Wednesday 12th April 2017

[HindleA]

Morning


New wave of free schools planned despite secondary staff cuts


https://www.theguardian.com/education/2 ... staff-cuts" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.gov.uk/government/news/more ... ood-places" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... re-schools" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 78926.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


50,000 disabled people 'have adapted vehicles removed after benefits assessment

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Morning

To the above, ridiculous and ridiculous.

The news stand at Huddersfield Station wasn't a pretty sight for Boris. Ouch!

For example, the Mail: Humiliation for Boris as G7 snub his calls for sanctions against Assad and say Russia 'must not be pushed into the corner'

[HindleA]

http://m.wbrc.com/myfoxal/db_345960/con ... YQ.twitter" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



Alabama Senate votes to allow church to form police dept

[HindleA]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... SApp_Other" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


What’s it like on the frontline in the Brexit culture wars?


Al Murray

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Another day another Labour policy announcement

Debbie Abrahams‏Verified account @Debbie_abrahams · 3h3 hours ago

Proud to be announcing @Uklabour 's Pension Pledges in Coventry later today with @JohnMcDonnellMP & @JimCunninghamMP

I read that Labour are outflanking the Tories on the controversial "triple lock" to woo the "grey" vote.

[StephenDolan]

Another day another Labour policy announcement

Debbie Abrahams‏Verified account @Debbie_abrahams · 3h3 hours ago

Proud to be announcing @Uklabour 's Pension Pledges in Coventry later today with @JohnMcDonnellMP & @JimCunninghamMP

I read that Labour are outflanking the Tories on the controversial "triple lock" to woo the "grey" vote.

Tanks on the lawn! Will be the cry from Rentoul etc, right?

[PorFavor]

Good morfternoon.

Boris Johnson is a liability for Britain, says John McDonnell (Guardian)

Can't argue with that.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -mcdonnell

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Good morfternoon.

Boris Johnson is a liability for Britain, says John McDonnell (Guardian)

Can't argue with that.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/20 ... -mcdonnell

The quote from Christopher Meyer is particularly devastating.

"How on earth...."

[StephenDolan]

http://www.newscrasher.com/2017/04/11/b ... -audience/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[HindleA]

http://www.itv.com/news/2017-04-12/lanc ... rt-battle/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


Lancashire anti-fracking campaigners lose High Court battle

[AnatolyKasparov]

I read that Labour are outflanking the Tories on the controversial "triple lock" to woo the "grey" vote.

Thought that McDonnell strongly hinted at that a while back, tbh. Tubby wasn't too impressed as I recall.......

[PaulfromYorkshire]

http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/a-17 ... O4FjE11qJC" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Wanted-A-fair-and-truthful-press-An-open-letter-to-the-New-Statesman

This is tbf quite a rant!

[StephenDolan]

I read that Labour are outflanking the Tories on the controversial "triple lock" to woo the "grey" vote.

Thought that McDonnell strongly hinted at that a while back, tbh. Tubby wasn't too impressed as I recall.......

It's being able to disentangle those that need it and those that probably don't. The push to universalism instead of targeted, be it the TL or FSM is interesting.

[StephenDolan]

SH, do you have a twin by any chance?

'Bruce Medallion' posting elsewhere bears a rather striking similarity to yourself.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I read that Labour are outflanking the Tories on the controversial "triple lock" to woo the "grey" vote.

Thought that McDonnell strongly hinted at that a while back, tbh. Tubby wasn't too impressed as I recall.......

It's being able to disentangle those that need it and those that probably don't. The push to universalism instead of targeted, be it the TL or FSM is interesting.

Yes at least there is some consistency there. It's a clear break with the "third way" isn't it? The logical conclusion will be increases in taxation. So be it.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Presumably Bruce Medallion isn't in favour of universal benefits and tax increases?

[HindleA]

I wrote a missive(garbled hardly intelligible letter)to them in '83(NS) after editorial suggesting tactical voting ,during my conscientious(even more self deluded period)of firing off letters to press/media,as if it made any difference-one exchange with the Express(In defence of binmen) went on for about a year;to be fair I got a polite reply.

[HindleA]

The Tories have used targeting(not in a good way) of particular pensioners,with some niceties to come.

