Corbynmania

[Chinahand]

I find this trope about greedy bankers and media manipulation all rather dated, but clearly it resonates.

[Declan]

You could say the same about the claim that the Global Economic Crash was all the last Labour Government.

[The Sick Moon]

I find this trope about greedy bankers and media manipulation all rather dated, but clearly it resonates.

 

The banking disaster wasn't that long ago and nobody was ever really punished for anything. Quite the opposite. Why shouldn't it resonate?

[Albert Tatlock]

The roots of the financial crash go back to the deregulation by Thatcher and Reagan, though especially the repeal of Glass-Steagall by Clinton and the democrats.

[Lxxx]

250,000 people voted for the out-of-touch Marxist out of about 65 million people. Once anyone with a brain gets past the nice soundbites and actually examines what he wants to do with the economy they'll rightly run a mile from him and his policies, but not without the unions flexing their muscles first now they have the spotlight again.

[Chinahand]

 

I find this trope about greedy bankers and media manipulation all rather dated, but clearly it resonates.

 

The banking disaster wasn't that long ago and nobody was ever really punished for anything. Quite the opposite. Why shouldn't it resonate?

 

Erm ... nobody was punished for anything?

 

Are you aware of the prosecutions, fines and regulations that have been levelled on the financial industries in the last few years?

 

There has been a huge backlash with billion dollar fines, multi-year imprisonments and massively more intrusive regulation.

 

But beyond that, can I just ask, do you think the heads of GM or Ford or British Leyland should have been punished for the stupid decisions they made in the 1970s which basically bankrupted these companies and caused mass unemployment and labour strife as they failed to turn their companies around in the face of Japanese competition?

 

Is there a qualitative difference between the stupidity of the bosses in the 1970s dealing with physically manufacturing things, and the stupidity of the bosses in the 2000s dealing with paper products?

 

Bankers made terrible business decisions, they ignored risk, thought they could sell and forget and attempted to manipulate markets, but for the most part the problem was that people bought into their snake oil, including the bankers themselves. Caveat Emptor.

 

When you believe your own myth, whether it's that the Ford Pinto is a great car, or this Collateralized Debt Obligation is AAA rated, you business is at risk.

 

Is that a crime? Should the creators of these two myths be punished for creating them and staking vast amounts of money on this.

 

It is so simple to claim that all bankers were crooks deliberately perpetrating deliberate fraud, but that is only a very minor part of what happened and to try to use this trope to ensure these disasters aren't repeated will fail. The reality is far more complicated, with bankers believing their own myth and having others buy into it.

 

People can go mad and buy tulips, shares on the Shanghai Composite index, invest in mass production in Dagenham, and think re-opening the coal mines is a good idea.

 

These ideas are dead ends with huge losses the result, but going to look to punish people isn't a particularly good way to stop it happening.

 

Fraud was a part of the banking crisis, and people have been punished for that, but it was only a small part, the difficult part to solve isn't fraud, it is people believing their own myth, and bankers aren't the only people to have this fault - ask any entrepreneur or politician.

[The Sick Moon]

Erm ... nobody was punished for anything?

 

Are you aware of the prosecutions, fines and regulations that have been levelled on the financial industries in the last few years?

 

There has been a huge backlash with billion dollar fines, multi-year imprisonments and massively more intrusive regulation.

 

Very few individuals, in Britain at least, have ever been held to account for their disastrous decisions. The fines are paid by the institutions ie, the shareholders.

[Lxxx]

 

Erm ... nobody was punished for anything?

 

Are you aware of the prosecutions, fines and regulations that have been levelled on the financial industries in the last few years?

 

There has been a huge backlash with billion dollar fines, multi-year imprisonments and massively more intrusive regulation.

 

Very few individuals, in Britain at least, have ever been held to account for their disastrous decisions. The fines are paid by the institutions ie, the shareholders.

 

 

Which they can just offset against their tax liabilities anyway, so either way the money never goes anywhere, just a few stokes of a keyboard.

[Chinahand]

You could say the same about the claim that the Global Economic Crash was all the last Labour Government.

The crash wasn't, but the resilience of the UK economy to adapt to that external shock without creating such unsustainable deficits that core public spending was threatened was.

 

The leap in the deficit as the economy slowed was hugely unprecedented. You've got to look at war time or the 1930s for a similar collapse in the ability of a government to fund itself.

 

Gordon Brown didn't inherit a Treasury dealing with world war 1 or 2, or the economic melt down of the 1930s, but he left one facing similar problems as deficits exploded.

 

Since 1692 there have been only 17 years when the UK had a higher deficit than in 2009.

