Vince Cable said some interesting things at the HowTheLightGetsIn festival.
He said, George Osborne now wants to lower UK corporate Tax to be the lowest in Europe, by 2015 I think he said. In other words Osborne wants the UK to take over from Ireland as the country where global corporations shift all their profits so as to pay the lowest possible tax on them and in so doing help them cheat tax payers in all other countries.
Cable said, “This sort of race to the bottom is wrong.” He also said, “It means if you try to tax any company they will simply say, ‘If try to tax us we will simply go elsewhere. And of course they say this to all countries which results in a race to the bottom.” He then went on to call this policy “A Beggar thy neighbor policy which I don’t like.”
Mr Cable definitely NOT on message with the Tory Totty Boy there. The Spin doctors won’t be happy with Vince who rather gleefully said they wouldn’t be as he was saying it.
Let’s see if he gets slapped down for describing Tory policy as Beggar thy Neighbour politics.
I have to say when he started to speak he talked about Japan where he had just visited and said he felt that they, unlike us in the UK, “Got it”. I so very much wanted to believe that perhaps this meant Mr Cable “Got it” too. But I’m afraid his idea of ‘got it’ and mine are world’s apart. Mr Cable spoke fluently and openly for the better part of an hour but in that time assiduously avoided ANY mention of bank debts or any need to clear them from the financial system. The ONLY debts he recognized as a problem in his talk were public debts. They had to be cleared as quickly as possible.
I asked him if he didn’t feel it odd, even unfair, that he and the government should insist that public debts be cleared immediately, but were letting banks hide their debts and not clear them at all? I even quoted the Wiki leaked memo from Mervyn King in which he said ‘When you look at Britain’s banks you can’t help but see they are insolvent’ and said so why are you so concerned with public debt only when the banks are more insolvent than we are?
Sadly he ducked the question and gave the non-answer that the government was forcing banks to hold more capital. Which has nothing to do with my question. I don’t know if Mr Cable really didn’t get it or chose to ignore it. Or perhaps I wasn’t clear.
The other major worrywhen he said he really felt the Japanese had got it, was that at no point did it seem relevant to him to observe that the “Got it” Japanese solutions, which they have employed for the last twenty years have resulted in zero recovery and two consecutive lost decades. I am at a loss to see what Mr Cable thinks the Japanese have ‘Got”.
The Japanese policy has been and is, to never force their banks to face their bad debts, never purge that debt from the financial system, but to always bail those private debts out with public money.
The last of our exchange involved him lamely offering as the justification for the continued propping up of our banks that, “If we keep the tax payers shares in the bailed out banks for long enough, in 5-7 years we’ll make a profit. And that money will be used to help people.”
I’m sorry but to call that feeble is to be kind.
“That’s the analysis.” He said. As if that settled it. To which I said, “No that ‘s half the analysis surely? The rest of the analysis is, We give the bankers money NOW, and as a consequence are forced to bear draconian cuts all on the bankers promise of Jam tomorrow.” Mr Cable said nothing further.
There was a second Economics debate.
Mr Cable was on the panel with Will Hutton and Robert Skidelsky.
The highlights for me were:
Mr Skidelsky horrified both Hutton and Cable by saying he felt the entire Globalization and Free Market agenda had to be reconsidered. And that ‘protectionism’ to protect jobs and wages was necessary. You should have seen Hutton and Cable’s faces.
Hutton said, growth – permanent economic growth – was inevitable and he was not worried about growth nor sustainability and neither should we be, because – and I kid you not – “we will solve our problems by getting resources from other planets, having huge spaceships for people and economic growth.” I thought I was getting radio interference from Children’s Hour.
On a positive and I feel very important note, Mr Hutton did talk very clearly about China and said among other things, that he was sure China was not stable, either economically nor politically and expected a massive Perestroika-like change soon. I talked to both him and Skidelsky about what I have written about China’s politics and economics in “The new sub prime” One and Two. Skidelsky said he was interested. Hutton, I couldn’t tell.
Hutton did like one point I made. One of the panelists had mentioned the collapse of the retirement homes group Southern Cross. They all agreed it was a typically awful example of how financial companies, take on massive debts in order to buy up healthy companies, dump the debt on the acquired and previously healthy company, extract whatever short term profit there is to extract for as long as the company is able to struggle for its life under the weight of debt and when it succumbs simply move on to the next. “Merchants of Debt’ doing what they do.
Cable himself has just finished telling us how our banks had balance sheets several times larger than our national GDP and he couldn’t see the parallel. It beggars belief.
The banks took on vast debts, extracted the profits for themselves in the good times, and when times turned bad, they unload their debts on us for us to pay (with the threat that we had to pay because the banks couldn’t be expected to pay since if they did they might fail, and they were too big to be allowed to fail). In effect our entire nation, thanks to the banks being ‘too big to fail’ – too big to pay their own debts, had been ‘aquired’. And then we, just like the pensioners of Southerns Cross, are told that due to the pressure of paying off debts, there’s no money left to care for us.
