UKBouldering.com

Finance, coronavirus, the economy, etc (Read 53667 times)

Somebody's Fool

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1051
  • Karma: +124/-6
I guess the only reward those wise enough not to have got into debt will get is not living in a dystopia.

Life’s not fair etc etc

petejh

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5776
  • Karma: +621/-36
Good discussion JB (and Nigel, Sean).

Interesting to dig into the reasons behind why we attribute value and meaning to some things but not others. I think the point above - 'life's not fair' - is important to bear in mind at all stages!
You might come up with the most perfect system of organising a society of humans, without resorting to an illusory store of wealth/token of exchange. But the unfairness of life would probably find it out when exposed to enough alternative societies. Aldous Huxley's 'Island' basically - a perfect society organised along rational and fair framework, destroyed by chumps.

Aboriginals may have an amazing society but it was no match (not that they were trying to) for a bunch of capitalists who just took what they wanted.

Oldmanmatt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • At this rate, I probably won’t last the week.
  • Posts: 7097
  • Karma: +368/-17
  • Largely broken. Obsolete spares and scrap only.
    • The Boulder Bunker climbing centre
You don’t need chumps.
(They’re fucking irritating, mind you).

Natural disasters, random accidents and the odd Pandemic will do just as well.

Bring on the Robot Overlords.

Much better.

Discuss. 😱

tomtom

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 20282
  • Karma: +641/-11
I’ll bite OMM.

I’m amazed some of the conspiracy theorists have not suggested this is actually a large scale software update in the matrix. That requires most of the world to be in their houses to successfully enable landscape 2.1.

😃

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11437
  • Karma: +690/-22
I guess the only reward those wise enough not to have got into debt will get is not living in a dystopia.

Life’s not fair etc etc

Gave this some more thought on my daily trip to the park. I think you should to. Attractive as it may seem, it would help the wrong people and increase inequality. The very poorest have the least debt because they can't get credit. Those with the most debt are the most credit worthy, if we're sticking to individuals these would be the centrist dad demographic mortgaged up to the eyeballs with a big a house and a bunch of buy-to-lets.

For radical policies UBI (say 10k a year) would seem to be a far better way to level up from the bottom up without adding much for the better off.

Somebody's Fool

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1051
  • Karma: +124/-6
I was putting it up as a debating point, rather than advocating it completely. 

However I do think the economy has been flooded with cheap credit to provide the means to spend as wages have been suppressed in real terms.

Rather than blaming poor people for getting into debt, it’s worth bearing in mind this behaviour is encouraged as consumerism is the neoliberal sweetener behind which the state is shrunk.

Servicing these debts is crippling a lot of middle-low income people. Surely the money would be better served in the real economy rather than disappearing as interest?

I mean it’s all hypothetical anyway as I’m sure we’ll just get another round of austerity.

Also agree UBI would be of great help. 

andy popp

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5525
  • Karma: +347/-5
Debt is only meaningful net of income and wealth. Someone could have a 10th or 20th of the insignificant debt I hold and still be far more indebted than I am if they have zero meaningful income and wealth. The poor certainly do become indebted, in all kinds of ways. Nor should poverty and indebtedness be so easily ascribed to irresponsibility and a lack of wisdom.

In any case, I think a debt amnesty might be a momentary relief but it's no more than that.

Bradders

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 2785
  • Karma: +135/-3
I mean it’s all hypothetical anyway as I’m sure we’ll just get another round of austerity.

Haven't been following the wider debate on here but I would think it'd be incredibly politically difficult for this Government to reinstate austerity, having previously very publicly brought it to an end before all this kicked off.

Somebody's Fool

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1051
  • Karma: +124/-6
Yes, but this has all kicked off. And now they’ve given god knows how much out in free money, which will ‘need paying for.’

Also the current government are the most demented collection of ideologues we’ve ever had in power.

Hopefully I’m wrong though!

shark

Offline
  • *****
  • Administrator
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 8697
  • Karma: +625/-17
  • insect overlord #1
Also the current government are the most demented collection of ideologues we’ve ever had in power.

Boris a confirmed libertarian has ushered in state control and Rishi Sunak an ex-hedge fund manager has ushered the biggest state handout of all time.

Bearing in my mind your comments in the other thread would Corbyn and McDonnell have bent to reality in a National crisis where common sense would have required them to compromise ideology as quickly and decisively? (Answer is no BTW)

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11437
  • Karma: +690/-22
Quote
  Nor should poverty and indebtedness be so easily ascribed to irresponsibility and a lack of wisdom

That was not the point I was trying to make. For the record I don’t think that at all!

All I meant was that amongst my contemporaries some have chosen to be in more debt than others.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2020, 07:30:55 pm by Johnny Brown »

andy popp

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5525
  • Karma: +347/-5
Quote
  Nor should poverty and indebtedness be so easily ascribed to irresponsibility and a lack of wisdom

That was not the point I was trying to make. For the record I don’t think that at all!

All I meant was that amongst my contemporaries some have chosen to be in more debt than others.

No, I believe you absolutely Adam. It was just really hard to let it pass, if only to clarify the point.

Somebody's Fool

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1051
  • Karma: +124/-6
McDonnell proposed a national investment bank with £500 billion behind it, so arguably there wouldn’t have to be an ideological shift in such circumstances, as the tools would already be in place to deal with it.

Oldmanmatt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • At this rate, I probably won’t last the week.
  • Posts: 7097
  • Karma: +368/-17
  • Largely broken. Obsolete spares and scrap only.
    • The Boulder Bunker climbing centre
Also the current government are the most demented collection of ideologues we’ve ever had in power.

Boris a confirmed libertarian has ushered in state control and Rishi Sunak an ex-hedge fund manager has ushered the biggest state handout of all time.