[gilsey]

On Labour's problem with the neo-liberal consensus, in need of serious editing but still worth reading.
British Labour has to break out of the neo-liberal ‘cost’ framing trap
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=35747" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The national government is never revenue constrained because it is the monopoly issuer of the currency. So it can buy whatever real resources that are for sale in the currency it issues.

Which means that it the nation determines through the political process to drop bombs and leave sick people sick then it can financially accomplish that goal without issue.

But it also means that if the political force is to have a first-class health system and the real resources are available to accomplish that task then the government can always make that happen.

The NHS is starved of funds because the political process determines that – the support for the NHS and the political voices its musters (presumably within the British Labour Party) have not been strong enough.

In part, this is because the Labour Party has bought the false framing about ‘costs’. It has adopted the neo-liberal frame and thereby has weakened its capacity to argue for the NHS.

This comment btl sums it up well.

The inability of Corbyn and the Left to articulate a better fiscal narrative is destroying them -however, they are (without being conscious of it) between a rock and a hard place)

1) The myths about spending and a ‘shortage of money’ have become mental wall paper and very hard to remove if possible at this juncture of supremely dumbed-down debtate. SO even if Labour adopted MMT overnight the press would savage them even more and BBC etc journalists rant on about the inter-generational debt blah…blah….

2) By adopting the neo-lib narrative but adding the ‘spending creates income’ Keynesian bit they still walk into the same trap and the public are told the usual trash about Labour being spendthrift.

No win either way for Labour despite polls showing the country WANT rail nationalisation/houses/ NHS improved.

As a social care disaster approaches and doctors leave in droves and student debt piles up people like Theresa May shout at Corbyn about him ‘bankrupting the economy’ and there is NO reply!!!!!

I'm not sure he's right about them 'not being concious of it', there must be some Labour MPs who understand economics, surely.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Yeah, as I said the other day I agree with universal benefits if practicable (and if non-universal they should be reasonably wide ranging)

There was a big debate about this back in my 1980s student days, but I think the evidence is now clear - mass means-testing erodes support for public welfare.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Yeah, as I said the other day I agree with universal benefits if practicable (and if non-universal they should be reasonably wide ranging)

There was a big debate about this back in my 1980s student days, but I think the evidence is now clear - mass means-testing erodes support for public welfare.

They could even invent something called National Insurance eh?

[AnatolyKasparov]

And yes, the "government economics are exactly the same as household ones, so we have to live within our means" meme has been a terrific boon for the right.

Seeing too many Labour "moderates" endorse this is just one illustration of how they have just lost the plot.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I read that Labour are outflanking the Tories on the controversial "triple lock" to woo the "grey" vote.

Thought that McDonnell strongly hinted at that a while back, tbh. Tubby wasn't too impressed as I recall.......

Indeed, I'm not. We've been here before in the 80s too, when Labour was in favour of higher pensions than the Tories, and it got no thanks for it. At that time, pensioner poverty was endemic and appalling and there was a strong argument for it. Now, that isn't the case and it's expensive vote buying. I'd much rather they did more for the pensioners who don't get the full pension.

I do like McDonnell going for Johnson as a liability though.

[AnatolyKasparov]

I'm not convinced by it myself, I have to admit. Can still recall Blair/Brown getting badly burnt by the 75p pension increase that one year, though.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

I'm not convinced by it myself, I have to admit. Can still recall Blair/Brown getting badly burnt by the 75p pension increase that one year, though.

The solution is through taxation isn't it?

If the wealthy have been taxed sufficiently throughout their working lives and are taxed fairly on inheritances and land / property then it gets easier to give them the universal benefits.

We already (just about) do it with health don't we?

[Tubby Isaacs]

And yes, the "government economics are exactly the same as household ones, so we have to live within our means" meme has been a terrific boon for the right.

Seeing too many Labour "moderates" endorse this is just one illustration of how they have just lost the plot.

It might be riding my particular hobby horse here, but I think there's an easily understood difference between capital investment and current spending, and that people accept borrowing for capital.

