Do you want to discuss boring politics? (28 Viewers)

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
Capital spenditure btw is a direct investment into the private sector. Much better that investment comes from a currency issuing government than from a private bank expecting it to be repaid with interest. Well done to Reeves for announcing this and let's have more of it.
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
Capital spenditure btw is a direct investment into the private sector. Much better that investment comes from a currency issuing government than from a private bank expecting it to be repaid with interest. Well done to Reeves for announcing this and let's have more of it.
Where's the money coming from?
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
Please explain how the UK government could ever struggle to repay a debt it owes denominated in pounds sterling.

I've borrowed some thoughts from others on the thread. Can I ever run out of thoughts to repay those debts?

It will need to tax, cut or print more just to service the interest on the debt. Let’s assuming it’s print, as I’ve explained before the more you do this, the more you debase the currency (reducing purchasing power) and in turn the more bond yields are likely to rise because lenders will want a higher return due to the anticipated further debasement of the currency…so the interest on your debt increases even more

Only way to get out of this doom loop is growth hence the comment about making sure money is spent wisely
 

CCFCSteve

Well-Known Member
The same is true for most people. Difference is people have to pay it off before retirement and a country never retires. This deficit hawk attitude has consistently just lead to expensive failures in public services and crumbling infrastructure that needs rebuilding. We’ve had 14 years of stagnation, how you can argue for more is beyond me TBH.

Not sure who you’re replying to there but as I’ve just said we need to spend and invest more (but need to make sure cash is spent wisely) I presume it’s someone else
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Can hardly be a surprise. History tells us Labour overspend, The Conservatives clear it up and get blamed for needless austerity. Rinse and repeat.
Well, apart from the fact we've increased borrowing under the Tories whilst also letting the infrastructure go to ruin, choosing instead to give loads of money to the rich with tax breaks and subsidies.

At least if you spend on that infrastructure you have a capital asset, plus providing employment thus increasing tax take and purchasing power whilst decreasing welfare and benefit payments.

It could just as easily be argued that the Tories massively underinvest and Labour have to clear it up (but by which time the bill has increased massively) and get blamed for overspending.
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
At least if you spend on that infrastructure you have a capital asset, plus providing employment thus increasing tax take and purchasing power whilst decreasing welfare and benefit payments.
The issue we have is that the infrastructure spend has (historically)largely been done on completely pointless projects, such as the Thames flood barrier, HS2, millennium dome etc etc
While at the same time we've neglected our power infrastructure and water supply systems, two vital pieces of infrastructure that have been crying out for investment for years. A couple of new reservoirs to supply the massive house building project would make far more sence than HS2
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
I get your point, I'd just rather have energy from other sources but I know that's a bit utopian. I'm more interested in when fusion kicks off so we can have warp drives tbh!

Fusion is only five years away!

And always will be.

Would love it but I don’t think we can bank on it any more than us suddenly solving artificial intelligence.

There’s been huge propoganda against nuclear as long as I’ve been alive. Even The Simpsons FFS. When you look into it its biggest issue is cost and it costs so much because people are so over the top on safety and planning. Cheap energy is so key and the downward trend basically stopped when we decided as a species we didn’t like nuclear. Hopefully wind and solar pick that up. But I’ll take any energy production that isn’t beholden to a bunch of despots.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
The issue we have is that the infrastructure spend has (historically)largely been done on completely pointless projects, such as the Thames flood barrier, HS2, millennium dome etc etc
While at the same time we've neglected our power infrastructure and water supply systems, two vital pieces of infrastructure that have been crying out for investment for years. A couple of new reservoirs to supply the massive house building project would make far more sence than HS2
I don't disagree with that, but you were saying that we always have to cut spending because Labour always overspend.

What you've just stated there isn't that though is it?
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
Where have I said that
Well you can only produced the money promised by raising taxes, or by further austerity, or by irresponsible leanding or by shaking the mythical money tree and printing extra money out of thin air. (ie quantitive easing with all the negative consequences involved)

So which of the above are you suggesting?
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
I don't disagree with that, but you were saying that we always have to cut spending because Labour always overspend.

What you've just stated there isn't that though is it?
It's not, but at least the overspend would be justifiable as it's on desperately needed infrastructure.

Labour piss money away on nonsense, such as giving away British sovereign soil, as in the Chagos Islands (which were ours) and then paying millions to lease it back!!!!

And don't even start me on the cost of migrant hotels, which is costing us billions due to a failed asylum processing system.

(For balance the Tory's were just as culpable)
 
Last edited:

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
Well you can only produced the money promised by raising taxes, or by further austerity, or by irresponsible leanding or by shaking the mythical money tree and printing extra money out of thin air. (ie quantitive easing with all the negative consequences involved)

So which of the above are you suggesting?
Quantitative easing is the manufacturing of money specifically to stimulate the economy. Manufacturing money for the purpose of investing in capital expenditure is not quantitative easing, it’s investment. To use the simplistic analogy of household spending it’s borrowing money just so you can spend more on nothing in particular vs borrowing money to invest in your house, new windows, re-wiring, maybe an extension etc. One is intangible the other is tangible. So not nearly the same thing.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
and tbf I'd take hardcore Scientists over goons from petrostates. You've talked me round. Kudos! Still hope the reactors don't kill us all, though.

Climate aside, the civilised world moving to a situation where it doesn’t have to fund absolute maniacs would be a huge win.

Well you can only produced the money promised by raising taxes, or by further austerity, or by irresponsible leanding or by shaking the mythical money tree and printing extra money out of thin air. (ie quantitive easing with all the negative consequences involved)

So which of the above are you suggesting?

Read some Keynes if you want the theory behind it. This is fairly bog standard mainstream economics.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
His theories don't stack up in the "real world" wage and price inflation, tax avoidance by the wealthy and corruption at senior levels saw to that.
In the real world money is created every day through government spending, that is a fact. Here is some research into how it all works


I'll give you your due, consistently clueless whether on or off topic
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Growth, growth, growth….

But five minutes ago you were blaming Starmer for being weak and sucking up to Trump in order to try and minimise the effect of the tariffs. Can hardly blame UK government when you've got a DESPOTUS wildly slapping tariffs on and off on a whim without having the faintest idea what trade deficits are.

Even I wouldn't blame the Tories for us having reduced trade with the US at the moment if there were still in power.
 

rob9872

Well-Known Member
His theories don't stack up in the "real world" wage and price inflation, tax avoidance by the wealthy and corruption at senior levels saw to that.
I think they can, but only with optimum conditions. Outdated rather than don't work would be fairer.
 

Captain Dart

Well-Known Member
In the real world money is created every day through government spending, that is a fact. Here is some research into how it all works


I'll give you your due, consistently clueless whether on or off topic
It's not government spending it's borrowing.

You should find out how banks create money from nothing, biggest scam ever. If you have a mortgage you're paying intrest on that magic money. 🤭
 

SBT

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Top