Keir Starmer, yearly review

I think that when it comes to this, MaizieD is, actually, an expert, and doesn't rely on the Guardian. 🤔

LilyGransnet

Hi folks

Can we have a bit of peace and love, please?

Thank you LilyGransnet.

Volver - Not wanting to have a reasonable discussion then? I’m very willing to discuss that I’ve raised, albeit I am tiring of the attempts to shut me down.

I don't have enough knowledge to discuss this, I'm just reading what people post. So any goading is useless. But I know that MaizieD knows what she's talking about.

Fleurpepper

growstuff

DaisyAnne

growstuff

Wow! How rude!

If you read the article in the Guardian Siope's interpretation of the headline and the intention of the writer is absolutely spot on.

That is an opinion growstuff. If you alter a quote to add an opinion you should make it clear.

Wow! Just wow!

The rudest post ever, and shouting at someone for shouting! Wow! Just wow!

If you think I'm being rude, I was actually being restrained. I don't take kindly to people being aggressive towards me because they can't accept how rude they are.

I'm off to have a reasoned discussion with people who can discuss rationally.

That’s a sense I get - not just from this thread, but from many - there’s too many bumping their guns through repeating the often politically slanted opinion of others and fighting to have that opinion heard alone. Whilst some may be more informed it’s difficult to understand the validity of those opinions as so much gets shouted down by the persistent few.
Volver thinks I’m goading her - I’m not, just challenging her method of communication which does appears - to me - to be an attempt to drown out whatever doesn’t suit. Am I wrong in feeling that? I’d say not as the root cause is an absence of meaningful discussion.

It is likely that once I’ve recovered from surgery I’ll fade into the ether once again as I’ll not have time to post. I would however like to be part of some reasoned dialogue meanwhile. After all, we should all have enough life experience to not only to possess our own viewpoint, we should also have the skill to rationally explore other opinion as well.

Is this thread still here?

There are a lot of posters who come on here and complain about being shouted down by lefties, or something. Generally its because the "lefties" actually have arguments that stand up to scrutiny and the "righties" spout unsubstantiated claims which they can't justify other than saying "well that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it and you've just borrowed yours from the Guardian".

If you look properly, you'll find many threads full of people having proper dialogue.

Good luck with the surgery.

Oh, and me, the pedant. One bumps ones gums.

I’m claiming no affiliation so have not criticised anyone’s opinion. But I do have this feeling that some suffer from over inflated self-opinion, evinced by the catty pedant comment. As said before, sometimes people make the themselves appear ridiculous.
I’ve had the surgery and am in recovery, but I appreciate the good wishes.

Meow 🐱

growstuff

Fleurpepper

growstuff

DaisyAnne

growstuff

Wow! How rude!

If you read the article in the Guardian Siope's interpretation of the headline and the intention of the writer is absolutely spot on.

That is an opinion growstuff. If you alter a quote to add an opinion you should make it clear.

Wow! Just wow!

The rudest post ever, and shouting at someone for shouting! Wow! Just wow!

If you think I'm being rude, I was actually being restrained. I don't take kindly to people being aggressive towards me because they can't accept how rude they are.

Sorry, you were not rude at all growstuff. And the wrong post was quoted. It was DaysyAnne's post SHOUTING AT YOU, for you shouting at her! And saying she is just not interested about what you or Maizie, or us 'lefties' (!!!) have to say.

THAT post was really rude.

ExperiencedNotOld

That’s a sense I get - not just from this thread, but from many - there’s too many bumping their guns through repeating the often politically slanted opinion of others and fighting to have that opinion heard alone. Whilst some may be more informed it’s difficult to understand the validity of those opinions as so much gets shouted down by the persistent few.
Volver thinks I’m goading her - I’m not, just challenging her method of communication which does appears - to me - to be an attempt to drown out whatever doesn’t suit. Am I wrong in feeling that? I’d say not as the root cause is an absence of meaningful discussion.

It is likely that once I’ve recovered from surgery I’ll fade into the ether once again as I’ll not have time to post. I would however like to be part of some reasoned dialogue meanwhile. After all, we should all have enough life experience to not only to possess our own viewpoint, we should also have the skill to rationally explore other opinion as well.

How do you think we should attempt to deal with the crisis we are now in?
We have had years of Austerity / public-spending cuts and - pandemic notwithstanding - the policy doesn't appear to have improved the economy, nor the lives of millions of people... I'm including middle-income earners (like myself) as well as the already impoverished. We've had the odd growth spurts, especially after lockdown restrictions were lifted, but overall people's standard of living seems to have declined, the gap between rich and poor is ever widening and our public services are reaching the point of unsustainability (to put it mildly). And now we're faced with a recession and even more spending cuts - spending cuts which will surely hit those in our demographic quite severely.
You mentioned in an earlier post that none of us had come up with ideas about what we were prepared to give-up - that we hadn't differentiated between what we 'need' and what we 'want'.
I might be wrong, but I assume that what the majority of ordinary people want is an affordable roof over their heads and a reasonable income that enables them to pay their essential bills and put wholesome food on the table, as well as a reasonable standard of care from public services. That's certainly a want but I'd say it's inextricably linked with a need.
If millions of people are now going to tighten their belts again - to some degree or other - how will this affect the economy? What does growth depend on if it is not on people spending into the economy? Where does the growth come from? If people have no disposable income - will businesses (both large and small) be encouraged to hire and invest?
I'm just posing these questions to you for the purpose of debate.