So there you are, a brief report of what I heard and what I tried to contribute, to the debates with Mr Cable, Mr Hutton and Mr Skidelsky.
Hey Golem, long time reader, first time poster.
Addressing your reaction to Hutton's comment, "we will solve our problems by getting resources from other planets, having huge spaceships for people and economic growth.", its not as kooky an idea as it sounds.
Look at the rise of space-tourism and the increasing commercial efforts in space-based activities. Is it such a radical idea when looking at the growth in this sector, that asteroid mining will occur?
In the 1800s people living in New York and the East Coast laughed at the idea of mining the West Coast and having these resources transported back East, but then the intercontinental railway was built, and subsidies allowed for mining corporations to begin.
I will agree Hutton shouldn't have made that comment in light of the festival he went to, but laughing at a space-related answer is the equivalent to being that kid who laughed at Neil Armstrong when he said he wanted to fly when he grew older.
Well, maybe that's the vision, but even if you like it to think that it can come in time to solve our present predicament does seem to be away with the fairies – colonialism, globalization and then universalism. And after that – a move into the fifth dimension or a parallel universe?
Hello Visions,
I'm very glad you decided to comment. I agree with you about asteroid mining. It's actually something I did a fair amount of research on for a film proposal. But, as Nicholas Dyson says in his comment above, what's worrisome is the seeming attitude of thinking such technologial fixes (which will surely come I agree) can be banked upon to come in time to be the answer to pressing present problems.
Mr Hutton did not give the impression that his faith in technological fixes came from any knowledge of the state of those particular technologies, but rather just the ususal, "let's not face difficult questions about our innability to organize our world in a more sustainable and equitable manner", let's instead ignore those questions and say "Don't worry technology will fix it" in the a way I have heard economists and all those wedded to never ending growth oftern do.
That's how his comments struck me.
I take it Cable's view is that the banks are slowly fixing their balance sheets by buying up government debt. It may work, but it still leaves the problem of people's ability or willingness to borrow once the lending tap is turned on again. That means wages have to rise – hello, Globalism!
Golem
An interesting report back from Hay, and I think we can get a good sense of where many possible "good guy" candidates, such as Cable & Hutton, are actually coming from!
As you state, neither are touching on the real issue of excessive (bank led) debt creation, and I suspect neither would even broach the subject of a debt jubilee.
Sounds like you had some excellent exchanges though, and a real shame debates of this sort don't appear on NewsyNewsy NightNight.
Skidelsky seems more on the pulse. Protectionism was at the heart of the "New Deal" policies of the 1930s; a reaction to the failure of un-fettered Capitalism which burst in 1929. Just finishing Karl Polanyi’s "Great Transformation", and it is poignant to see the parallels between our current situation and the early part of the 20th Century.
Polanyi’s view is that the free-market should be a servant to Society, not its master. The economic and political tensions throughout the nineteenth and twentieth century are viewed as responses by society to tame and limit un-abandoned free-market policies (mainly in relation to land, labour & money).
In his view the New Deal, Communism and Fascism were all social responses to the collapse of International Capitalism; a way for society to re-assert it’s primacy over the market.
Following WWII the social Democratic model (mixed economy) took the West through its heyday of the 50s/60s but started to wobble in the 70s. Since the 80s, the liberal economic model regained strength, but with the underlying tensions building up under the surface.
The friction between the market system and society is growing day by day; whether in North Africa, the middle-east or Southern Europe.
Does the world have the stomach for another revolt against the global Laissez-Faire pillage? And if so, which form will it take this time?
– Hawkeye
shtove,
Other things he said – he had to be careful about talking directly about the banks now that he has been told its no longer his concern – seemed to me to indicate that he knew teh banks were NOT fixing their balance sheets. Not as I would define it anyway.
Yes, the banks are holding more capital. But that is window dressing if the banks have done virtually nothing about writing down or marking to market assets still held on their balance sheets at fantasy values.
That was what I challenged him with and which he did not answer.
As you say, it could work. But I think it leaves not only the banks but the Nation in a very fragile not to mention cash strapped position facing heavy cuts purely to prevent the banks having to pay their own debts.
I read people writing about 'laissez faire' and "free markets" and I am wondering where this may have happened?
Visions
Obtaining resources from outer space will require a lot of energy. Energy that the world is starting to hit limits to. It takes a heck of a lot of energy to escape our atmosphere. So to safely travel to another planet, extract resources and then bring them back will be a remarkable feat.
Just feeding the people on this planet relies far more on cheap energy (mainly the organic variety: oil/coal/gas) than we realise; fertisilers, pesticides, transportation etc. Organic matter (whether as food or another energy source) is not in abundance on other planets or asteroids. So I can’t see where the payback will come from these extra-terrestrial excursions.
Our dependence on resources should not be underestimated, especially (organic) energy resources. I’d say that the “Limits to Growth” predication is a far more plausible outline of how the next 30-50 years will pan-out:
http://forensicstatistician.wordpress.com/2011/05/27/is-economics-a-real-science/
Keeping the masses optimistic and hopeful about the future (when in reality it’s far more likely to be harsher) could be nothing less than shrewd “stage management”.
