Wednesday 28th October 2015

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 4:51 pm

The Trussell Trust statement seems to indicate they know nothing about these plans for food banks mooted today. Unless I'm misreading it. More lies?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 4:54 pm

seeingclearly wrote:The Trussell Trust statement seems to indicate they know nothing about these plans for food banks mooted today. Unless I'm misreading it. More lies?

IDS probably not thinking he even needs to consult any of the food bank organisers. He thinks he owns all 'welfare'.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 4:56 pm

That workhouse post is unbelievable, except it seems to be real. Pinching myself today to check I'm really conscious. Cameron's replies to Corbyn had me doing that too, tax credits or NHS and police? see what he is doing ?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 4:57 pm

Total PoliticsVerified account
‏@TotalPolitics
Is Jeremy Corbyn turning into Tony Blair? http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/45200 ... -sun.thtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …

Read it and see what you reckon. Good to have a giggle.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 4:58 pm

seeingclearly wrote:The Trussell Trust statement seems to indicate they know nothing about these plans for food banks mooted today. Unless I'm misreading it. More lies?

According to AS it looks like they were in the UKIP manifesto...

Ukip has accused Iain Duncan Smith of adopting one of its manifesto ideas. Following the work and pensions secretary’s announcement that he is planning to place benefits advisers in food banks, Ukip’s Suzanne Evans said the party’s election manifesto said Ukip would “train and fund the cost of 800 advisers to work in 800 foodbanks, so the poorest in our society have free and easy access to timely help in their hour of need”.

Edit - with my academic hat on, I don't mind taking other people's ideas on board so long as they admit where they got it from (and you could say the same for the Infrastructure Commission too).

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:00 pm

seeingclearly wrote:That workhouse post is unbelievable, except it seems to be real. Pinching myself today to check I'm really conscious. Cameron's replies to Corbyn had me doing that too, tax credits or NHS and police? see what he is doing ?

Yes they are desperate to make it a choice between tax credit cuts or loss of resource to health, education etc - the depts they have assured us are ringfenced. But they steer well clear of the more obvious choice between tax credit cuts for the poorest or giving inheritance tax cuts and lowering corporation tax .... Continuing in the evasive shyster mode. Just hope they won't be getting away with it this time.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:09 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:The Trussell Trust statement seems to indicate they know nothing about these plans for food banks mooted today. Unless I'm misreading it. More lies?
IDS probably not thinking he even needs to consult any of the food bank organisers. He thinks he owns all 'welfare'.

It will be a bad day if it happens...It will make foodbanks, which we keep going due to our donations, an official arm of the government.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:13 pm

'Food bank jobcentres': will DWP make charity handouts part of welfare state?
Iain Duncan Smith’s move to put jobcentre staff in food banks suggests a shift in outlook – and is tacit admission of link between welfare policy and food poverty
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... fare-state" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

More potential issues with this proposal raised in this article.

... However, whether food banks and other charities will play ball with the DWP is another matter.

Organisations as diverse as Citizens Advice, cancer charities and the Royal British Legion have warned MPs that the millions they currently spend on supporting people left hungry and penniless by delays and errors in the welfare system is unsustainable and they cannot “shore up” DWP failings indefinitely.

Then there are the moral and logistical reservations. Food banks tend to see their service as a last resort and would recoil from the idea that they might be informally incorporated into the welfare state. Many refuse on principle to accept referrals direct from JobCentre Plus.

The same goes for food banks’ donors: would they be so happy to continue if they knew their food donations were covering for avoidable administrative and policy failings on the part of the DWP? Is the public ready for a US or Canadian-style reliance on food banks to be institutionalised in the UK?

With prescient timing, a Fabian Commission on Food and Poverty report published on Wednesday highlights exactly these dangers. It recommends that rather than expand the role of food banks, government policy should be directed at phasing them out by 2020...

