"quantative easing" and the "how stupid are you?" state capitalists.

[ymu]

Interesting, thanks.

However I must add there are a lot of Americans who want an NHS. Currently though they are battling against Congress/the Insurance companies and big pharma.. and some doctors who obviously like making $$$$$ every year.

Clinton's mini-NHS healthcare plan was scuppered by the Democrats in Congress. Obama's isn't exactly impressive, but will he get even that through? Is the current public mood enough to shame/scare those Democrats into supporting it?

BTW, Ron Paul being a doctor is most unlikely to lead him to support an NHS-style system. US doctors get paid an absolute fortune, and they get paid by the treatment, and can overtreat to their heart's desire given the medico-legal situation, where failing to treat is much more likely to be punished than over-treating to death.

British doctors were a huge obstacle to the NHS. It's why they get paid such an enormous amount now - we had to "stuff their mouths with gold" to get them to agree to it.

Most kids who fail to get into medical school go into law or accountancy. They're not bleeding hearts, even if they can afford a bit of public philanthropy every now and again.

 

[TomPaine]

Yeah exactly. I'm sure Ron Paul means well or whatever but I doubt he is the norm by any stretch of the imagination.

I watched a documentary on public health care which was screened on PBS. It showed 5 different public health care schemes from around the world and the high and low points of them.
All of them where better then the US system.

I think if they where going to push it through here the best bet would be the Japanese model. I can't see Obama doing jack shit to be honest. Any attempt at pushing through a proper NHS over here is going to be totally unlikely with all the money that has just been wasted on the bail outs.

Oh and any attempt at an NHS would have him labelled a communist/marxist Pol pot etc.

 

[ymu]

I can't see Obama doing jack shit to be honest. Any attempt at pushing through a proper NHS over here is going to be totally unlikely with all the money that has just been wasted on the bail outs.

It'd be a huge boost to the economy though. Tens of millions of the poorest Americans would suddenly be a great deal richer without their astronomical healthcare costs, especially families. Struggling employers could dump their absurdly expensive employee coverage. It'd be very cost-effective. The first bailout was $2000 per head. This'd be at least that big, but going directly into shallow pockets, wouldn't it?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I couldn't see the US going for an NHS-style system – too many vested interests in the way – but maybe a French-style universal insurance scheme, where you get an amount of money that you can then take to whichever doctor you like, and pay the difference if they are expensive.

Doctors might even like it as it would see the currently uninsured 40 million coming through their doors. There are a great deal of untreated poor in the US who are potential patients going to waste. That's how I'd sell it to doctors and big pharma.

 

[TomPaine]

Struggling employers could dump their absurdly expensive employee coverage.

yep I agree it would boost the economy. My wife doesn't get work sponsored healthcare so we have to pay oput of our own pocket.
One of my inlaws applied for private non-employer based health care when they went to do a one year training course and the insurance firm refused to cover them.
The worst thing is they have ever had was RSI, and that got sorted and paid for that out of their savings ($2000 a wrist) so I can't see why the Insurance company where refusing coverage...
Crazy crazy world we live in here when it comes to healthcare

 

[TomPaine]

Doctors might even like it as it would see the currently uninsured 40 million coming through their doors. There are a great deal of untreated poor in the US who are potential patients going to waste. That's how I'd sell it to doctors and big pharma.

Yep it sucks eh. These 40 million as well either end up dieing of something or with liens against them if they do end up at the doctors.
Problem is the health care companies don't want to have to cough up to doctors who treat the uninsured. The power lays with the health care companies. Smash them and then I guess you could get an NHS system.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

He's on TV over here on CNN and CNBC. I bought his book, it was a fairly interesting read.

Where I really disagree with him though is he is totally against something like the NHS. As somebody who is an immigrant in the US and self employed, the health care costs are pretty crushing even though we have to pay into the Medicare or whatever it is called scheme.

Dont get me wrong, Ron Paul is a capitalist and free marketer in a way that I disagree with. But he is honest about his politics, not for the phoney rigged markets of the financeers. He is a libertarian too. I could never vote for him but he is among the most interesting of the Republicans and has done more to speak for truth than too many democrat.

 

[Urbanblues]

There is nothing quite so pleasing,
As a jolly good quantitative easing;
To flood the banks with new cash,
Is the solution to stopping a crash.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

The idea would be quaint
Were it true, but it aint.
All we're getting from Gord
Is more rip-off and fraud.

 

[fela fan]

Inflation happens because people have money to spend and they spend it, increasing demand for the things they're spending money on.

This doesn't sound right to me. People for years now have had money (well, come across money somehow) to buy the latest technology. And as we all know, prices for such consumer items as computers and mobiles keep coming down. Inflation seems to have no impact on such products. Demand is neverending, yet prices come down.

It has no impact on drugs like marijuana either so far as i know.

I think inflation is just a tool to be used by those that can use it. Businesses simply charge what they think they can get away with.