Guido
Polanyi was referring to this as the market for land, labour & money, whereby these “fictitious commodities” are traded (and therefore priced / valued), as if they were real commodities:
“A market economy is a self-regulating system where everyone is assumed to behave in a way that maximizes money gains. It assumes that in the market supply price will equal demand price. Money is assumed to exist, and the market sets prices. There are markets for everything from goods and services to labor, land, and money. In this ideal system there is not external regulation of prices, demand, or supply.”
http://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/org_theory/granovet_articles/polanyi_grtrans.html
Globalisation has pushed the mantra of extending these “markets”. China, Asia etc. have adopted this model. This is not to say that we don’t have a complete contortion of the liberal free market ideology either though. See this on the Predator State.
Either way we seem have both "a bad form of Capitalism" (a Kleptocracy no less) coupled with "Capitalism itself is bad" (markets as master not servant to society).
The patient has quite a complex syndrome at present! Diagnosis is going to be problematic, meanwhile the prognosis is still not good.
Guidoromero,
Made me laugh.
Forensicstatistician,
I agree about the importance of recognizing the limits to growth and don't think technological expansion into the near soilar system is a solution to our present and near term problems. Those we must solve here among ourselves with imagination not technology.
BUT the thought experiment of near space exploration is great fun and more intersting than you might at first think. I won't bore you with it but the problems and how we migth solve them are very illuminating. My proposal was called ArcShip and got as far as Hollywood agents and big name actors. I did a lot on it. It was great fun.
Even the energy problem for space exploration and manufacture has interesting and thoroughly possible solutions. It turns out its less a matter of technology and more one of focus and global will power. We could IF we really set ourselves to do it.
We are sitting on the surface of a metal boiler, under the glare of a fission reactor, helpfully beaming energy at us 24/7. We seem to be making little enough use of that.
What resources could we possibly get from the Asteroid belt, Venus or Mars, that could warrant the expense, energy, impracticability and pollution that would result?
I used to think Hutton had some real solutions (The State We're In), but to hear your account of his latest response makes me think he has lost the plot completely.
Debt Jubilees, strict Banking regulation, Governments issuing their own Money?
No. Space Mining!!!
Unbelievable – and I'm a big fan of science fiction.
Lord Skidelsky suggesting the evil "P" word is an interesting heresy.
Could you tell us a bit more about his proposals, Golem?
I now take the view it's right to assume they don't "get it" and that it needs to be pointed out to them at every opportunity.
Private sector debt was the problem and it was a political choice to make it a public sector debt issue. It should have been left to the private sector to resolve/destroy that debt in the normal market way.
Whoa there cowboy!
This feels like a David Icke moment.
BTW- he lives in Sedona. Went there last year and stayed only a few hours. The place has a strange, intense atmosphere, and the light is likewise rather unusual. It 'feels' as if the light is diffused through the red sandstone rock. i found it very oppressive and uncomfortable. Little wonder that it promotes strange ideas.
Are you telling us that Hutton (and you) think we can mine the nearby planets, moons or asteroids and simply suspend 'sustainability? In what time range are you talking? One, two, or three lifetimes?
So what resources exactly are we talking about? Water? Oil? Energy?
diamonds, gold, iron platinum?
Was Hutton talking in a 'generic' or figurative way- that there will always be something 'out there' which is accessible to human ingenuity? Well that is a little more credible but even that is questionable. It sounds as if Hutton (rather interestingly) is simply the victim of the neo-capitialist cargo cult.
Here is a challenge for you. Go on the internet and download the relative 'sizes' and distances of the solar system. then take these and, using things like coffee beans, marbles, tennis balls, golf balls etc to represent the various planets, to a very large field ( I mean really big) and use simple methods like counting paces to lay out a scale model of the solar system. After you have done this come and tell me you still think space mining is possible, on a time scale that is meaningful to people living now.
There are really serious questions about sustainability here and even the basic understanding of the laws of thermodynamics and what it means to be human.
The problem is not one of what is technically 'possible'- it the problem of what is technically possible but remains consistent within the parameters of a meaningful human existence i.e remaining recognisably human in values, aspirations and capacity for compassionate engagement with other people.
Mr Shigemitsu,
Yes it was both interesting and surprising. He didn't elaborate either on stage nor to me privately. All he said was that he thought it was time to question the Globalization paradigm. He specifically mentioned the notoin that people should be free to move – ie workforces moving from country to country. He also felt we should question the idea of countries 'doing only what they do best" and importing the rest. He felt, as do I, taht for both security and for jobs as well as for environmental costs nations should make what they need close to home.
So what he said was teh blazingly obvious. But was great to hear nevertheless.
Needless to say I agree with him I was just glad to hear someone from what I regard as the mainstream, a 'respected' voice coming to conclusions and feeling moved to voice opinions the rest of us have been trying to advocate for years.
