If you want to know why George Osborne wants to take us back to pre-war economics, this is why:
The graph is from Max Roser here, where all the working links can be found.
Sometimes explanations are easy to locate.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
It’s still worth repeating: Osborne’s agenda is to accelerate the concentration of wealth.
That’s it. All of it. Everything he says and does makes perfect sense when you view it through that lens; and he is the most effective economic actor ever to have occupied the post of Chancellor.
Feel free to disagree; but every time that you are tempted to describe a ‘failure’ of economic policy, ask yourself: “Who gained from that?”; and every time you think that he has told a lie, or has been subsequently proven wrong, consider that his saying it was as profitable, to someone, as the actions taking place behind his words.
Truth comes in a very particular flavour, for some.
Also: see if you can find the figures for the inequality in wealth. It’s far more striking than the inequality of income, and it is our Chancellors’ outstanding policy success.
Apologies for being off topic, Richard, but talking of superb explanations for things, here’s a lengthy but excellent piece from The Guardian that explains one aspect of TTIP that many people are now aware of – the ability of corporations to sue states. I recommend anyone interested in this subject read it. The situation is already even worse than most people can possibly imagine.
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jun/10/obscure-legal-system-lets-corportations-sue-states-ttip-icsid
It’s very good
It’s got to be a good piece Ivan because the journalists are not regular Guardian ones as far as I can tell!!
good to know France and Germany are looking for removal of investor-state dispute element of TTIP.
Can’t wait for the reintroduction of Montague Norman’s Gold Bullion Standard. This would be a Churchillian approach to the economy.
Ah-hah!
So this is what they REALLY mean by ‘aspiration’?
In the 1930s ‘The Three Stooges’ were a comedy act comprised of Moe, Larry and Curly; now they’re Conservative, Labour and LibDems (with UKIP in a bit part…)
In the 1930s ‘The Three Stooges’ were a comedy act comprised of Moe, Larry and Curly; now they’re Conservative, Labour and LibDems (with UKIP in a bit part.) Their jokes have worn thin.
There seems to have conflicting narratives on this blog. Firstly we seem to paint Osbourne as being incompetent, not understanding MMT and thus leading the country back to the dark ages. The next day we have Osbourne painted as a sophisticated economic villain who is deliberately implementing his dastardly economic policies because he wants to realise his masterplan of concentrating all the wealth.
I know you can’t stand they guy but it’s best to have a consistent line of attack.
How about both are true
He knows what he’s doing but it’s the wrong thing
As ever the obvious eludes you
Flip-chart-Rick again: Look at the graphing of social/private rent and income….and dates:
https://flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com/2015/06/11/work-shy-dole-scroungers-so-last-century/
“If the UK’s social security costs really are out of control it’s not because lots of people are sitting around with their feet up. It’s because lots of people are in jobs that just don’t pay enough”
Shortly to be in jobs that pay less, and working benefits will be lowered.
Now, about the pervasive monitoring of e-comms and social networks.
And “social unrest”…..it’ll never happen on any large scale. If it did..well, we have an army and a police service. And no firearms..