Bearing in my mind your comments in the other thread would Corbyn and McDonnell have bent to reality in a National crisis where common sense would have required them to compromise ideology as quickly and decisively? (Answer is no BTW)

You can’t be sure of that. That’s a guess.

I detest Corbyn and Bojo, but they might very well have done similar in the circumstances, since there seems little option.

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11437
  • Karma: +690/-22
I guess what Shark was trying to say was that given some hypothetical disaster scenario where Labour were in power and were suddenly required to fuck over the poor and privatise the NHS while fellating the corporations, they might have found it harder to do so. But the Tories have always found it easier to compromise ideals for expediency.

Oldmanmatt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • At this rate, I probably won’t last the week.
  • Posts: 7097
  • Karma: +368/-17
  • Largely broken. Obsolete spares and scrap only.
    • The Boulder Bunker climbing centre
I guess what Shark was trying to say was that given some hypothetical disaster scenario where Labour were in power and were suddenly required to fuck over the poor and privatise the NHS while fellating the corporations, they might have found it harder to do so. But the Tories have always found it easier to compromise ideals for expediency.

I want video evidence of you saying that with a straight face.

andy popp

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5525
  • Karma: +347/-5
In what sense is Johnson a libertarian? It's an entirely impoverished term and yet he still doesn't deserve it.

Johnny Brown

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 11437
  • Karma: +690/-22
I want video evidence of you saying that with a straight face.

And let's not forget it's not that long ago that labour were in were during an unprecedented international crisis that required them to compromise their ideals. I thought they did ok*, and I'm fairly sure both the situation and the response would have been no better with the Tories in power.

* in Lanchester's words, what was done was both necessary and a disaster

Oldmanmatt

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • At this rate, I probably won’t last the week.
  • Posts: 7097
  • Karma: +368/-17
  • Largely broken. Obsolete spares and scrap only.
    • The Boulder Bunker climbing centre
I want video evidence of you saying that with a straight face.

And let's not forget it's not that long ago that labour were in were during an unprecedented international crisis that required them to compromise their ideals. I thought they did ok*, and I'm fairly sure both the situation and the response would have been no better with the Tories in power.

* in Lanchester's words, what was done was both necessary and a disaster

I bet Bojo gets an easier ride than either Blair or Brown, though.

I can just imagine his crestfallen clown act, already.

Old ladies blathering on about how the “poor dear was overwhelmed and who wouldn’t be”.
Assuming there are any old ladies left.

shark

Offline
  • *****
  • Administrator
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 8697
  • Karma: +625/-17
  • insect overlord #1
I guess what Shark was trying to say was that given some hypothetical disaster scenario where Labour were in power and were suddenly required to fuck over the poor and privatise the NHS while fellating the corporations, they might have found it harder to do so. But the Tories have always found it easier to compromise ideals for expediency.

Yes and colourfully put. And that’s why it is absurd to label them as ideologues (which is the description I was responding to) especially when the alternative we were asked to choose from were genuinely ‘demented ideologues’

shark

Offline
  • *****
  • Administrator
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 8697
  • Karma: +625/-17
  • insect overlord #1
In what sense is Johnson a libertarian? It's an entirely impoverished term and yet he still doesn't deserve it.

Maybe I’m confusing it with libertine  :lol:

tomtom

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 20282
  • Karma: +641/-11
The what would Labour have done differently is quite interesting. And it’s all hypotheticals - but (and I’ll use a Cummings/Johnson favourite) they did it with a three stage plan. (Or 4 I’m not counting)

Don’t forget that over a period of a week to ten days. They first caved in on SSP. Then on business relief. Then small business relief. Then self employed people. And have still left all the zero hours people completely fucked -!and STILL have a 5 week wait for universal credit £££. They’ve done a lot - but do have most countries - as if they didn’t there would be total meltdown.

I would hypothesise that if Labour were in power the phasing would have been the other way around (a bit) starting with the people on benefits and zero hours and then working upwards.

Let’s not forget that whilst the chancellor has made big give away S - I’d argue he’s had no choice. Remember his budget speech - all that Stuff about statutory sick pay. That’s fecking chicken feed now in the big scheme of things.

Rail nationalisation? It’s basically prop up the companies or the trains stop running.

Nigel

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 1755
  • Karma: +165/-1
I would hypothesise that if Labour were in power....

If we're hypothesizing about that, can I suggest that if Labour under Corbyn had introduced the (necessary) current social controls then the papers would largely be full of foghorn warnings about Gulags and Soviet-style control. So in some ways (and I can't believe I'm saying this!) we might be lucky to have the Tories in charge of this as they get a free pass on the "slippery slope to dictatorship" front from the media.

petejh

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 5776
  • Karma: +621/-36
TT,
Couple of things,
1. if Labour had phased support ‘from the bottom up (supporting zero hours employees before they supported businesses etc.) it would be little benefit if companies had fucked off all their employees because they weren’t seeing the support for their payroll come through sharpish. Supporting workers’ wages is no use if you’ve been laid off.
2. Not sure but fact check the 5 week UC. I thought the gov have agreed to fast-track an advance UC payment within the first week?
3. Also not sure but fact check the zero hours wage underwriting  - from reading up on the scheme today I thought the job preservation scheme (I.e. the 80% wage underwriting) does cover zero hours employees?

tomtom

Offline
  • *****
  • forum hero
  • Posts: 20282
  • Karma: +641/-11
Hi Pete - the bigger point was that I think the emphasis of the bailout would have been different under a labour govt. but we’ll never know eh!

Tory or Labour got s would have both had the same economic tools/mechanisms to use - so there would be some similarity. But I’d bed the emphasis or what was implemented when to whom might have been different.

All moot now.

 

SimplePortal 2.3.7 © 2008-2024, SimplePortal