Globalization is a failed and thoroughly stupid theology. This whole idea that 'protectionism' is like the plague and the way its always trotted out as – 'it caused the Great Depression' annoys me. A credit bubble of bad debts was a major cause of the Depression.
Protectionism is what we need to tame global corporate pillaging, jurisdictional arbitrage and to make once more, as Haweye was arguing, the economy the servant of the people and not the other way around as it currently is.
So I felt rather happy about hearing Skidelsky beginning to think and say the 'unthinkable'.
If we have the technical know-how to send mining expeditions to the stars and have the energy requirements here and now to allow us to do this, and the only thing that is holding us back is the lack of money to pay for it all…..Then let's stop using money….simple
The MacPuddock,
Hang on a minute. Let's be clear hear it was Hutton not me who wafted such notions around as a solution to our current predicaments. And to be doubly triply clear I do NOT think they are solutions on the time scales within which we must solve our current problems.
I think our current problems must be abd can only be solved by moving from a raw 'growth' model of society and economics to a sustainable steady state. We will only do this if we steady population growth and that in turn, in my opinion, will only be possible if we recognize that a degree of prosperity and security for their future is a requirement (though certainly not the only one – empowering women is necessary as well) for lowering the size of families and age of first birth.
All that said, I also happen to feel that beginning to explore and utilize 'near' space is necessary and would be good and could be done in the life time of my children.
I also think we would benefit from beginning to think on these slightlyly longer time scales rather than always reacting to crises when they are already upon us.
And lastly, I think such a move in to space is both possible technologically and that the even the exercise of thinking about it can be a constructive thing.
Short term solution to pressing problems, of environment, economy and social justuce? No.
Something that we could do, and could usefully start thinking about now? I happen to think so. Does that make me David Ike-ish? Not for me to say but I don't think so. I find thought experiments invigorating both intellectually and morally.
Golem: Japan's debt has been running at +200% of GDP for some time now. I remember sometime past you mentioned you were going to do a post on this matter, which I would welcome, as I cannot for the life of me figure out how the world's 2nd/3rd biggest economy can keep running with that sort of debt level; and the knock-on effects it must have on the holders of that accrued debt.
Prometheuswrites,
Yes, I did didn't I. I haven't written about Japan for a while. OK. Give me a couple of days.
You know I think what it is, is I have written so much for so long an these same subjects I start to worry that I will bore people by repeating myself.
Golem, foreignstatistician
Thanks alot, I do agree that it is not a valid answer when faced with such a question, and Hutton should have really put his thinking cap on before answering the question.
In regards to Protectionism, doesn't the problem solely lie in regards of how Protectionism is viewed in economic circles? I remember in my history class reading of when Lloyd George (became PM of the UK) strongly advocated protectionism among the British Empire in my history class, fellow students who were also studying economics already judged his economic sense as stupid.
Imagine what they were taught in their economics class that made them feel that way.
Maybe people feel that way about the word, as when religious people talk about the "end of the world".
visions,
I think you're right – people do associate 'end of the world' with Protectionism. Just as they do with 'default' I wrote a little while ago that Sovereign Default especially has come to be understood as being to nations what suicide is for people,
Maybe there is something to explore and better understand concerning this web of associations we have with economic terms and what effect those associations have on our thinking.
Skidelsky's latest book on Keynes – The Return of the Master, lays the blame for the crisis not on bankers or regulators or governments, but on the intellectual failure of the economics profession. A failure of ideas; the very ideas that felt themselves responsible for the "victory" over the Soviet Union and spent the next decade in triumphant jubilation with their snouts in the trough, convincing their governments to repeal all those New Deal laws that held them in check.
Skidelsky is also right that the idea of Free Trade needs to be revisited. Guido nicely pointed out that nowhere on our planet in our history has there ever been Free Trade.
This is a hugely complex issue and the elephant in the room is the nation state; the best worst way we as humans have managed to organise ourselves so as to protect and feed as many of us as possible. (that may be open to debate)
We will need a new level of consciousness in order to overcome the genius of the nation state in a world with finite resources.
Golem, just as a follow on to your very entertaining piece on the eternally surprised economists, here is an excerpt from the latest Article IV consultation by the IMF on the UK,
Aided by the implementation of a wide-ranging policy program, the post-crisis repair of the UK economy is underway. However, the weakness in economic growth and rise in inflation over the last several months was unexpected. This raises the question whether it is time to adjust macroeconomic policies. The answer is no as the deviations are largely temporary…
you can read the rest here, http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2011/060611.htm
Keep it coming. This is a must read blog.
Yup, visions, I remember being taught in A' Level History that "Free Trade" coming after Protectionism in the 19th Century led to prosperity. You don't really question that at the time, but I expect it benefited Britain a lot more than it's colonies and competitors.
Now the roles are reversed, and you're right Golem, it's not a level playing field – simply wage and environmental regulation arbitrage.