The Trussell Trust has apparently run its own pilot already but in partnership with the Child Poverty Action Group - using their advisors - not DWP staff. Much better to keep it out of direct DWP control IMO.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:15 pm

This article by David Graeber caught my eye I have his very large book sitting on my shelf. Wondered what others think....

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ry-surplus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:20 pm

In practice local food banks, non Trussell ones, are already and with no fanfare, advising people of what other resources and forms of help there are. Some of these are also providing homeless people with meals and shelter too.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:33 pm

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 12m12 minutes ago
Loud banging of desks as George Osborne enters Rm 14 for '22 grilling on tax credits. "That's for our benefit," says one veteran scribbler.

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 9m9 minutes ago
Chancellor kept waiting nearly 20 mins in corridor outside Ctte Rm 14 before being called in to face '22 on tax credits & battle with Lords.

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 4m4 minutes ago
After loud banging of desks & applause in '22, George Osborne begins speech to Tory MPs joking:"I'll have to come back when we win a vote!"

joncraigSKY ‏@joncraig 1m1 minute ago
Tory MP reveals why banging of desks was loudest close to doors of Rm 14 for George Osborne arriving at '22. "That's where the whips sit."

They really do sound like overgrown schoolboys, don't they. Half expect shutting an offending MP's head in a desk lid to feature as a ritual punishment. Watch out Heidi Allen.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:35 pm

When they're busily trying to target benefits to those who most need it, universal infants free school meals make no sense whatsoever.

What's more, the numbers we have who've signed up for FSM giving us the pupil premium dropped alarmingly with our year 1 this year -after all, why sign up for FSM when you're going to get it anyway?

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:35 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
Total PoliticsVerified account
‏@TotalPolitics
Is Jeremy Corbyn turning into Tony Blair? http://www.totalpolitics.com/blog/45200 ... -sun.thtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; …
Read it and see what you reckon. Good to have a giggle.

Thanks for the link. What does this mean, I wonder:

"There are comfy chairs in the corner in the coffee table."

Sounds far from "comfy". Cramped, even.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:36 pm

Steve Bell.......Ha, ha, ha.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ts-cartoon" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:41 pm

That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

: CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg (11.43 KiB) Viewed 6163 times

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:45 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg

I live for the day his comb-over gets lifted by the wind with a photographer there to catch it. It'll be nearly as good as the mickey mouse towel shot...The fat git.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:46 pm

ohsocynical wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg

I live for the day his comb-over gets lifted by the wind with a photographer there to catch it. It'll be nearly as good as the mickey mouse towel shot...The fat git.

I love the fact Rowson has started including the bald spot when he draws Dave.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:52 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg

Toby, is that real? Or have you photoshopped him to look worse than it actually is? Had no idea it was that thin, lank, ..... insert descriptor of choice.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 5:59 pm

@RR2

Haven't touched it I swear. The pic was on my twitter feed a few minutes ago, relating to pmq's (no mention of his hair in the tweet) Although it does look a bit suspect - then again, the light plays funny tricks ...

: ScreenShot00896.jpg (28.13 KiB) Viewed 6139 times

PorFavor · Post by **PorFavor** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:00 pm

My Labour Party membership is due for renewal. The system claims not to recognise my membership number (they provided it, I've checked that it's the one on my card - and it is). I hope everyone else isn't having the same problem, or membership numbers will go down and not up.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:05 pm

PorFavor wrote:My Labour Party membership is due for renewal. The system claims not to recognise my membership number (they provided it, I've checked that it's the one on my card - and it is). I hope everyone else isn't having the same problem, or membership numbers will go down and not up.

Maybe you have to convince the system you are not an entryist in some unexplained way PF. Sorry, I'm not being helpful, I know. Is there a number you can ring to speak to a human being and get it sorted?