If the case is put properly in those terms, of saving money in the future and growing faster, then I reckon it can be popular and look like the future, which is always something Labour needs to do.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I'm not convinced by it myself, I have to admit. Can still recall Blair/Brown getting badly burnt by the 75p pension increase that one year, though.

Yeah. But Philip Hammond making noises about scrapping the triple lock gives them a bit of cover.

[Tubby Isaacs]

Just watching the excellent Ed Conway on Sky News.

Didn't the Tories time it well with wages rising?

[AnatolyKasparov]

As far as Sky News journalists are concerned though, Sam Kiley seems to be getting rather more attention today. Can't possibly think why

[SpinningHugo]

I read that Labour are outflanking the Tories on the controversial "triple lock" to woo the "grey" vote.

Thought that McDonnell strongly hinted at that a while back, tbh. Tubby wasn't too impressed as I recall.......

Are you?

It is a bloody awful policy.

[AnatolyKasparov]

Have you read the whole thread before posting that?

To put it politely (again) I am unconvinced.

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Have you read the whole thread before posting that?

To put it politely (again) I am unconvinced.

I think a lot of us are unconvinced, but it's lead to some interesting discussion about the merits or not of universal benefits that I'm enjoying.

It would be great wouldn't it to continue the debate in that open way?

[PaulfromYorkshire]

Meanwhile, Tim Farron basically repeats almost verbatim what Emily Thornberry said on newsnight about the Syria situation and Johnson and gets a Groan article for his trouble

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... tim-farron" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; [It's not worth it]

[Tubby Isaacs]

The school meals policy could be popular because it gets money off other people.

But more generally, it'll be lots of the people who get the universal paying the extra tax. That's pretty easy to attack as "giving with one hand, taking away with the other".

[PaulfromYorkshire]

The school meals policy could be popular because it gets money off other people.

But more generally, it'll be lots of the people who get the universal paying the extra tax. That's pretty easy to attack as "giving with one hand, taking away with the other".

Massive reduction in red tape though

[StephenDolan]

Glad to see this so high on the popular read list of the BBC news app.


Thousands have disability vehicles taken away - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39575293" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Tubby Isaacs]

The school meals policy could be popular because it gets money off other people.

But more generally, it'll be lots of the people who get the universal paying the extra tax. That's pretty easy to attack as "giving with one hand, taking away with the other".

Massive reduction in red tape though

Probably isn't very much red tape at all.

[gilsey]

I think there's an easily understood difference between capital investment and current spending, and that people accept borrowing for capital.

There could be, but imo that's another horse that's bolted. Politicians (of all stripes) say they're 'investing' in schools, the NHS, social care when they mean paying teachers and nurses. Can't expect the voters to know what 'investment' means in these circumstances.

I used to think it was mad that government accounts were effectively cash-based, no distinction between capital and revenue, but I'm coming round to the view that in terms of central govt it makes sense.

There is actually a magic money tree and you can just print the money to increase spending, in moderation. Unfortunately most govts who've tried it forget the 'in moderation' bit, spooking the money markets and causing inflation.

[gilsey]

sovereign, currency-issuing countries are only constrained by real limits. They are not constrained, and cannot be constrained, by purely financial limits because, as issuers of their respective fiat-currencies, they can never “run out of money.” This doesn’t mean that governments can spend without limit, or overspend without causing inflation, or that government should spend any sum unwisely. What it emphatically does mean is that no such sovereign government can be forced to tolerate mass unemployment because of the state of its finances – no matter what that state happens to be.

Virtually all economic commentary and punditry today, whether in America, Europe or most other places, is based on ideas about the monetary system which are not merely confused – they are starkly and comprehensively counter-factual. This has led to a public discourse about things like budget deficits and Treasury debt which has become, without exaggeration, utterly detached from reality.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2013/03/ ... r-mmt.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

For mass unemployment, read mass under-employment, in the UK.

[citizenJA]

Good-evening, everyone. I apologise for not checking in sooner, I've had no difficulties, just been away. I wasn't angry or flouncing.
I hope you're all well.

[citizenJA]

Nations' wealth is created by labour and access to material resources under the nations' control. In a sovereign currency nation, money isn't collected or saved like coins in a tin. Currency issued facilitates easier exchange between everyone. It doesn't even need to be physical currency to function.

