I recorded this yesterday. It's a more political video than most I have done. But that's because I am angry with the government. And I think Manchester is right to challenge it over coronavirus lockdowns.
You simply cannot tell people to lockdown and force them into real financial hardship. That won't work. It cannot work.
And what's more it's also completely unnecessary because the money to pay people in lockdown is readily available, which means that by not paying it the government is choosing to impose poverty on people. Of course Manchester is right to oppose that.
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:
At the moment the majority of UK voters think the government has to get its money from taxation and borrowing and the rating agencies have downgraded UK government debt. It will only be when there’s wholesale death from starvation this majority might revise its thinking and the operative word is “might!”
Why are you criticizing the government for putting Manchester in to level 3 measures, when Wales and Scotland are being put into total lockdown by their respective governments?
You don’t seem to mention that at all?
Surely the same applies to them as well?
Or is it bad when a Tory government does it, but OK when your friends in the SNP or Labour do it?
I think that they too should be holding out for more support
Of course I do
I don’t think you are getting what I am saying.
You are criticizing the UK government for putting Manchester into lockdown, and saying they should be giving Manchester more money because of this.
The Welsh and Scottish lockdowns are being put into place by their respective governments. Labour and the SNP in this case. Which will also do economic damage to Wales and Scotland.
Are you saying that the UK government should pay extra for this as well, even though they have not made those decisions?
So on the one hand you are criticizing the Tory government for decisions they have made, but not criticizing the Labour and SNP governments for the same decisions but also giving the people who don’t have to actually stump up the cash a free ride.
Sounds like double standards to me.
Of course I am saying the UK government should make sure poverty is avoided in Wales and Scotland
Why not?
They provide the funds to devolved administrations
Right, but if it is the Welsh and Scottish government’s decision to put people into poverty by forcing a lockdown, shouldn’t they pay for it?
That is after all what you are saying the government should do for Manchester.
Shouldn’t the Welsh and Scottish governments be accountable financially as well, or is accountability only a thing if it concerns the Tory government, who you clearly hate and attack on literally everything they do. Which you don’t seem to do when it comes to the SNP especially, which is odd considering what a mess they have made of almost everything up in Scotland.
I think you need to learn about who paid for furlough
And his devolved government works
Come back when you have
Annie
the simple difference is that devolved governments don’t control the national central bank i.e. the Bank of England who are the only ones who can create new money. That is under the control of the central government which is Conservative.
Annie it’s you who’s missing the point. Andy Burnham is arguing that as well as imposing a severe lockdown there needs to be government assurance adequate government income support will continue to be available to those unable to work because of the effects of the coronavirus pandemic. Because this government doesn’t understand that its own bank, the Bank of England, can create money from thin air like private sector banks can and doesn’t understand that hyper-inflation will not ensue if it does it is intent on a policy of substantially reducing income on those unable to work threatening homelessness and mass starvation.
If I may take issue:
a) I think the government does understand “quantitative easing” or creating spending money. But cutting public spending is the goal, not a means to an end, and “balancing the books” is merely a narrative to justify it. Spending money on vanity projects (HS2) or corporate welfare has never been a problem.
b) I think “quantitative easing” has already caused hyper inflation, in house & stock prices.
That is not hyperinflation
Inflation yes
A problem, definitely
But remember MMT would never recommend QE
It would recommend green QE
But never QE
And now you know why
As a matter of fact the Scottish Government (and probably the Welsh Government, but I am not entirely certain how it is funded) is required to produce a balanced budget; because it has extremely limited borrowing powers; and the Scottish Government ‘lives within its means’ each year; unlike UK, because it can create money, borrow or do precisely what is required. The Scottish Government is already using its resources as best it may to provide additional funding (£40m, for example in grants etc., to businesses faced with closure).
Thanks
There is also the point that tier 3 restrictions are not sufficient to bring the R number below 1 and that sacrifices made by people in Manchester and other high infection areas will still not benefit from reduced infection rates as they will still be going up! This is as well as the huge income losses that you rightly point out are unacceptable for workers to endure when the money is available to support them. It looks likes a national total lock-down for 3 weeks or more is inevitable as long as this Roman Empire style government lets C-19 spread like wildfire out of control.
Thank you for this!
I have just emailed your video to Andy Burnham’s office.
I hope they take note.
Annie refers to “up in Scotland” which suggests to me she doesn’t live here. That begs the question where is she getting her information from about what is happening here in Scotland? The tone of her comments indicate she is a Tory supporter or maybe even a Brexit Party supporter so gets her “information” from right wing propaganda organs such as the Daily Mail, Express or Telegraph. Things could definitely be done better in Scotland but it is nothing like the mess that is England and on top of that Scotland’s money raising powers are limited unlike the UK government which significantly reduces the Scottish Government’s options. Is there anything worse than blind ignorance?
She is a troll
And has been banned now because look all of them she turned to abuse
Vince Cable in the Independent today – not quite MMT yet, but moving in the right direction:
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/rishi-sunak-furlough-jobs-lockdown-eat-out-to-help-out-vince-cable-b1181852.html
He has said he is not at all convinced by MMT to me…
I live in greater manchester and I live on less than 2/3 of the minimum wage, but nothing is said about that. I support Burnham but far as I know he is only concentrating on people who are working, both self-employed and employed. Nothing has been said about people who are on benefits though I have heard hints he has said UC was not good enough. In fact, I have heard the govt is going to cut UC benefits rates. But I am not on UC and as I have said I live well believe the 2/3rd rate of pay. Yet nothing for the likes of me, so there is silence about people living on less than 2/3rds pay.
https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/2020/september/universal-credit-will-be-cut-%C2%A320-week-april-2021-0
Darren
Your point is well made
Why aren’t you claiming UC in that case?
I will; not post your answer, unless it is generic in nature.
But I do argue that UC reform should be part of any solution
Richard
I live just over the border from Greater Manchester, near Glossop. With thousands of our residents making a daily commute, we are tied to Manchester’s misfortunes. And we are directly linked to their economy. It’s with some natural bias that I declare support Andy Burnham’s stance.
Having said that, I find it difficult to get my head around how long the government can sustain a high level of support. I accept the challenge that it can’t afford not to. However, I have Anne Pettifer’s words ringing in my ear… “We can afford what we can do.” But how long can we afford to do very little?
If we are to have 5 million people unemployed what could we afford to do if we put them to work]
I know Ann
That’s what she meant on this occasion
We can afford whatever full employment in this country permits
Money is not the constraint
Getting people to work is
With that view I have no difficulty. The problem, as I see it, is that the necessary restrictions are an obstacle to putting this potential workforce through re-training and onto the work of the green new deal. Perversely, the threat might be that a rapid recovery would allow the ‘old’ economy to steal back this potential workforce before it can be re-assigned.