 

[fela fan]

All too true, but I cant help thinking that we are the real muppets of the piece, not our masters who rig the game.

Between the scammers and the scammed it's pretty obvious who the bigger loser is. It's us.

Only in a money and economic sense.

But the scammers lost out right at the beginning of their criminal exploits if we use other criteria to decide who the muppets are.

 

[Barking_Mad]

Cynicus Economcus, as usual, has some interesting questions about this...

As you may gather, I am not very convinced that the exchange of letters offers any great clarity, and this is worrying in light of some of my earlier concerns. In summary this is the position:

1. The BoE has no obligation to report all of its activity

2. It would be difficult to describe the BoE as being independent of the Treasury

3. The Banking Bill has removed the necessity to publish how much money the BoE creates

4. The method for gilt auctions has just been reviewed, and included discussion of direct purchases of gilts, which would suddenly allow direct purchases by the BoE (altering a 300 year old system)

5. The only published policy on QE does not make clear the method of purchase of gilts, thereby allowing for direct purchases of gilts

6. The total maximum amount of money to be printed is completely unclear, but it appears that journalists are getting off the record briefings and reporting them as hard fact. A reading of the letter from the BoE suggests that the total amount of money to be created is £150 bn.

7. No timescale is given for when the purchases will take place

8. There is no end strategy or time whatsoever

The letters, and other information on the BoE QE policy, therefore do not preclude the direct financing of government operations and are very opaque in their description of the policy, and offer no formal or clear method of reporting. As such, it is quite possible that the government is doing a 'Zimbabwe'.

http://www.cynicuseconomicus.blogspot.com/

 

[GarfieldLeChat]

why not just cut taxation on everyones wage below £15,000 to zero no NI no Tax let them spend away or save it and then after two years bang the itnrest rate up to 4% and the economy will have recovered sufficently, but also healthy and better for long term good.

Also as part of that process renationalise rail, electrictiy and gas drop the prices to cover costs on a more frequent matrix than the futures market value a year ahead of time which it is at present. universal free health care.

A study out today as ready in the metro said about 11% of people pay presrciption charges so why bother charging them at all in england. they aren't ging to charge for cancer drugs and are looking at including other similar illnesses so why bother?

they don't in scotland or wales. I think perhaps someone can confirm?

so why bother charging at all. universal health care and cretinga system which promoted this and accepted that it cannot be run for profit just as transportation cannot would in essence we could even talior our ecomomy towards producing the reserch and healthcare service we need and deserve.

after all if we are to start living longer then we need to be able to repair ourselves better...

And invest in public works to build sustainable power generators in this country.

Give grants to small local employing businesses, innovators, invetors, green and so on businesses which employ under 15 people. This then allows small holdings to spring up in modern times all which will then generate a better health economy because it's a diverse needs driven one rather than a created market let the market place become one born out of genuine need not useless predicated markets of old. and by markets i mean literally markets not financal pissing contest areans...

but do it now.

fuck it.

It broke.

It can't be fixed.

all you are now doing is adding more wood on the fire.

ffs. how fucking gullible do you have to be to see it isn't working?

but sadly i doubt they'll do anything like this...

cost they are selfish self serving cunts.

 

[TomPaine]

But he is honest about his politics, not for the phoney rigged markets of the financeers.

As I've just discovered by doing some reading up on him, he's also been a bit of a cunt in the past as well. Some of his comments in a newspaper who wrote articles for are the sort of nasty shit you would expect to have heard from 80's Tories.. and worst.

 

[Das Uberdog]

The rich will hoard it, the poor will spend it. It'd be more efficient to make sure the poor had it to spend.

What I was trying to get at, if I'm understanding this correctly, is that we need some form of quantitative easing because we have deflation. Interest rates are adjusted for inflation - so when we have deflation, interest rates get pulled towards zero and then get stuck at just above zero because they can't go negative.

Banks won't lend under these circumstances because the money is making money just sitting there waiting to be worth more when prices have dropped further. Why would they risk lending it at a very low interest rate when it's increasing in value anyway?

So, QE will not start to have any effect unless and until the bail-out money reaches the real economy and real people can spend it, making inflation positive again. Whilst the banks are using it to shore up the books and pay off failed executives, this won't happen and the bailout won't do any good. Just like the last - how many is it now? - bailouts didn't do any good.

What they're doing might work if the banks were nationalised and therefore doing what the government needs them to do. It might work if there was a "bad bank" which took on all the toxic paper (as Japan did in the 1990s). It won't work if they just give it to the banks and hope it trickles down. The last trickle down theory has been shown to be bogus. There's no reason at all to think that this one isn't, especially when it's being implemented by the same neo-liberal numpties.

Eurgh, you dirty underconsumptionist, you...

Miniscule rates of real global growth for the past 30 years and an incredibly low rate of capital expansion in relation to both global population figures and material development have been leading us up towards this crisis since the post-war boom. Doling out money to the 'real sector' of the economy in the hope that it'll keep our value-unproductive tertiary consumer sector alive is pissing in the wind. The real issue is a crisis of profitable global production, caused in no minor part by vast overaccumulation of capital in Western countries.