But selective tariffs and exchange controls would not be sufficient – the economy would still need to be restructured, with long-term investment encouraged and manufacturing jobs created, otherwise there'd be no point.
Sadly, I don't see it happening any time soon, nor do I see an even simpler symbolic move a truly patriotic British Government could make – the abolition of tax-haven status in all British foreign and domestic territories.
And, while I'm wishfully thinking, the redeployment of our military forces from Libya and Afghanistan to Switzerland and Liechtenstein can follow on from there : )
Mr Shigemitsu,
Your last line made me laugh. Second time you lot have made me laugh today!
John,
Thanks for your kind comments but especially thanks for that link!! Unexpected?!
Skidelsky is only partly right about it being the fault of the economists. The film "Inside Job" tackles the issue quite well; that whoever pays the piper plays the tune.
Why would economists such as Veblen, Georgescu-Roegen, JK Galbraith, Herman Daly etc. get ignored? Was their analysis and predictive capabilities flawed?
No. Their views ran counter to the de-regulatory mantra of "free-markets". Therefore they got neither funding nor a voice.
Powerful (financial) forces are pulling the strings. Watch the PBS programme "The Warning" about the de-regulation of derivatives. Brooksley Born was prevented from even "evaluating" the merits of derivatives by the strong arm tactics of Rubin/Greenspan/Summers. This is not the actions of reasoned and disinterested scholars. It was a class interest ideology in motion rather than the actions of an impartial (but misguided) profession.
Which can only lead me to conclude that Keynes got it the wrong way round:
"Defunct economists are merely the slaves of shrewd practical men."
– Hawkeye
I may have done Skidelsky a disservice in paraphrasing his apportioning of the blame. In fact, his point may have been that seeking scapegoats is a weakness that we fall prey to instead of analysing what exactly happened.
Different economists fall in and out of fashion like other great thinkers do. Is it the zeitgeist? Is it the result of powerful forces pushing their own champions? Is is sheer luck or coincidence? Is it the pendulum swinging back to compensate for earlier excesses? Probably all of the above.
To paraphrase John Lanchester in Whoops! (brilliant book on the GFC – don't let the title put you off) this last crisis will go down as the greatest wasted opportunity in history. It's business as usual. What will it take for things to change?
G, it's a pleasure as always reading your polite rage. It's like a really nice meal and the comments are like some delicious desert.
I'm stuffed!
Their ramblings make no sense whatsoever, funny that they're steering the car, although remember those toy steering wheels you can get so the kids in the back can pretend their driving? None of it makes sense unless you accept that none of it is done for the good of you or I.
Somebody put my video on their site so I thanked them for it and they did a post in which they took the time to type out your words from the end. They touched him and so they should. They touched me too. They should be on billboards and bus stops.
That would be a advertising campaign for 38 degrees which would top the Artful Tax Dodger ads anyday.
I didn't tell him you wrote it although it says it at the end, shhhhh 🙂
The role of Nature accepted, we then have to ask; whether in the affairs of humanity, any concept, system, practice or ideology which doesn’t improve the wellbeing, contentment, security and advancement of the majority of the species and its survival, has any claim to legitimacy or continuance by establishment or custom? (extract from The People Business)
We haven't reached that level of maturity on Earth yet, and unless we instigate massive changes in our value systems the chances are we never will. So for the foreseeable future I think we should leave the Sci-Fi to writers and film directors; if we include economists they'll only bugger it up.
Learn some astronomy in under 3 minutes!
Golem;
I am very depressed as I thought Vince Cable was one of the few politicians that "got it" Am I reading too much ioto this or is he saying that the Japenese "solution" is the best we can hope for?
It came accross like that to me.
bill,
I don't know if you're reading too much in to it or not. I was not able to talk further to him. But unless Japan suddenly unveils some radical new 'got it' policy beyond those they have refused to alter over two long decades of stagnant failure, then it comes across like that to me too.
Sweet Sweet Justice
Hello,
Thanks for a great blog and thanks also to all those who contribute – it's about the only place where the 'bottom half of the internet' is worth a damn.
Golem, I know that someone above has already asked for an article but I'd be really interested in your thoughts on a couple of things.
Firstly – Land Value Tax. I've been reading some work by Fred Harrison (http://www.fredharrison.com/) and all in all, it seems like a pretty good idea. Apparently Winston Churchill tried to get it through parliament in 1909 but was defeated by the Lords. He also blames land value speculation for the regular boom and bust cycles that we've been experiencing for a few hundred years.
Secondly – Fractional Reserve banking. I'm pretty new to economics in general but to have money creation almost entirely in private and self-interested hands seems completely nuts.
Apologies if my searching ability is rubbish and you've already written about these things…
Thanks again!
Poor old Japan "got it" alright, but not in the way Cable had in mind.
Another stunning piece by Prof Michael Hudson, titled as being about Greece, but I'm not sure what Michael has left out of this incredibly comprehensive article in describing the entire obscene scam being pulled by the mega banks worldwide.
http://www.counterpunch.org/hudson06062011.html
Of particular interest is the statement that Greece is to hold a referendum on whether to submit to further debt – a poll suggests 85% will say NO! (Cue Greek default & Euro exit and….) Bring it on! (I can't see any other way sanity can prevail without such a crisis?)