 

Are you really going to say the UK faced a situation like 1944-45 in 2009?

 

The Global Economic Crisis was a huge economic shock, but Brown et al are responsible for turning that shock into something that effected the UK government at a scale far worse than a 5% recession. The shock to the UK finances wasn't like a recession it was like a major war.

 

We are still dealing with consequences of that.

[pongo]

Mr Brown was a really good Chancellor / Mr Brown was a really bad Chancellor.

 

He was absolutely right to rescue the domestic banking sector. But absolutely wrong to allow public spending to increase so dramatically during the boom years.

 

He was right to hand the bank independence on setting rates (Ed Balls largely devised that policy). McDonnell, the new firebrand shadow Chancellor wants to reverse that. He believes in political control. That would undermine confidence in a Labour govt. But there isn't going to be one whilst people like McDonnell have any influence.

[P.K.]

A lot of youngsters joined the Labour Party specifically to vote Corbyn into the leadership.

 

The reason is simply because he gave them hope for their futures where before there was none. As a 'state of the nation' indicator that's a national disgrace. But a la Thatcher "They don't vote Tory so fuck 'em" etc etc

[Chinahand]

In the 1991 recession, youth responded to the disenchanting prospect of being poorer than the preceding generation by embracing grunge.

 

It didn't come to pass, of course. The world carried on and materially the GenX'ers are more affluent, with more pursuits, leisure time and worldly goods than their predecessors.

 

Goodness knows what the Millennials are upto embracing Mr Corbyn - though, listening to his speech yesterday, he does sound a bit like Kurt Cobain ... maybe they're related.

[Lxxx]

Mr Brown was a really good Chancellor / Mr Brown was a really bad Chancellor.

 

He was absolutely right to rescue the domestic banking sector. But absolutely wrong to allow public spending to increase so dramatically during the boom years.

 

He was right to hand the bank independence on setting rates (Ed Balls largely devised that policy). McDonnell, the new firebrand shadow Chancellor wants to reverse that. He believes in political control. That would undermine confidence in a Labour govt. But there isn't going to be one whilst people like McDonnell have any influence.

 

What does McDonnell want to do? Get the reins back so he can force the BoE to print billions to pay for increased government spending? Presumably to plug the huge gaps in the economy caused by increased taxes on anyone and anything earning over minimum wage. Lunacy.

[Chinahand]

What I don't understand about the left is its lack of understanding that EVERYBODY sees taxation as a cost.

 

This isn't just the view of right wing economists - it's the view of everyone from brickies to billionaires, shop-keepers to celebrity goal-keepers, Captains of Industry to Captain Birdseye.

 

Taxing people more makes them adjust their behaviour. They have less money to spend, save or invest.

 

Sure it's great if your a civil servant, but even they don't like handing over an ever increasing amount to HM Revenue.

 

Putting these middlemen in between you and the spending of your money only works when these middle men can spend your money more efficiently than you.

 

Does the UK electorate think Corbyn and the Civil Service can really do this?

 

Corbyn wants to invest more in the railways (... above and beyond HS2 and Cross Rail?); put the Utilities under State control; and reopen Coal mines.

 

No doubt he can spend our money, but how will this create value compared to us spending it ourselves.

 

There's a reason why the only people willing to invest in Coal mining are romantic left wingers wanting to spend other people's money - everyone else knows it's simply a way of wasting it.

[Lxxx]

What I don't understand about the left is its lack of understanding that EVERYBODY sees taxation as a cost.

 

This isn't just the view of right wing economists - it's the view of everyone from brickies to billionaires, shop-keepers to celebrity goal-keepers, Captains of Industry to Captain Birdseye.

 

Taxing people more makes them adjust their behaviour. They have less money to spend, save or invest.

 

Sure it's great if your a civil servant, but even they don't like handing over an ever increasing amount to HM Revenue.

 

Putting these middlemen in between you and the spending of your money only works when these middle men can spend your money more efficiently than you.

 

Does the UK electorate think Corbyn and the Civil Service can really do this?

 

Corbyn wants to invest more in the railways (... above and beyond HS2 and Cross Rail?); put the Utilities under State control; and reopen Coal mines.

 

No doubt he can spend our money, but how will this create value compared to us spending it ourselves.

 

There's a reason why the only people willing to invest in Coal mining are romantic left wingers wanting to spend other people's money - everyone else knows it's simply a way of wasting it.

 

Very true. The best way to stimulate an ailing economy to make up a budget deficit; cut taxes not raise them. The complete opposite of what the lefties, or basically anyone in government, proposes.