Lordship 516

@DaveR "Provocative bullshit of the highest order. Your spiel might go down well in a Boston bar but to suggest that's because you've found a more knowledgeable audience is laughable." The level of ignorance amongst the indigenous English of their colonialism in Ireland displayed on here is risible; people talk about 'sides' & democracy in the UK but in 1921/22 democracy went out the door & the minority of two counties in Ireland [Down & Antrim] held the London Government to ransom and forced the Six Counties [now Northern Ireland] into existence - Churchill & Lloyd George cared little about democracy then. They then allowed James Craig to declare "a Protestant parliament for a Protestant people" & invented the gerrymandering process to achieve that. The misery in NI since then flowed from all that denial of rights to the rest of the population. Unionist bullies prevented Catholics from having jobs, having houses, having education, having businesses. So-called Special Constables ['B' Specials] roamed the streets beating up Catholics at will. Atrocities occurred on both sides but the main genesis was Unionist bullying. In October 1968 the NI police violently attacked civilians who were peacefully protesting for civil rights & one-man one-vote, the government did nothing to prevent further police violence. In January 1969 Major Ronald Bunting led a mob of bullies that hurled rocks at a Civil Rights 4-day march from Belfast to Derry that was mainly composed of unarmed students & elected politicians and the police actively helped Bunting & his thugs [with many off-duty police amongst them] by harassing the marchers & finally erupting in a wide scale violent attack on the marchers at Burntullet on the 4th day. These events are regarded as the beginning of what came to be known as the 'troubles' and gave rise to the re-establishment of the IRA which eventually morphed into the PIRA which McGuiness was attracted to. There were many other episodes that further exacerbated the situation that lasted for 50 years but which thankfully led to peace and a lot more equality of treatment for all people in NI - McGuiness participated in all stages of this evolution & NI is a better place today. It is unlikely it would have happened without the vioence - such are the ways of humanity. Indigenous English people have a particular view of the world that many others find strange; justifying the past & dismissing it as done & dusted doesn't wash with everyone - England, through their robber barons ransacked the world, accumulated treasures against the will of many nations & still many people glorify the great empire. Whereas you are not directly responsible you are accountable as a nation and restitution is reasonable as an expectation from those affected. I could give you a long list of British Army war crimes in Ireland, South Africa, including two cowardly Bloody Sunday massacres of innocent civilians [1920 Dublin & 1972 Derry], the creation of the concentration camp in South Africa & for the MauMau; starvation of populations in Ireland, India & elsewhere whilst exporting their food to England, the burning of their homes & ransacking of their farms & businesses, Amritsar etc, etc. General Farrar-Hockley said in a public interview on his retirement in 1982 that the British Army would never defeat the IRA & that the IRA would never defeat the British Army & the sooner the government commenced discussions/negotiations with the IRA the sooner the war would be over. However, as Ms Thatcher was in hock to the unionist vote this took many years to come about, so it can be said that it was the British Governments intransigence that prolonged the war in Ulster. It took the mild John Major & the unlikely Albert Reynolds to commence the negotiation of peace & establish the foundation of a new era for Northern Ireland. McGuiness was no better & no worse than many of the supposedly 'great' English heroes - he was fighting for the freedom & reasonable welfare of his people that was constructively denied them by their so-called democratic governments in Belfast & London. For that many admire him & also admire him for breaking away from what he considered necessary violence when the time was suitable.

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------ > Mick I really think you need to look up the > meaning of Genocide up before you use it so > loosely too.... ..a lot of people need to look up the meaning of genocide, including the British Army & other forces of the Crown who wreaked havoc all over the world in furthering the interests of the various city companies - through the theft of land from various populations, the likes of the East India Company & its derivatives that were actively supported by the British Army to enforce 'trade' [theft]. Harm was done on all sides - it is time to move on and develop a future that will cherish all equally. The most important thing is that there is peace in Northern Ireland - even if it is a bit fragile - that children from all religions have access to a full education, ordinary people all have a free vote [only since 1968 for local elections] and NI are in dialogue & co-operation with the Republic of Ireland [common electricity & gas market, common tourism promotion etc] that can develop into whatever will be suitable to both sides & are now [belatedly] being supported by the British Government. McGuiness was a man of his time & he contributed greatly to bringing about the positive environment that is the modern Ireland, both north & south. May he rest in peace.