You know, when I read & realise the stark truth that Hudson tells, I'm left with just one conclusion about Cable, Hutton & their ilk – they are just two of the many thousands of ignorant parasitic assholes nothing more than well paid spewers of bullshit in the public information space – utterly contemptible.
Just wanted to get that of my chest! Lol
is this the best economic/political/angry blog right now? Since the demise of "Burning our Money" this is surely #1 – and thanks for all the comments too – fabulous
@ 24k
Great link. The only way they will listen. Shows what a mess the banks are in when they can foreclose on the wrong house.
@ Mr Shig
Jeez.. So we are now hearing that there were 3 (what odds 4) simultaneous full blown nuclear meltdowns? If they rated it at level 7 (the same as Chernobyl) back then, what is it rated at now?)?
It sounds to me like the Japanese are 'proper fucked'. Full blown financial and nuclear meltdown on top of a massive earthquake and tsunami. Not to mention 20 years of stagflation and an ageing population.
2 Questions –
1. Why aren’t the media screaming about it now? Do you think it's because the public just don’t care anymore, or because there is some sort of censorship? Is this being downplayed to prevent another banking crisis?
2. The government took the old patronising short term 'avoid panic' lies route. Why on earth would we believe anything from them now? I think you have to assume it’s 10-20 times worse than they are letting on. We had 3 (probably 4) simultaneous nuclear meltdowns, which nobody did anything about for nearly 2 weeks (apart from pumping a bit of sea water in (if they even did that)).
I feel desperately sorry for the Japanese people. They deserve better than this. I really hope our politicians weren’t putting pressure on their government to play this down and leave people in danger just to protect our banks.
mikehall:
"You know, when I read & realise the stark truth that Hudson tells, I'm left with just one conclusion about Cable, Hutton & their ilk – they are just two of the many thousands of ignorant parasitic assholes nothing more than well paid spewers of bullshit in the public information space – utterly contemptible."
Well said, that man! Excellent Counterpunch link, Hudson always impressive.
fitzy103: Well, to be fair, the Graun does have the story in its World news section today, but prefers to reserve the Home page for articles about the new version of Halo, the couple who tweeted their home birth, and a stunning exposé of how the British are not very good at barbecues. Good to know it has its priorities right, eh?
An interesting letter. Dear Stephen King:An open letter to one American who reallycould scare the rest of us into action
I know many of us here are very serious about the completely ecologically unsustainable track our species is on, threatening countless other species with extinction too. A major thread of this is our profligate use of polluting & unsustainable energy sources. Really, it's exactly the same mindset as pervades economics & much else isn't it?
Since there was a link above to the Fukushima nuclear reactor situation, I thought I would commend to those who are not aware of them the recent published articles of journalist (one of few real ones) George Monbiot. (1st published in the UK Guardian & then on his website.)
http://www.monbiot.com/category/nuclear/
Previously anti-nuclear Monbiot (who still would be if Climate Change were not so threatening) has made a very careful re-appraisal of the threats to life & environment of nuclear versus it's usefulness in mitigating, well, an imminent existential threat to much of life on Earth. I have to say I am persuaded by his extensively researched, +evidence+ based (& fully referenced!) viewpoint. That is to say, if I may summarise in one sentence – develop renewable technologies on a 'war production' footing & continue with nuclear +as well+ at least in the short to medium term.
That Germany, in a kneejerk, debate-free reaction, is now closing it's nuclear reactors at a time of record Greenhouse Gas emissions, just shows again how intellectually bankrupt public policy making is imo.
fitzy103, how they could get away with it with no proof in the first place is amazing.
Plasma fusion looks interesting but so do roundhouses and permaculture, all three mind now there is a life, electricity and sustainability, with no melt downs and no weaponry capabilities.
Chuck in government issued debt free money and we have a winner.
I was thinking about that today and for me, and my film I think that's where I'm going. I did think just getting rid of corruption would be good enough but think about it, no fractional reserve private bank monopoly money so nobody getting mega rich off nothing, no ZMF, none of it and you can still have corrupt polititions doing their bullSh£te thang and it wouldn't matter, the system would be able to take it. It could also take the scroungers and sick fakers and anybody else you care to point at. The system could cope with all the a$$holes you throw at it and we'd have decent infrastructure and transport system to move all the a$$holes about. Plus the exchange between countries would be more honest, no carry trade bunk just honest trade.
Please correct me if I'm wrong. It wouldn't be the first time.
I'm sure private banks would still loan money they have but that's it, the rest of society could get on with being stupid and I could forget about this stuff and get back to just playing.
I feel nature calling me like some jungle drum.