 

[goebfwai]

There are a lot of columnists arguing for precisely that.

Enough banker welfare. Hand out cash and make us spend it

"What is needed is instant intravenous demand. Dole it out to those most likely to spend it at once and not save it, those on social benefits and low pay. Declare short-term tax cuts and VAT holidays. Have the post office hand out time-limited cash vouchers. Give instant grants for everything from DIY to eating out. "

Exactly. Mervyn King has said it will take time, but QE will work. Chances are economic demand would pick up anyway so many years down the line, without QE. QE is predicated on the hope the banks will lend it out to people. Who out there will have much appetite or stomach for borrowing with unemployment rising so quickly? Obama is giving £500 cash out?. Japan the equivalent of a few hundred I think. Giving gift vouchers would increase likelihood of such a freebie being spent rather than hoarded. 70% of the UK economy is based on consumer spending apparently. Something that gives people the confidence and wherewithal to spend, without getting into debt and without digging into their own savings that they are worried they will need to maximise as much as possible to cope with the unknown/a decline in economic conditions, is essential. There will come a point (God only knows when though) when the likes of Northern Rock will be fit to be sold on, and the shares in other banks can be sold on for a handsome profit, so it is right that people receive some sort of windfall for all this largesse, whether it be now, or now and in the future.

 

[Das Uberdog]

Guhhhhh! You Keynsian monetarist madmen. Cite just one example of when cash 'injections' into the 'real' or 'other' economy has ever historically worked to raise an economy out of recession. It's been tried in every major crash since the Great Depression, and has never succeeded.

Japan 'injected' trillions into their economy during their last depression - their output levelled off at around half of what it was before the crash, and hasn't recouped since. It's a crisis of profitable production, not absence of 'fluid capital' (which can always be found when there are profitable avenues for investment) that causes trade depressions. Chuck money at the poor all you like - you can only extend the tortured existence of fundamentally unprofitable productive systems for so long before there's no money left to chuck.

Capitalists need to go back to the classics, and realise there are only two longterm viable ways out of a recession/depression. 1) let it run its course, let unemployment drive down wages to a once again profitable degree, allowing those without jobs to starve and fight it out amongst themselves and keep your fingers crossed they don't get together and lynch you, or 2) fight your way out, World War stylee.

 

[bluestreak]

The government has borne all the costs of nationalisation and gained none of the advantages. The Conservative opposition has meekly and pathetically agreed.

All too true, but I cant help thinking that we are the real muppets of the piece, not our masters who rig the game.

Between the scammers and the scammed it's pretty obvious who the bigger loser is. It's us.

That's what we exist for. We work, we earn money, they take it and spend it. That's capitalism. People have to learn that the government and the bankers are in on this together. It's a two man scam.

 

[sleaterkinney]

The thing that disturbs me the most is that the govt just won't come up with a different way of doing things. They should nationalise the banks, create a good and bad bank out of it and get on with it.

 

[Das Uberdog]

Ahhhghghghgh!

Micro-management of financial institutions matters nothing in comparison with the mammoth deficiencies at the heart of our current economic model!

Peepz need read zum Lenin's Imperializmz

 

[extra dry]

http://www.itv.com/News/Articles/Bank-begins-new-money-injection-247949141.html

The banks are going to do this quantative easing...but if a lot of people just invest the money in off shore accounts??

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

Capitalists need to go back to the classics, and realise there are only two longterm viable ways out of a recession/depression. 1) let it run its course, let unemployment drive down wages to a once again profitable degree, allowing those without jobs to starve and fight it out amongst themselves and keep your fingers crossed they don't get together and lynch you, or 2) fight your way out, World War stylee.

What the hell are you on about? Let people starve? THAT'S the way out of a recession? You sir, are a nutter.

Saying that, is some truth to the idea that the economy needs to be left to 'correct' itself (at the moment we are in a situation comparable to stretching an elastic band; the state keeps stretching it thinking that they can do so forever. However, the elastic band WILL break eventually and attempting to prop the system up just increases the pain when it snaps).

What needs to be done is to let go of the elastic band NOW whilst providing a security net to those adversly affected. Eventually the economy will re-allocate the structure of production to one which provides jobs and stability.

What we have at the moment is a mis-allocation of resources due to an artificially created credit bubble. As long as the government keep reinflating the bubble with stupid ideas such as quantitative easing, the economy can never recover.

In my opinion we should cut all taxes other National Insurance. This would enable small businesses to survive during the downturn and less people would be laid off. This would speed up the recovery. In six months we would be out of this mess.

 

[DotCommunist]

yeah and the war will be over by christmas

 

[ItWillNeverWork]

yeah and the war will be over by christmas

This isn't a war though is it? It's a government created crisis. And you want government to solve it?