@ Loz "unwarranted benevolent transfers" 1] Increasing Tax thresholds 2] Reducing top rate of income tax 3] Reduction in Capital Gains Tax [18% and 28% rates to 10% and 20%] 4] Increasing Inheritance Tax Relief 5] Reductions to tax relief on pensions 6] Reduction in Corporation Profits Tax [up to ?300k - 20% tax; over ?300K reduced from 23% to 20% 7] Quantitative Easing [40% of the gains went to the richest 5% of households - BoE figure] The reductions in social support for disabled people + other supports are funding these reductions to the tune of ?50 billion+ up to 2020 .... this is a heck of a transfer program and unconscionable but won't cause Gideon & his mates to lose much sleep. A distributional analysis of Mr Osborne?s Budgets shows that they benefit the richest the most ? and the poorest least. Osborne said in his 2016 budget speech ?The British economy will stay on course and we will not burden our children and grandchildren. This is a budget for the next generation,? He means HIS children & grandchildren & those of his claque of Tory grandees - bugger the rest of the mules.... Of course it all unravelled for him rather quickly but he has left a mess behind him & I suppose he will try to re-write his legacy from the sidelines in the Evening Standard.

@ Loz I too have no political allegiance but on balance I have greater regard for the Labour performance than that of the Tories. I can only observe that the conservatives are very greedy & seem to want to maintain privilege for the few & care little for those in need. Words are easy - its action & effect on the street that tell the story. "And anyway, as you can see from the wildly changing GDP figures over the last 10 years, it is hardly a "reality that we will always find ourselves in". It's a good long-term measure of debt-affordability, but a pretty useless short term measure, especially when GDP figures are so erratic." The business of government is exactly to smooth the curve & the Public Net Debt/GDP relationship is relevant both long term & short term. The swings in GDP in the UK are relatively moderate & can be catered for within a good economic management structure, so long as governments are acting in an aware manner. The base level of UK GDP has been fairly stable but certain sectors need government policy support in order to develop base stability [construction & agriculture] However, I wouldn't get too exercised about running Public Debt up if the reasons were good social policy or productive reasons. It could be argued that running up public debt @ 3% of GDP in the latter years of the boom was a mistake but this was a relatively minor mistake. Most of the boom was in development & finance with inflation running at very low levels. Few foresaw the impending recession. When you analyse the causal reasons for the recession it is clear that government spending levels & budget deficits contributed little if anything to the cause of the recession. The current Tory government are setting about a rash policy of running the NHS into a corner so they can then pursue a policy of privatization, reducing spending on education thus creating [or indeed maintaining] a two speed education policy, doing little about social & affordable housing; Basically they are about rolling back on democracy & regaining the better life for the few rather than us all being in it together. If you care to review economic history going back to 1913 you will see that the economy improved substantially with increases in wages, improvements in housing, establishment of the NHS & the insistence of the ordinary soldiers who came back from the wars for a better deal. The current negative increases in real wages is holding our economy back - we need a better spread of the nations income across the total population. On the question of what I would do it is simple - I would set up a development fund similar to that proposed by John McDonnell & others[about ?250 to ?500 billion] by having it issue bonds to the BoE - QE but not for the banks & their mateys - with every citizen over 16 holding shares by right so it would not be a public entity but we all own it - say a Citizens Development Bank that would invest in strategic projects [hospitals, schools, housing] that would be self funding & the cash flow income [from current budgets or client/resident rental] would provide further & sustained stimulus for years to come. This would release the direct funding burden from the government & keep their current contributions down to a manageable level instead of frittering away moneys to banks & the already rich via PPP etc. Most of the Public Net Debt is to banks & other financial institutions - this would be funding by citizens & payment from the exchequer, other agencies [councils, health authorities, schools etc]. The city boyos would never allow it to happen. They would lose their golden goose forever.....