Bom Bom Bom Bom
OhWah Ohwah (that was a monkey or jungle creature)
Wow. Just discovered this via a long series of links. Agree both the article and comments are wonderful. And then I get near the bottom and Ewan mentions land value tax… This is what I was going to ask, if Golem had anything to say about it. I know both Fred Harrison and Michael Hudson – Michael is also a land taxer but doesn't like to associate himself with the Georgist community because they are fixated on LVT as a panacea. When you consider that Harrison published 'Boom Bust: House Prices, Banking and the Depression of 2010', in 2005, you've really got to take the man seriously. I'm seeing him on Saturday, so I'll gladly pass any message of support on to him.
Hi Golem
sending you direct a few links on China, and particularly Part1 of the Q12011 Newsletter here — http://www.gmo.com/America/
All the best
frog2
@ Carol
Thanks for the mention of Fred Harrison – wasn't aware of him. He looks interesting tho' his website is a wee bit 'thin' on detailed information on his work? I guess one has to buy his books to get that – not so easy for the financially challenged!
One snippet was also interesting in a youtube on his site. Praising Vince Cable no less for his warnings re the housing bubble. (This was before the ConDem coalition tho'.) I wonder what Fred thinks of him now as a key facilitator of ruinous Tory economic policies! (I do have some sympathy for Fred here, as someone who foolishly thought (Green) party politicians would be capable of following thru' on the logical conclusions of their own fine rhetoric even in a 'coalition' – lesson learned!)
So here's a link back for you, in case you don't know them –
http://smarttaxes.org/
A goldmine of info on land taxation, the 'commons' & masses more on sane economics. (A spin off from feasta.org – Foundation for The Economics of Sustainability.)
I think it was Fred, perhaps preceded by Dave Wetzel, who introduced FEASTA to LVT.
We have no delusions about Cable. I saw him make a guest appearance at a LibDem conference fringe on LVT (only because it was local! when he consistently called the chair by the wrong name and said not one word about LVT. Huhne is a genuine landtaxer. We were very disappointed when he failed to take the leadership.
Take a look at our website labourland.org. We've just published our updated manifesto. Oh, and did you know that the Green and Co-op parties have LVT in their manifestos – also Andy Burnham during the leadership campaign?
I've been involved for 15 years and things are definitely moving now.
Oh, and by the way, re China, have you seen how much of a mess they are getting into because they are privatising land without collecting the rent for public benefit? They've been relying on selling leases for revenue when they could have a sustainable virtuous circle of providing infrastructure and other public goods and services, which feed directly into land values, and funding it from the rising rents.
Dave Wetzel has been lecturing in China for the last few years (he's off again in a couple of weeks) trying to help them understand this. That was one of the problems with Marx, he didn't see the sensible solution to the allocation of land to best use.
@ Carol
My comment re the Greens was the Irish lot – where they actually had a chance & position in government to make a stand against the neo-liberal establishment, but failed miserably to connect economic sanity with a sustainable future.
@ dave from france
That GMO newsletter is an astonishing piece on world resources! Doesn't it just beggar belief that no-one in mainstream media (or politics) is taking any notice?
mikehall 18.37 — re GMO,
It is pretty convincing,isn't it, as most of is in front of our eyes already.And much has been for some long time … 'limits to growth' was what 40 years ago now ?
Video on China's ghost cities, construction bubble, and the dangers of social polarisation rich v the masses — HERE
And a very illuminating China article, in fact at GMO, which I also found at comments in the Torygraph — HERE.
How to check if your a UK extremist
Carol,
Thank you for your comments. I hope you'll stay and chat with us for a while.
As for Land Tax. IU think it is one of a clutch of really good and workbale ideas. I don't see it as a panacea all on its own.
It seems to me we need to recognize that how wealth is accumulated, held and moved has changed and will change. Thus how we regualte, tax and stop abuses must also change. Taxing `land does seem to me to be fairer as a starting place than a colleciton of flat rate consumption taxes.
Taxing something that can't be spirited from one jurisdiction to another is also essential. So I am in favour and would love the chance to talk to those who know much more about it than I do. Perhaps you'll tell us more?
A LAND VALUE TAX FOR SCOTLAND
@cynicalHighlander
Yes indeed. The Labour Land Campaign is heavily involved in this push. There are lots of interested 'movers' from all parts of the progressive movement, including STUC. Of course, Scotland is much more aware of the iniquities of private monopoly of land. Yet 0.3% own 69% of UK land by acreage. We stupid English seem blind to land once it is built upon and accept the spiel of the big estate owners that they are great stewards of the English countryside. I had a letter published in the FT recently in response to an estate owner who thought he should be let off tax. I asked him if he thought we should actually be paying him to further his 'hobby'. And suggested that we should do a test auction of his land to see if it had any value at all.
@Golem
I'm going to a steering group meeting tomorrow of the CEJ (Coalition for Economic Justice, which is an umbrella group for UK LVT organisations. I will refer your interest to them. And thanks.
My father was a huge fan of Henry George, and as a teenager I was bombarded with his Georgist "propaganda", as a panacea for all the world's ills.
