Labour’s Manifesto

Maybe it is because they are, like Reeves, proponents of modern supply side economics?

Although I don’t follow Murphy, I suspect that he may support the argument that much of the U.K. economic problems are as a result of an over reliance on the market mechanisms to solve the issues. Instead MSSE argues for greater use of state powers, that support growth without detrimental affect on equity or the environment, as we can see this in the manifesto and being developed by Reeves.

I do understand that as far as Murphy is concerned the argument is over the way the government funding is procured, but I don’t see why this should invalidate MSSE theory.

^ Instead MSSE argues for greater use of state powers, that support growth without detrimental affect on equity or the environment,^

I'm sorry. What does not having a detrimental effect on equity mean?

Looking at MSSE brings me back to the question of where will the money come from?

If Labour intends to get it from the tinkering with taxation that it has so far announced it will be nowhere near sufficient for the investment needed. It has also sworn it won't rely on 'borrowing' because it wants to reduce the deficit (deficit reduction would, I suspect, have been the last thing that would have concerned Keynes).

So, unless it secretly intends to undertake wholesale money creation (like the £billions the tories created to deal with the pandemic) I'm completely at a loss to see how it is going to work.

I find myself agreeing with this article by Jeremy Clarkson

Rachel Reeves worries me.

I have already said that Labour intends to change the basis on which fund managers are paid from CGT (the practice in Europe and the US as well as the UK) to income tax. That will really assist investment.

It worries me that you’re at a loss MaizieD! I depend on you to explain the economics of what’s being promised…

Pantglas2

It worries me that you’re at a loss MaizieD! I depend on you to explain the economics of what’s being promised…

😂

If you’re at a loss Maizie I am even more worried. Why oh why do we not hear Reeves grilled on where the money is coming from? Properly pinned down by someone who knows what questions to ask? It seems people blindly follow the ‘we need change’ mantra without question. We are in for more austerity, ‘tough decisions’ and higher taxes.

Incidentally, where will the money to compensate the subpostmasters and victims of contaminated blood come from, and the money needed to end the doctors’ strikes? Any mention of that anywhere?

Incidentally, where will the money to compensate the subpostmasters and victims of contaminated blood come from, and the money needed to end the doctors’ strikes? Any mention of that anywhere?

I actually think it will come from much the same place as did the £billions to cover the covid pandemic. Which was neither from taxation or 'borrowing'.

No-one ever asks a government questions about cash injections for out of the ordinary spending like this at the time they happen, or even when they are announced. 'How are you going to fund this?' is a question reserved specially for general elections.

Germanshepherdsmum

If you’re at a loss Maizie I am even more worried. Why oh why do we not hear Reeves grilled on where the money is coming from? Properly pinned down by someone who knows what questions to ask? It seems people blindly follow the ‘we need change’ mantra without question. We are in for more austerity, ‘tough decisions’ and higher taxes.

Incidentally, where will the money to compensate the subpostmasters and victims of contaminated blood come from, and the money needed to end the doctors’ strikes? Any mention of that anywhere?

Well, Labour will have to find the money for those issues as the Conservatives have been happily kicking those particular financial cans down the road knowing that they probably won’t have to deal with it themselves.