You might need a bit of comfy coffee table and armchair chill out time a la Jez afterwards. Shame they can't provide that down the internet - wireless broadbandy thingy.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:07 pm

@seeingclearly re the Graeber article. I read that earlier and found myself musing about the 'boom and bust' cycles that Gordon Brown famously / infamously claimed to have scuppered. Is he basically saying that these cycles are now inevitable and we are heading for the bust again?

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:09 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:@RR2

Haven't touched it I swear. The pic was on my twitter feed a few minutes ago, relating to pmq's (no mention of his hair in the tweet) Although it does look a bit suspect - then again, the light plays funny tricks ...

ScreenShot00896.jpg

There's funny tricks and then there's - move over Bobby Charlton.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:09 pm

HindleA wrote:Did he have a separate bedroom and was it penalised;did his wife have to undergo an assessment ;referral for health "advice" and subjected to sanctions ;did he face income capping/reduction in income and have to explain himself.Such experiences,by such as he only make their policies more reprehensible,in my eyes.Honourable to them,a lifestyle choice subject to bemoaning and "behaviourial change" for us.

He has money and influence and genuinely doesn't care about people who don't.
It makes his ministerial position farcical, a caricature.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:19 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
TobyLatimer wrote:That comb over is looking a bit precarious Dave. Baldy f*cker. (i speak as one follicly challenged myself)

CSaohd2WIAA-wA_.jpg
Toby, is that real? Or have you photoshopped him to look worse than it actually is? Had no idea it was that thin, lank, ..... insert descriptor of choice.

He has a sizeable bald spot. There was an overhead shot of him the other day in the commons and it was quite obvious...More so than I'd imagined.

TobyLatimer · Post by **TobyLatimer** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:21 pm

During my *ahem* research into Dave's palate, I came across this from the Graun 2012.

Comments btl really made me blink twice as they are in the older pre Julian format, looked a bit strange first glance.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/poll ... e-powerful" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

: ScreenShot00898.jpg (56.87 KiB) Viewed 6112 times

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:24 pm

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2015 ... lnutrition" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

NHS hospital to offer food parcels to patients at risk of malnutrition

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:25 pm

The Fabian Society ‏@thefabians 3 mins3 minutes ago

Launch of the #foodandpoverty report about to begin in House of Commons. If you've not already, read it here:

Hungry for Change.

http://www.fabians.org.uk/wp-content/up ... -27.10.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:29 pm

Since the age of 12 ,people have said I have a bald patch-it isn't is a "triple crown"

Stagger Lee · Post by **Stagger Lee** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:32 pm

BBC1 6pm flagship news programme. Not a single mention of PMQs, tax credits or IDS. What a joke.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:32 pm

My better half still has some hair dye left-she never went grey but liked a change now and again,may experiment,it is rather a distinct brunette/red.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:34 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:@seeingclearly re the Graeber article. I read that earlier and found myself musing about the 'boom and bust' cycles that Gordon Brown famously / infamously claimed to have scuppered. Is he basically saying that these cycles are now inevitable and we are heading for the bust again?

The core argument seems to be that you need some kind of balance between public and private to ensure tat money keeps going round and making more money. If not then things start winding down. I sort of understand this stuff on a broad level, detail in numbers does my head in, but it seems common sense to me, and having read and read everything I can find can only really think that any big anomalies come from the QE made to keep the banks going, and all the other stuff Osbourne and co base their policies on is very suspect. But none of this is out of range of anyones thinking, really, we head for the bust because there's not enough money in the system not to. Globally, I have no idea, but for us it seems as though our economy is based upon spending to generate anything. The last figures seem to support that, unless I've read everything radically wrong. For instance our construction industries output, surely the cure for that is to build more, creating jobs and some movement. Yet everything here is tightly controlled and immobile, and seems as unreal as everything else this government does, empty. The way the West Midlands for instance is described bears no connection with reality. Or the North. I expect you have your own view about Wales. Though people moving in affluent circles with good jobs at perceive things very differently, because for them things are still quite fluid.

