Making the poor better off

[truman 10]

this will be a good start :suspect:

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/07/corporate-welfare-a-93bn-handshake

 

Wonder how many jobs it would cost? Not having a go...it's just that things aren't always as simple as they seem ..

[banjodeano 31]

Wonder how many jobs it would cost? Not having a go...it's just that things aren't always as simple as they seem ..

I know your not having a go, debate is healthy, i always listen to what people say and try to pick up new information that i didnt know, our thoughts are in a constant state of flux, or should be...

Perhaps it will cause job losses, or perhaps it wont, but lets wait and see,

I also like his views on printing more money to get the economy moving, getting people working, getting people with money in their pocket, and getting people with money in their pocket spending, thus creating more jobs and wealth..

I notice there is a lot of hoo haa about this, saying "printing money is not good" but what did the Tories do? printed money and gave it to the banks to encourage the system to grow, and what did they do with it? sat on it and invested it

[unbeliever 10]

I know your not having a go, debate is healthy, i always listen to what people say and try to pick up new information that i didnt know, our thoughts are in a constant state of flux, or should be...

Perhaps it will cause job losses, or perhaps it wont, but lets wait and see,

I also like his views on printing more money to get the economy moving, getting people working, getting people with money in their pocket, and getting people with money in their pocket spending, thus creating more jobs and wealth..

I notice there is a lot of hoo haa about this, saying "printing money is not good" but what did the Tories do? printed money and gave it to the banks to encourage the system to grow, and what did they do with it? sat on it and invested it

 

The previous Labour government and the Coalition "printed" purely electronic money and lent it out to banks to hold in their reserves. As such they can get it back "un-print" it and everybody knows that.

Creating money without such controls will cause hyper-inflation and other Zimbabwe style disasters. Look into it. It's a terrible idea.

[banjodeano 31]

The previous Labour government and the Coalition "printed" purely electronic money and lent it out to banks to hold in their reserves. As such they can get it back "un-print" it and everybody knows that.

Creating money without such controls will cause hyper-inflation and other Zimbabwe style disasters. Look into it. It's a terrible idea.

 

Over 40 top economists have looked at his proposal and given it their approval, so you know better than them then,? Also I believe it has been tried in several other countries and been successful..as for Zimbabwe, wasn't it the sanctions imposed on them that has helped to destroy the country,?

[Vague_Boy 10]

Over 40 top economists have looked at his proposal and given it their approval, so you know better than them then,?

 

Many of those "top economists" are university lecturers.

 

Not necessarily uninformed but hardly worthy of the "promotion" you've inadvertently awarded them.

 

55 similar individuals have signed a letter to the Financial Times saying his policies will be disastrous [LINK]

 

Who do you believe?

 

Givern that you emphasize the numbers in your post, I would say that 55 beats 41 [the actual figure], wouldn't you?

 

If only economics were indeed as simple as that.

[Cyclone 10]

The previous Labour government and the Coalition "printed" purely electronic money and lent it out to banks to hold in their reserves. As such they can get it back "un-print" it and everybody knows that.

Creating money without such controls will cause hyper-inflation and other Zimbabwe style disasters. Look into it. It's a terrible idea.

 

Physical money supply can be reduced just as easily as M3 or M4 money supply.

[Eric Arthur 10]

I also like his views on printing more money to get the economy moving, getting people working, getting people with money in their pocket, and getting people with money in their pocket spending, thus creating more jobs and wealth.

 

It's an attractive idea but it is illegal. If Corbyn wants to use QE for government spending he'll need to leave the EU.

 

 

Article 123 of the Lisbon Treaty

 

1. Overdraft facilities or any other type of credit facility with the European Central Bank or with the central banks of the Member States (hereinafter referred to as ‘national central banks’) in favour of Union institutions, bodies, offices or agencies, central governments, regional, local or other public authorities, other bodies governed by public law, or public undertakings of Member States shall be prohibited, as shall the purchase directly from them by the European Central Bank or national central banks of debt instruments.

 

2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to publicly owned credit institutions which, in the context of the supply of reserves by central banks, shall be given the same treatment by national central banks and the European Central Bank as private credit institutions.

[bigsexydoug 10]

Thats the problem...what the parties think.?? i believe the Labour party are a million miles away from knowing what the party actually stands for, let alone attracting voters. IMO there is very little between them and the Tories, i have heard many political commentators mention this point.

Everyone has to admit that the Corbyn bandwagon has been phenomenal, he has attracted thousands of new people to join the party, the same can not be said of the other three candidates offering the same stuff that saw them get wiped out in May. so why would you want to proceed down that path again?

Yeah people are going to say, the last time they went left was in 1983 and it failed, but that was a whole different situation then, 1983 wasnt a time of austerity, 1983 didnt see Bankers getting us into a mess and getting bailed out, and then shortly afterwards getting huge bonuses whilst we repay their debt, 1983 wasnt a time where corporate companies made billions and paid no tax, whereas everyone else gets chased for every penny..Yeah, times are totally different now, there has never been so many thousands of people who feel so disgruntled and not having a voice, Corbyn is now their voice, so the next question will be, is he just a protest vote? no..!!

 

recent public opinion polls...

• He supports a publicly run NHS, a position supported by 84% of the public.

• He supports the nationalisation of the railways, a position backed by 66% of the public.

• He supports the nationalisation of the energy companies, a position supported by 68% of the public.

• He believes the Royal Mail should be publicly owned, a position supported by 67% of the public.

• He supports rent controls, a position supported by 60% of the public.

• He has long pushed for the withdrawal of British troops from Afghanistan, a position favoured by 82% of the public.

 

I am sure there will be many people in this country who are interested in what he proposes, i am also sure he will recoup many of the disaffected voters who left to join the greens or Ukip believing that Labour doesn't represent them any more, i know the media keep stating he will never win in a million years, and the Labour Party get anybody and their grandmother to lambaste him........it just makes you wonder why :suspect:

Perhaps some people are actually starting to get a little worried that he could actually bring the money people to heel, and bring a fairer country for us all to live in :)

 

Slightly off topic, but I thought it was against eu rules to have state owned companies, hence the sale of royal mail, I'm well aware of the fact that the French and germans ignore this fact with their own state owned services, but how would he get them through into real life.

Also Labour has pro eu for many years now, so how would jc get these through his own party ?

[banjodeano 31]

Forgive me if I am wrong, but didn't Germany try quantitive easing. And they are in the EU, I can't for the life of me where I read it and what countries they were.. But I thought one was Germany

[El Cid 214]

Slightly off topic, but I thought it was against eu rules to have state owned companies?

 

Against EU rules to subsidise companies, so if they make a profit, all is ok. I thought that was why some of our shares in the banks got sold off, the state is allowed to help companies, but not subsidy year after year.

[Berberis 10]

Slightly off topic, but I thought it was against eu rules to have state owned companies, hence the sale of royal mail, I'm well aware of the fact that the French and germans ignore this fact with their own state owned services, but how would he get them through into real life.

Also Labour has pro eu for many years now, so how would jc get these through his own party ?

 

No, Look at most of Europe, they have more state run businesses than the UK.