@Loz Current deficits must be judged against the overall Total Public Debt as each years borrowings to service Current Deficit is added to the Total Public Debt. The Total Public Debt to GDP ratio is recognized as the most relevant measure regardless of other economic performance criteria as this is the reality that we will always find ourselves in. In 13 years from 1997/8 to 2009/10, the Labour Government increased debt from ?347 billion to ?1030 billion - an average of ?52.5 billion per year. In the 5 years from 2010/11 to 2014/2015, the Coalition Government increased debt to ?1,554 billion - an average of ?104.8 billion per year. At the end of January 2017, the amount of money owed by the public sector to the private sector stood at ?1,682.8 billion, or 85.3 percent of GDP. You could say that what Gideon was about after 2015 was correcting the excesses of the coalition government by making unwarranted benevolent transfers from the sick, disabled, the poor to his own privileged class - they have rewarded him well with a top job in the city & a sinecure editorship from the Russian oligarch plus various speeches to the various well-off chattering classes.[This para is a political comment & well justified] The change to austerity after 2010 was largely a self-induced panic with the Tory government talking down the economy in order to demonize the Labour party - the motive for austerity was the desire to paint a grim picture of public finances. This Tory mantra of economic pessimism became self-fulfilling. We have only the Tory party to blame for where we are now.

???? Wrote:

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I love the objective, non-partisan and rational > voice of our own EDF Economist. Jump the shark > point on politics on here for me.... More like low level sniping.... All I have shown are the government's own figures compared to the New Labour performance...what's irrational about that..? Or should we try some post-fact analysis that fits the right wing agenda..? Gideon's budgets have now finished and we are moving into the era of Hammond's own budgets - lets see what he produces [& how long he lasts] New Labour's performance has been analysed in depth, particularly by CASE [LSE] and there has only been hysterical denunciation of their analysis by reactionary right wing la-la land afficianados...so we can reasonably say that the partisan shoe is worn on the right foot...

???? Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I love the objective, non-partisan and rational > voice of our own EDF Economist. Jump the shark > point on politics on here for me.... More of a snipe point than shark.... So, please tell me what I quoted was biased..? I just quoted their own output to illustrate the current reality...

In 1997 when New Labour came to office the National Debt stood at 42% of GDP. Even though the government embarked on sorting out investment in the NHS & Education by 2002 this had dropped to 35%. From then to 2008 the ratio increased gradually to 47.4%. In the following two years it increased to 55% & 68% respectively for reasons the we all have come to understand. Contrary to the propaganda of Cameron & Osborne, the labour Government left the economy & the fabric of the UK in reasonable good health. They had improved education, health & housing much of which has been/is being torn down by the coalition & the current mob. The real failure of all of labour since 2010 is allowing them to put the idea across that Labour left the country in an economic mess - the opposite is the truth; it is the coalition & the conservatives that have created the mess and created an imbalanced economy & a very divided society. From 2010 to 2016 the UK national debt to GDP ratio steadily increased to 85%; it is now 84%, the same as 2015. This is Gideon?s economic legacy. He has taken from the poor, the disabled, the NHS, housing & education and given to the wealthy [both foreign & locals] - his own privileged friends, some of whom are rewarding him with jobs & substantial incomes. The current administration are carrying on his legacy. They will use the cover of Brexit to achieve their goals - to implement more austerity by abusing the co-operative spirit of the UK people, that surfaces in face of adversity, to enrich the already rich & privileged & to entrap the greater population in miserable circumstances for years to come. Let them eat cake. Our real adversaries are not the EU - it is the enemy within - the Conservative changeling party that is in thrall to the lunatic fringe fringe to the right of bugger all. A bunch of 5th columnists that are set to subvert everything that this country has so painstakingly fought & worked for.