Good luck with your recovery from surgery. I had major surgery a couple of years ago and I know how much there is to catch up on afterwards, and when you are still somewhat physically (and mentally) fragile, it can be quite challenging to wade through the backlog as well as cope with the day-to-day minutiae, especially if you have to re-evaluate your capabilities.

I think his time is coming and he's going to make a good PM. Let's face it he couldn't possibly be any worse than the last ones. I'm not counting Sunak in this because he wasn't elected by the people.

Ye Gods Volver didn’t you read what LilyGransnet just posted or are you deliberately trying to shut down this thread as you don’t like it?
ExperiencedNotOld and anyone one else has a right to reasoned dialogue on here and once again correcting spelling or anything is only for pedants corner otherwise just plain rude.

1. Yes. I'm not being rude, I'm stating a fact as I see it. Its my opinion and I'm entitled to it. (oh, hang on...)

2. I described myself as a pedant, So you calling me a pedant doesn't really upset me that much.

grannyrebel I am wavering a bit about Starmer tbh.I just hope he will be good as PM and keep to his convictions.
As you say tho, can’t be worse than a few we’ve had lately!

grannyrebel7

I think his time is coming and he's going to make a good PM. Let's face it he couldn't possibly be any worse than the last ones. I'm not counting Sunak in this because he wasn't elected by the people.

I'm just not sure about Starmer.

My feeling is that he is attempting to win over/ appease two opposing factions which, of course, makes sense if you're trying to win an election. But I'm not sure it works, or not for long, anyway because both sides will make demands and to please one he will have to disappoint the other.

Brexiters will view him with suspicion - naturally, he was a Remainer. And Remainers will not be happy about his rebuttal of the SM - which he obviously once believed in.

If he and his party are going to be elected on the basis of 'anyone-but-the-Tories' then I think he's in for a hard ride.

I could be wrong of course, but I remain unconvinced that he'll 'make Brexit work' in the way Brexiters want it to work, and many Remainers don't think it will work anyway!

I believe at heart he's a fairly decent 'chap' - but he's also ambitious and if that ambition means denying your previous principles to get into the hot seat... well, there's usually a price to pay. So to speak!

ronib

Professor N Gregory Mankiw Harvard

Thank you for this ronib. If anyone wants to read it you can download a PDF.

Here

The first thing I came across that increases interest is the MMT approach to inflation. Professor Mankiw brings to our attention the use, by proponents of MMT, of conflict theory as the basis of their suggestion that inflation is intrinsic to "the power relations between workers and capital (class conflict), which are mediated by government within a capitalist system"(MW&W, p.255). Mankiw adds, "That is, inflation gets out of control when workers and capital struggle to claim a larger share of national income." (PDF, p.5).

He then compares this with mainstream theories of inflation that, he points out, "emphasize not a class struggle but excessive growth in aggregate demand, often due to monetary policy." (PDF, p.5).

This will, I think, be an interesting read.

This man started with a BA in Economics, became a Doctor of Philosophy, and also gained a PhD in economics. He taught economics at MIT, where he became a full Professor of Economics at 29. This is an expert in the subject.

Maizie has, to my knowledge, never claimed to be an expert. Personally I think it a little unfair to her to label her as such; it's a heavy load to carry. As far as I am aware, she still conscientiously follows a blogger who has been involved with the theory and has searched for other information on the subject, taking great interest in it. I think she has given us another point of view on emerging economic theories. I am grateful for that.

volver

I think that when it comes to this, MaizieD is, actually, an expert, and doesn't rely on the Guardian. 🤔

I wouldn't say that I'm an 'expert', but, being very sceptical myself about it when I first encountered MMT I read as widely as I could around the subject, including refutations and counter refutations and am prepared to accept the evidence of researchers who have actually researched the mechanisms of state funding and demonstrated that the spending comes before the taxing. (Even Adam Smith, one of the so called 'Fathers of Economic', in the 18thC recognised that...)

You don't need to look far to find that most economists, whatever their affiliation to a particular field of economics, will tell you that national budgets are not run like household budgets for the sole reason that only the government of a country with a sovereign currency can create money; no other entity within a country can do that.

What annoys me is people telling me it is somehow a left wing policy, when it is merely a description of how the state financing system works. It is entirely politically neutral.