HindleA · Post by **HindleA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:36 pm

Though I think I will give the waxing strips a miss.

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:38 pm

Hunger becoming institutionalised.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:41 pm

seeingclearly wrote:This article by David Graeber caught my eye I have his very large book sitting on my shelf. Wondered what others think....

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... ry-surplus" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"...if the government runs a surplus, the private sector goes into deficit. If the government reduces its debt, everyone else has to go into debt in exactly that proportion in order to balance their own budgets. The chips are redistributed. This is not a theory. Just simple maths."

There it is. Correct. Graeber's introductory paragraph is brilliant; he describes uncomfortable embarrassment historically reserved for subjects like human sexuality having now become economics. Take a look at Gaeber's Guardian article written about the book on your shelf, Debt: The First 5000 Years. I've not read the entire book. Essential global conversations we should be having as the regulars on this planet, too many of our leaders are taking labour, resources and life belonging to everyone, not just a few. We've got to understand how money works.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:41 pm

: CSU_C_PXIAEEjFm.jpg (168.93 KiB) Viewed 6084 times

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:42 pm

seeingclearly wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:@seeingclearly re the Graeber article. I read that earlier and found myself musing about the 'boom and bust' cycles that Gordon Brown famously / infamously claimed to have scuppered. Is he basically saying that these cycles are now inevitable and we are heading for the bust again?
The core argument seems to be that you need some kind of balance between public and private to ensure tat money keeps going round and making more money. If not then things start winding down. I sort of understand this stuff on a broad level, detail in numbers does my head in, but it seems common sense to me, and having read and read everything I can find can only really think that any big anomalies come from the QE made to keep the banks going, and all the other stuff Osbourne and co base their policies on is very suspect. But none of this is out of range of anyones thinking, really, we head for the bust because there's not enough money in the system not to. Globally, I have no idea, but for us it seems as though our economy is based upon spending to generate anything. The last figures seem to support that, unless I've read everything radically wrong. For instance our construction industries output, surely the cure for that is to build more, creating jobs and some movement. Yet everything here is tightly controlled and immobile, and seems as unreal as everything else this government does, empty. The way the West Midlands for instance is described bears no connection with reality. Or the North. I expect you have your own view about Wales. Though people moving in affluent circles with good jobs at perceive things very differently, because for them things are still quite fluid.

Ah ... I think I see. Austerity and QE - horrible bedfellows - bust inevitable. Sounds like an exam paper question - Describe the relationship between austerity and QE - please pay attention to / compare and contrast the likely impacts on those with little or no money or inherited assets and those who work in the financial sector or have enough money to invest in said sector.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:44 pm

HindleA wrote:Though I think I will give the waxing strips a miss.

Don't you bloody dare. You need to immerse yourself in the full female experience - as considered essential by others, over there, sort of people - to really understand.

rebeccariots2 · Post by **rebeccariots2** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:54 pm

TobyLatimer wrote:During my *ahem* research into Dave's palate, I came across this from the Graun 2012.

Comments btl really made me blink twice as they are in the older pre Julian format, looked a bit strange first glance.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/poll ... e-powerful" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

ScreenShot00898.jpg

Oh, the nostalgia.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:55 pm

That Private Eye thing looks a bit weak.

Capital allowances- dodgy huh?

Timing differences explained here

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/topic/ta ... iderations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note the mention of sales and not profits too. And tax isn't paid on trading profits, but taxable profits anyway.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 6:57 pm

Good to see Cameron speeding up adoption.

I thought it had been speeded up before. Just a matter of Gove telling them not to take race into account.

What a nasty bunch they are.

RogerOThornhill · Post by **RogerOThornhill** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 7:00 pm

Tubby Isaacs wrote:That Private Eye thing looks a bit weak.

Capital allowances- dodgy huh?

Timing differences explained here

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/topic/ta ... iderations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note the mention of sales and not profits too. And tax isn't paid on trading profits, but taxable profits anyway.

