Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Tories Reverse Thinking On Minimum Wage


Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
  • Replies 109
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1
HOLA442

The Conservatives like to pretend that they have problems with an anti eu right but that doesn't stop their party from buckling under to anything the eu dishes out.

That's apart from their also reneging on their promise for a referendum.

Their "anti eu" section is a phony attempt at appeasement.

Edited by billybong
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443

Looks like a simple bribe to buy votes to me. Nothing as deep as some change in 'ideology', assuming they have such a thing ; If they did they abandoned it when they kept rates at artificial lows to keep the irresponsible in houses they cant afford at the expense of the responsible.

Lots of reading too much into things on this forum.... again we have a subject jumped on and twisted to 'prove' some load of old c0ck view held by some nutters.

I don't think its a change in ideology either. The only "belief" that I see either of them having is in doing whatever will get them re-elected while maintaining the status quo.

However there is a fairly significant leftward shift going on on things economic. People think that income inequality is too high. See this article in the telegraph by AEP for example and all the supportive comments. You'd never ever have seen that in the "right-wing" torygraph 5 years ago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/ambroseevans_pritchard/10559802/Liberation-Theology-is-back-as-Pope-Francis-holds-capitalism-to-account.html

The same is happening in the U.S. where there is, my U.S. friends tell me, a big big discussion going on about income inequality also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444

The reason the Tory party have problems with those on the so called right of their party is because as you already know, Conservative party policies are so left wing they'd make Karl Marx blush.

Tory politics isn't left wing at all. Current Labour politics is barely left wing, if left wing means socialist.

The divide is between conservatism and liberalism (Thatcherism basically, nothing to do with the lib-dems)

Preserve the status quo hierarchy, or free-markets and small government. This government has been more about the former than the latter.

Even the minimum wage is perfectly consistent with conservative ideology. Conservatives believe in looking after the proles - as long as they do as they are told and stay proles. Its complete anathema to classical liberals though.

Edited by (Blizzard)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4
HOLA445

If you include borrowing as deferred taxation this government are spending over 50% of GDP.

Marx was alive in the C19 when i believe government spending of GDP was closer to 10-15%.

Now if you could turn back time and tell Marx 50% of everything the proles earn is his to spend he'd salivate.

You're a salivating old loon

For goodness sake, you really think GDP % of public spending between 19th c England and now is reasonable?

I'll leave you to mull that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446

Doesn't matter if you make the minimum wage £1m/hr. Those receiving it are those whose labour society least values it will only take a microsecond before any increase in purchasing power is inflated away.

We're on the road to Zimbabwe already, if this goes ahead, it will have turned out to be the slip road of the Autobahn to the Weimar Republic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6
HOLA447

Tories have always had problems from the right of the party, lib dems are a great way to neutralise that

Can say the same about Labour and its left wing too

I'm not so sure. Would it be fairer to say that the Conservatives have a problem with Eurosceptics instead?

I can't think of any great splits or rebellions on any other issue apart from Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448

If you include borrowing as deferred taxation this government are spending over 50% of GDP.

When they left power in 1997 spending was ~ 37% GDP, it took The Cretin Brown 13 years to get spending above 50% of GDP.

How quickly do you think you could reverse that? How quickly could you get spending back down to < 40% of GDP, particularly in the middle of the deepest recession for 70+ years. Since we're about 4 years into this parliament I'll give you the same amount of time, so tell me where are you going to find £150bn in spending reductions by December 2018?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449

, so tell me where are you going to find £150bn in spending reductions by December 2018?

We could boost north sea oil production back up to 1997 levels that would knock off a few billion. Then sell all the council houses, electricity companies, telecom companies and water companies. That's bound to add up to 150 billion.

Trouble is you can only do it once.

Although I think Gordon Brown was a total W****r He was not going to get the sugar rush the Tory's got by selling the family's silver.

Edited by gf3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410

I don't know what it would end up being to be honest.

Would it not be a good idea to have some idea what your system would look like before you start campaigning for it?

One of the key ways to pay for it would be a Land Tax.....

Is this on top of or instead of existing UK land taxes? In either case how much additional revenue would it generate? Please bear in mind that the UK already has some of the highest land taxes in the world.

How would the tax be calculated? At what rate would it be payable?

...(increase money supply by about 4% a year to cater for 2% inflation and 2% gdp growth)...

Which measure of the money supply are you targeting and how much would this generate? Are you looking at M4 in which case 2% of £2.2tn would generate ~ £44bn (based on 2010)?

Wbat would be the effect of this policy on inflation? What would the effect be on interest rates? Are there any other effects that should be drawn to our attention?

...on top of replacing many existing benefits.

I'm all in favour of that but plesae bear in mind that (per the long CI thread) this amounts to a massive cut in benefits for single parent/low income families to fund a massive tax giveaway to the well off.

Edited by Goat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411

We could boost north sea oil production back up to 1997 levels that would knock off a few billion. Then sell all the council houses, electricity companies, telecom companies and water companies. That's bound to add up to 150 billion.

Trouble is you can only do it once.

Although I think Gordon Brown was a total W****r He was not going to get the sugar rush the Tory's got by selling the family's silver.

boosting production doesnt reduce spending...it increases taxation, hides the problem for a while, meanwhile, the problem remains and you end up with your own exhaustion next year outcome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412
12
HOLA4413

I can't think of any great splits or rebellions on any other issue apart from Europe.