Even more annoying to be told that it is just my 'opinion'. It's like being told that saying that breathing is vital to keeping you alive is 'just an opinion'

My 'opinion' only comes into play when I suggest how the knowledge can be used.

Dickens

grannyrebel7

I think his time is coming and he's going to make a good PM. Let's face it he couldn't possibly be any worse than the last ones. I'm not counting Sunak in this because he wasn't elected by the people.

I'm just not sure about Starmer.

My feeling is that he is attempting to win over/ appease two opposing factions which, of course, makes sense if you're trying to win an election. But I'm not sure it works, or not for long, anyway because both sides will make demands and to please one he will have to disappoint the other.

Brexiters will view him with suspicion - naturally, he was a Remainer. And Remainers will not be happy about his rebuttal of the SM - which he obviously once believed in.

If he and his party are going to be elected on the basis of 'anyone-but-the-Tories' then I think he's in for a hard ride.

I could be wrong of course, but I remain unconvinced that he'll 'make Brexit work' in the way Brexiters want it to work, and many Remainers don't think it will work anyway!

I believe at heart he's a fairly decent 'chap' - but he's also ambitious and if that ambition means denying your previous principles to get into the hot seat... well, there's usually a price to pay. So to speak!

Interesting Dickens.

I don't think he is "attempting to win over/ appease two opposing factions" but three groups. Many in those groups are not part of a faction in the Labour Party, as they are not Labour Party members. They may not even be sympathetic to socialism.

The Brexit voter, according to polls, has softened a great deal. From these polls, it appears many don't feel they got any "levelling-up". I think Starmer should pick up on this, say levelling-up hasn't happened and offer his view of how it could. Some won't agree, others will, but it may be enough for some to vote Labour again.

I didn't think his speech said much about the Conservative Party. He was saying where the Labour Party's thinking was going. But we all hear things differently.

I think the question is - do you want a Labour Party that is in power and appealing to the widest possible audience or a Labour Party that agrees with the view of a, possibly small, proportion of the party members and is out of power? That may be difficult for Labour Party members, such as yourself, but some factions will disagree and agree with you within your party too. It is more likely, in my opinion, that this infighting will once again lose Labour the election than that Starmer will.

MaizieD

volver

I think that when it comes to this, MaizieD is, actually, an expert, and doesn't rely on the Guardian. 🤔

I wouldn't say that I'm an 'expert', but, being very sceptical myself about it when I first encountered MMT I read as widely as I could around the subject, including refutations and counter refutations and am prepared to accept the evidence of researchers who have actually researched the mechanisms of state funding and demonstrated that the spending comes before the taxing. (Even Adam Smith, one of the so called 'Fathers of Economic', in the 18thC recognised that...)

You don't need to look far to find that most economists, whatever their affiliation to a particular field of economics, will tell you that national budgets are not run like household budgets for the sole reason that only the government of a country with a sovereign currency can create money; no other entity within a country can do that.

What annoys me is people telling me it is somehow a left wing policy, when it is merely a description of how the state financing system works. It is entirely politically neutral.

Even more annoying to be told that it is just my 'opinion'. It's like being told that saying that breathing is vital to keeping you alive is 'just an opinion'

My 'opinion' only comes into play when I suggest how the knowledge can be used.

Oh dear, Maisie. You won't even accept a compliment without insisting you are correct and that all you say about MMT is factual. If you sat the relevant exams for this, you would not be allowed to put forward theories as facts, and you would fail. I wouldn't fail you, nor would anyone else on here. People with much more knowledge than us would.

I'm sorry you can't relax a bit and realise that, while your opinion is very worthwhile, it doesn't become a fact simply because you believe it is.

I explained the two views Mankiw showed concerning inflation. If two sets of economists hold two different views, why is one a truth and the other, currently the most accepted one, simply an opinion or thesis? Paul Samuelson explained, "Economics is not an exact science." He continued, "... in my judgment, we are not converging toward exactitude, but we're improving our databases and our ways of reasoning about them." I am sure that is what will come out of MMT. I doubt - to the extreme - that the whole theory will take over economics. Even some parts you currently hold dear may fall by the wayside.

As for MMT not being a left-wing construct, where else can you read three economists in a published book talking about "the power relations between workers and capital"?

I have said I think economists in the future will learn from it. But the socialist roots I have personally perceived means I am a little more suspicious of its aims. I get that you cannot believe everyone - except those who are hard right - doesn't believe, or want to believe in socialism. But I don't, and others don't either.

Thank you for the explanation Fleurpepper. I appreciate it.

I can understand why the Conservatives can't admit that austerity didn't help the country, in fact made things worse, because it was their idea. But I can't understand why Keir Starmer doesn't say it loud and clear, and present a different way.

Well MaizieD you're more of an expert than I am.