Yes, I was just thinking the same - they could do with a look at salary differentials between top and bottom to make a better point.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 7:03 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:

When they're busily trying to target benefits to those who most need it, universal infants free school meals make no sense whatsoever.

What's more, the numbers we have who've signed up for FSM giving us the pupil premium dropped alarmingly with our year 1 this year -after all, why sign up for FSM when you're going to get it anyway?

Excellent. Free schools budget for cuts then.

Tubby Isaacs · Post by **Tubby Isaacs** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 7:13 pm

RogerOThornhill wrote:
Tubby Isaacs wrote:That Private Eye thing looks a bit weak.

Capital allowances- dodgy huh?

Timing differences explained here

http://www.accountingweb.co.uk/topic/ta ... iderations" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Note the mention of sales and not profits too. And tax isn't paid on trading profits, but taxable profits anyway.
Yes, I was just thinking the same - they could do with a look at salary differentials between top and bottom to make a better point.

I've not trusted their tax stuff for a while really.

Old man Osborne is 72. I wonder how much he's actually doing.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 7:16 pm

Liz McInnes ‏@LizMcInnesMP 2 mins2 minutes ago London, England

Another debate lost; Junior Doctors' Contracts AYES 260 NOES 301. BUT Jeremy Hunt has stated that no junior doctor will lose pay.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 7:27 pm

seeingclearly wrote:Hunger becoming institutionalised.

It's temporary.I work to make sure we've got an inventory of our provisions, carrying capacity and am mindful of every human being I share the planet with. There is no one more important than another human being.

Other species are miraculous too; that's rather an aside to my point.

I can't do a lot on my own, I require the help of others who, like me, love others and want everyone to have a good time during their lives. It's extraordinary, knowing regardless of anything else, a mere one hundred years from now, hardly any of us here now will be alive. Our lifespans' brevity exists simultaneously with the grandeur of now. We all take part in that.

There are people chronically hungry on the planet? People we may see daily going hungry while living in one of the wealthiest nations? That isn't okay with me. It's not right, it's injustice, poor management, lack of care, ignorance of part of what makes being human glorious, recognition of our interconnectedness, humanity, loving-kindness, when others succeed and grow, it's shared. It's not a zero-sum endeavour, this - that is, we're not economic units. Maths teach us if one section has an abundance of money, the other section has a debt. That's administrative computations, not the whole point of life. Every single child in a classroom can succeed, it's not a platitude, it's a fact. Learning isn't a competition. Everyone has strengths and challenges. When someone falls down, another picks us up and we continue together leaving no one behind. Competitive sport and games are wonderful. But that's all they are, no more or less, games. No one need go hungry, homeless, unloved, dying alone. Someone dying alone, unloved is a collective failure we acknowledge as such and make provision to prevent it becoming institutionalised.

Yesterday, on the train, I was sitting with an open-faced man comfortable helping and singing quietly with another man in a wheelchair with rainbows decorating the wheels, his kin, more likely his friend, care worker, with the sun shining in the afternoon. No one was without what we needed. That's collective success. I love it.

I wish Tory government loved this success too and made sure everyone has rainbow wheel capacity, singing friends and train rides with others, quiet, plentiful tea later on and comfort enough to fall asleep not frightened about waking up the next day, uncertain about rations and friends.

Thank you, anyone, for reading this. It's okay if no one does. I liked writing it. Thank you for your patience with me.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 7:36 pm

Yesterday, on the train, I was sitting with an open-faced man comfortable helping and singing quietly with another man in a wheelchair with rainbows decorating the wheels, his kin, more likely his friend, care worker, with the sun shining in the afternoon. No one was without what we needed. That's collective success. I love it.