There is probably more internal friction on immigration, benefit cuts and deficit levels than is visible publicly.

The protagonists can do no more than lobby behind closed doors as they know going public (like the stripy blazer lot did during the Major government) will cost enough votes to let Labour back in.

I think democratic countries now need to be very broken (like Greece) before radical left or right politics can return - it's going to be centre/right politicians like Blair and Cameron for the foreseeable. Brown was an anomaly - he would never have got in if was a public vote - look how that turned out.

I'd be happier with this if younger voters would engage more - but boomers are still going to be dominant in next couple of elections.

Edited by slacker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13
HOLA4414
14
HOLA4415

Well done for deconstructing my post and taking each statement out of context.

etctcetc

You posted to the effect that CI/LVT and money printing are the solution to all our problems, I've asked you if you have a rough idea how each policy would work in practice and you've refused to answer.

Quite simply I'm asking whether you have actually thought about the policies that your are proposing or if you are simply parroting anti-capitalist rubbish without having a clue what you're talking about, the answer seems to be the latter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15
HOLA4416

Well done for deconstructing my post and taking each statement out of context.

Just to reinforce the meaning of what I said - I don't know what the required Citizens' Income would eventually be, because I don't know how far it would affect living costs - primarily the costs of shelter and how reduced land costs would help reduce prices overall. It would also depend on policy elsewhere - such as whether we continued to allow foreigners to buy up UK houses to rent to us.

The changes are revolutionary but I would phase them in to make sure people have time to alter their decisions over a period rather than everyone on Day 1. This is a normal part of effecting policy you may not have noticed.

The type of points you make are very British - damn someone for not having every single bit of detail up front and then attack them later when something has to be altered in the light of new information or events that inevitably occur further down the line.

It is such an easy tactic and shows people who do not understand how to run a business or policy. Or they do, and they've learned to use it destructively.

One should start with overall concepts and move them to detail over time, you phase in and adjust as you go along - but never losing sight of the original goals. The French and Germans are much better at thrashing out a project up front and agreeing strategy amongst all interested parties - whereas in the UK only 'action' is regarded - usually many times over with far more heat than light generated.

I don't like the way you argue Goat and you never alter your mind, so I'll be bowing out from discussion with you, thanks.

just one example of printing money being a success is all I need.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417

I don't like the way you argue Goat and you never alter your mind, so I'll be bowing out from discussion with you, thanks.

You don't like people asking you how your pet theories work and simply expect the rest of us to accept your claims that all of our problems can be solved if we simply adopt whatever policy you suggest.

Fair enough but I hope you don't object if I demonstrate your lack of thought to the rest of the forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17
HOLA4418

There are far better sources for that sort of information if you were willing to take the trouble...

I thought you weren't talking to me.

You're the one that wanted the various policies, you justify them.

Edited by Goat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18
HOLA4419
19
HOLA4420

You're a salivating old loon

For goodness sake, you really think GDP % of public spending between 19th c England and now is reasonable?

I'll leave you to mull that

No need for insults.

What is the point in asking something if you are not willing to accept an answer.

Im presuming you missed out the word comparing from your sentence and yes i think comparing the size of the government is relevant as Marx would have used this method to redistribute wealth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20
HOLA4421

There is probably more internal friction on immigration, benefit cuts and deficit levels than is visible publicly.

The protagonists can do no more than lobby behind closed doors as they know going public (like the stripy blazer lot did during the Major government) will cost enough votes to let Labour back in.

I think democratic countries now need to be very broken (like Greece) before radical left or right politics can return - it's going to be centre/right politicians like Blair and Cameron for the foreseeable. Brown was an anomaly - he would never have got in if was a public vote - look how that turned out.

I'd be happier with this if younger voters would engage more - but boomers are still going to be dominant in next couple of elections.

Not sure - the Lib Dems NEED to show some form of dissent to regain some form of credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21
HOLA4422

just one example of printing money being a success is all I need.

All modern economies (successful or not)

1 - Print money.

2 - Tax land values.

3 - Pay out a basic citizen's income.

The question isn't whether to do these things, it's how. Or, even more importantly, who should have the power to do this?

Edited by (Blizzard)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22
HOLA4423

All modern economies (successful or not)

1 - Print money.

2 - Tax land values.

3 - Pay out a basic citizen's income.

The question isn't whether to do these things, it's how. Or, even more importantly, who should have the power to do this?

I think youve taken my question too literally..yes, all money is printed.

What I meant ask was for one single example of money printing without backing by something ( repayment, an asset, tax,) that has ever worked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23
HOLA4424

You can either take the attitude of thanking me for providing you with information to get the detailed understanding you supposedly seek....

I could post a list of a dozen economics books and claim that they thoroughly disproved your argument, unless you were willing to wade through such gems as Rational Expectations and the New Macroeconomics then you'd have no idea if they were even vaguely relevant.

...or you are here simply to annoy.

I'll tell you what annoys me, it's posters who claim that they have the solutions to all of our problems without seeming to have the faintest idea of how their policies would work in practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24
HOLA4425

They've just opened the door to millions more cheap workers.

Raising the minimum wage by 50p won't do anything now.

Idiots

Sure it will. Everyone on £7-12ph will see their wages stagnate to pay for those under £7 to get 50p more. NMW is already a de facto maximum wage for 90% of workers in large tranches of the country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information