@Jaywalker... Hesse's writings are influential mainly in the physical sciences but could not be regarded as an influential figure in the wider social science context. Knorr Cetina on the other hand does have much value due to her studies in regard to the relationships between science, knowledge & society. All that navel-gazing stuff is a bit lost on me. I am more grounded in Descartes, Newton & Leibniz [who gave us analytical geometry, calculus & the binary system all of which I find use for every day] - the rationalists & mathematicians who embraced empiricism also though many empiricists have a lot of difficulty in embracing rationalism. I tend also to add tinctures of skepticism & pragmatism in my approach to my work. Each has their place. Also - please don't confuse econometricists with classical economists. Quants are regularly at odds or at least uneasy with our classical cousins. Economists are good at big-picture thinking, usually good at talking [bullstuff] and are really really good at politics and influencing government, whereas on the other hand quants are not so good at this, mostly because we are too critical of our own short-comings and very aware of what criteria is missing from the mix - politicians prefer absolutes to conditional thought. Big picture 'blue-sky' thinking has been the cause of most economic failure as the people with the most clout are often people with very little experience of analytical objectivity. Science makes [some] knowledge, knowledge shapes the future. Quants merely try to make sense of the world around us today - we don't try to shape the future; we test hypotheses & attempt to forecast trends. Often we can see black holes but much of the time a suitable solution eludes us. Our successes are greater than our failures so we find ourselves still gainfully employed.

Jah Lush Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Pseuds Corner. You're welcome...

steveo Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There seems to be a lot of intellectual dick > waving going on here ..,to each his own;

jaywalker Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "I dislike most politicians as they usually > confuse the connect between microeconomics & > macroeconomics, usually in an effort to justify > their ideology that is always as fluid as the wind > that they cast their words into. > > My work is always carried out dispassionately - if > I do otherwise then I will get the wrong answer." > > > Lordship, whilst I greatly appreciate your OP as > satire, I doubt this can escape your own net. > > viz an "ideology" of fact versus value (a > distinction now generally thought to be > unstainable), an assertion of the integrity of > recent economic theory that "connects" the micro > and the macro (well, in one sense for sure - there > is only the micro!: but to make anything of the > macro is then an impossible task as you will never > pin down the initial conditions), the consistency > of your own position as an econometrician that > requires you to make all sorts of > ideology-saturated assumptions about probability > distributions (somehow known before the developing > and unknowable action that gives rise to > outcomes), the adoption of ultimately rectilinear > models of process (for example if they involves > matrix algebra), and assumptions about the nature > of decision making (here you cannot escape the > infantile models of atomistic and acosmic human > action on which economics rests). I don't quite understand what is written here - trying to make out whether it was written from a Marxist or possibly a Bhuddist perspective....there is certainly a confusion [for me] of philosophy, religion & behavioural science connotations in the thought process behind the writing. [i would have thought that the first bracket ought to read "a distinction now generally thought to be sustainable] Whoever wrote it hasn't practiced much econometrics recently [or ever]- much effort is exercised by practitioners to separate the science from the ideologies but we also must recognize social behaviour/conditions of the society that we find ourselves in. We mainly escape our prejudices by using agent based analysis that removes our personal perspectives & use various iterations to test our results before accepting the discrete analysis. Your comment elsewhere re stagflation is in the economic runes but I haven't yet made a measurable sense of what is happening; I have some analysis but have thus far failed to ascertain what the dynamics are. All I do know is that the medium term doesn't look so rosy. We have to wait & see what all the actors might do.

idea

Snakes

Venom

Ptolemy 2C AD referred to Ireland as "mikra Brettania" in his famous work - Almagest [Mathematike Syntaxis] & the current GB as "megale Britannia" Conan Meriadoc 4C AD referred to Brittany as Brittanie Minor & UK as Brittanie Majore The Irish refer to Wales as An Bhreatain Bheag [Little Britain] & England as An Bhreatain Mh?r [big Britain] The EU press [especially Germans] are regularly mocking the UK as Little Britain...more to come.

Mouse

Loose

democracy

Almighty

Lucan

Jim

Amazon

Cooked