It was lovely to read this. I wish it was so for every one. Having spent countless hours in waiting rooms at the hospital over the last four and a half months, I have seen so many people in wheelchairs being pushed around, waiting for ages with not a word being spoken to them by their carer...Lonely always springs to mind when I see them sitting there ignored by someone who's being paid to do it.

citizenJA · Post by **citizenJA** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 7:52 pm

ohsocynical wrote:Liz McInnes ‏@LizMcInnesMP 2 mins2 minutes ago London, England

Another debate lost; Junior Doctors' Contracts AYES 260 NOES 301. BUT Jeremy Hunt has stated that no junior doctor will lose pay.

(my bold)

JHunt,
Junior doctors need good sleep. Time for friends and family. Train rides and walks. Rejuvenation.
Where you at, JHunt?
An event horizon of a man, he is.
Hiding.

ohsocynical · Post by **ohsocynical** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 8:05 pm

Handful of Tory MPs turn up to Labour's Commons debate on saving the steel industry

Barely a dozen Tory MPs sat through a Commons debate to save British steel - but their colleagues remembered to vote against it.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ha ... ar_twitter

seeingclearly · Post by **seeingclearly** » Wed 28 Oct, 2015 8:24 pm

rebeccariots2 wrote:
seeingclearly wrote:
rebeccariots2 wrote:@seeingclearly re the Graeber article. I read that earlier and found myself musing about the 'boom and bust' cycles that Gordon Brown famously / infamously claimed to have scuppered. Is he basically saying that these cycles are now inevitable and we are heading for the bust again?
The core argument seems to be that you need some kind of balance between public and private to ensure tat money keeps going round and making more money. If not then things start winding down. I sort of understand this stuff on a broad level, detail in numbers does my head in, but it seems common sense to me, and having read and read everything I can find can only really think that any big anomalies come from the QE made to keep the banks going, and all the other stuff Osbourne and co base their policies on is very suspect. But none of this is out of range of anyones thinking, really, we head for the bust because there's not enough money in the system not to. Globally, I have no idea, but for us it seems as though our economy is based upon spending to generate anything. The last figures seem to support that, unless I've read everything radically wrong. For instance our construction industries output, surely the cure for that is to build more, creating jobs and some movement. Yet everything here is tightly controlled and immobile, and seems as unreal as everything else this government does, empty. The way the West Midlands for instance is described bears no connection with reality. Or the North. I expect you have your own view about Wales. Though people moving in affluent circles with good jobs at perceive things very differently, because for them things are still quite fluid.
Ah ... I think I see. Austerity and QE - horrible bedfellows - bust inevitable. Sounds like an exam paper question - Describe the relationship between austerity and QE - please pay attention to / compare and contrast the likely impacts on those with little or no money or inherited assets and those who work in the financial sector or have enough money to invest in said sector.

It's more than that though, the little sums we spend all serve to keep things going too, wealth generation isn't just about the big stuff it's about the millions upon millions of small transactions we make, not all necccessarily monetary, that keep things fluid and working. If people don't have enough latitude for those transactions, whether it is a new pair of shoes or sharing a meal, having a haircut, or just taking a bus or being able to travel to or dress well enough for an interview, then things are not fluid any more, and the only kind of businesses that will thrive are the big ones. Locally everything gets poorer, even if vanity projects create a different illusion. There's nothing in the Tory plan to help make things get better, even when they shunt people off benefits and into self employment in unviable ways. I can constrast that directly with the kind of help that Labour was able to offer fifteen years or so ago, where people were actually supported. Today this is labelled as profligate and wasteful, but the evidence says different. Money helps generate money. No money no wealth, because really it's a token of what your society allows you to put in, no matter how small, but today millions are denied the chance of doing exactly that, while bubbles rise, inflate, burst, and are artificially created again.

Everything is conditional and freedom on a personal level becomes very limited. Fewer people are able to live outside of this than ever before, because even the bare basics are now unaffordable. That has been engineered, it doesn't have to be that way. We are wasting more than a generation, we are wasting resources that are hard to regrow, social resources. In every conceivable way a false economy.