[Tubby Isaacs]

I think there's an easily understood difference between capital investment and current spending, and that people accept borrowing for capital.

There could be, but imo that's another horse that's bolted. Politicians (of all stripes) say they're 'investing' in schools, the NHS, social care when they mean paying teachers and nurses. Can't expect the voters to know what 'investment' means in these circumstances.

I used to think it was mad that government accounts were effectively cash-based, no distinction between capital and revenue, but I'm coming round to the view that in terms of central govt it makes sense.

There is actually a magic money tree and you can just print the money to increase spending, in moderation. Unfortunately most govts who've tried it forget the 'in moderation' bit, spooking the money markets and causing inflation.

Yeah, you might be right.

Sir Charles Morrison (a Tory wet, brother of the Thatcherite Sir Peter) complained about 30 years ago that it wasn't easy to find what was capital investment and what wasn't.

We've got the OBR now who can maybe beef it up a bit. As you say, the problem has been that something very obviously recurring (teachers wages) gets described routinely as investment.

[citizenJA]

EU Referendum: Government actions led to public distrust

"If the results of referendums are to command the maximum of public support, acceptance and legitimacy, then they must be held on questions and issues which are as clear as possible. Voters should be presented with a choice, where the consequences of either outcome are clear.

The UK Government initiated the process which led to the referendum, despite being against the suggested proposal, and with the aim of using a negative result to shut down the debate about the question at issue. Moreover, the referendum was confined to a tight question, on the basis of a clear binary choice.

There could, however, have been more positive efforts to explain, and therefore to plan for, the consequences for voters in the event of either outcome. This would have required providing impartial consideration of the outcome which the Government clearly did not want.

Parliamentary sovereignty, and the associated principle that no Parliament can bind a successor, makes the concept of a legally binding referendum impossible in theory. However, it is clear that, in reality, referendums are seen by the public as conferring an obligation on parliamentarians to deliver the result. Parliament has delivered this, and the EU (Notification of Withdrawal) Bill completed its passage through both Houses, and received Royal Assent on 16 March 2017.

A more responsible conduct of the Government’s case in the run up to the referendum, and proper planning for a Leave vote, would not have opened up so much new controversy nor left the Prime Minister’s authority and credibility undermined. Using a referendum as a “bluff call” in order to close down unwelcome debate on an issue is a questionable use of referendums.

Indeed, it is incumbent on future Parliaments and governments to consider the potential consequences of promising referendums, particularly when, as a result, they may be expected to implement an outcome that they opposed."

https://www.publications.parliament.uk/ ... /49610.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hey, no kidding?
What are we supposed to do with what's in front of us all now, given this information?
The entire 'Brexit' fiasco transmitted through a Parliamentary committee report isn't effective at resolving problems now.
It's just an impotent Greek chorus.

[citizenJA]

It's wrong and distressing to acknowledge the crisis of legitimacy the UK EU referendum has placed us all in without government being made to fix it, not just continue on without plans just so they can stay in government.

[tinyclanger2]

If it wasn't a hassle I'm definitely getting to the point where I would pay not to have adverts loading.
The Independent is a nightmare.

[tinyclanger2]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 79141.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Foreign hackers may have hit voter registration site days before EU referendum, say MPs

Sorry if we had this already.

[tinyclanger2]

While accepting there is not direct evidence of an attack, the committee report said: “We do not rule out the possibility that there was foreign interference in the EU referendum caused by a DDOS (distributed denial of service) using botnets, though we do not believe that any such interference had any material effect on the outcome of the EU referendum.”

So there's nothing to suggest there was an attack, but it's possible that there was, and while we have no idea whether there was or not then we think we know what effect it had.

[HindleA]

http://schoolsweek.co.uk/government-con ... -families/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


"Govt consults on definition of "ordinary working families"

https://consult.education.gov.uk/school ... ucation-1/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[tinyclanger2]

Tories in control, just like the 80s.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/healt ... 79166.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Almost half of GPs plan to quit NHS due to 'perilously' low morale, survey suggests
Health service is 'haemorrhaging highly trained, experienced GPs at an alarming rate,' says top GP