarepegs in round holes its wrong they all end up the creek without a paddle.

I know economics is a complicated affair but from my simple viewpoint if all these experts were so expert how exactly have we ended up in the complete mess we have while they were all about you cannot put it all down to politicians that do not listen.

Because economics are like the weather - there are many variables, and every so often a storm arises from nowhere.

[danielf]

Makes one wonder why a 'nobel prize for economic sciences' is awarded.

Best guesser?

[danielf]

Perhaps 'best gambler' would be more appropriate?