I'm not sure to this day whether he was right or wrong, but in a time of global wealth, where vast sums of money can be spirited across continents at the click of a button, and huge amounts of 'wealth' appear to reside in ephemeral entities such as LinkedIn or Groupon IPOs, I am not sure whether old Mr George is as relevant as he might have been in 1890s Philadelphia. Perhaps those more knowledgeable than me could advise?
No point asking my father – he's in his 80s, and refuses to participate in the internet.
A great shame, he'd love it here…!
@MrShigemitsu
It is a sad fact that most people have no concept of the value of land. So could you just please reflect on the fact that the value of UK residential property is something like £4tr and much of that value represents land rather than bricks and mortar. Before the landed aristocracy saddled the workers with income tax, land was the only source of public revenue. It's about time the tables were turned.
@Carol,
The "value" of residential property may well be £4tr, though if a hefty LVT were applied it could halve, but who knows? Obviously the Exchequer requires a certain amount to be raised, so the rates charged would no doubt vary according to the market…but I digress.
The problem, it seems to me, is that vast amounts of wealth are generated nowadays by e.g. intellectual property rights, buying and selling of commodities, financial products etc, as well as the display and supply of goods which can take place via the internet rather than mall or high st stores…and these endeavours need occupy no land, apart from 0.1 sq.m. of computer footprint, which could be located anywhere from Haggerston to Hong Kong if LVT meant that Mayfair, Bishopsgate or Westfield was too 'burdensome'.
Corporations don't have to occupy prime real estate, or even base their HQs in the UK at all, short of a nameplate….evasion would simply take a different shape, I suspect.
I am not at all against a LVT as that is where a huge amount of untaxed wealth is stored, but not sure George's Single Land Tax ie. LVT as the sole source of Govt. revenue, would cover the same bases it would have done 100 years ago?
I am not any way an expert on this, so would be curious to hear your comments on these points.
@MrShigemitsu
Since full collection of land rent has never been implemented the claims of the single taxers are theoretical and I see no benefit in making such claims.
However, there are some parts of the theory which are unassailable by all economists. Indeed my first introduction to LVT was a book co-written by Mervyn King which concluded that LVT is the only tax which meets all the criteria of a good tax. This is best expressed in terms of 'deadweight' and it is generally acknowledged that all other taxes suppress wealth creation to a greater or lesser degree. LVT carries no deadweight. The suppression of wealth creation leads to lower land rents. LVT would increase land rents (whilst high rate LVT would virtually destroy land market prices – a good thing). The theory is that land rents would rise to a point where they would pay for all public expenditure.
@ Carol
I know Feasta have advocated such a 'commons' type approach to other resources, or 'rights to pollute' in the case of CO2 (& other Greenhouse gases).
I've wondered myself if, in fact, the bulk of taxation could be entirely derived from resource taxes which were set at a rate that resulted in usage that ensured a reasonable length of sustainability.
What d'you (or anyone) think of that idea?
BTW, excellent article here on Wachovia Bank's massive involvement in money laundering for drug cartels – some $380billion is mentioned. It also talks about the the 'too big to fail, too big to jail' response by federal authorities & virtual MSM 'blackout' on the whole affair.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28314.htm
Michael Hudson has another excellent piece here too:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article28319.htm
@Mikehall
I'm not too familiar with the intricacies of taxing resources. As I see it once minerals have been extracted they are capital, because labour has been applied. Thereafter, if the market does not do the trick, consumption taxes could be applied lower down the chain in order to constrain overconsumption. (I'm only thinking on my feet at the moment and may be completely wrong.)
I've often wondered whether it would be possible to use LVT instead of extraction taxes. The value of the site depends on the known reserves, ease of extraction, extraction rates (which can be govt controlled) and current demand for the mineral. All these variables could be in the public domain and could be used to assess the value on a continual basis. The rate, preferably 100% rental value, could then be applied and collection should be easy (it's difficult to hide a mine). However, I've never found anyone who wants to consider this, even in the Georgist movement so I don't know if this is practical or not.
@mikehall
Thanks for another great Hudson link. His keyboard must be smoking at the moment, the rate he is bashing out articles!
Not read it all yet, but the first couple of paragraphs are dynamite.
No wonder all my suggestions to Newsnight and Paul Mason to interview Michael Hudson keeps on falling on deaf ears! He'd rip Irwin Stelzer to shreds.
Great to be back, since I took to the hills my google a/c wouldn't let me in. I have finally found time to set up an openid a/c. I have been following the blog & I am left wondering, how can I love something so much, that after all, is about something so terrible.
Anyhow, I have come to the conclusion that I might start manufacturing rabbit traps or Hobbit houses instead of giftware, as we really do seem to be heading for the abyss. What with the Greens in Ireland & Cable & Co. it's hard to see any politicians not selling their souls for a piece of the action. Was Mao right ? " change will come through the barrel of a gun" I hope not. If there is any hope it seems to only come from places like this. It's great to see new contributors, seems Golem's seeds are bearing fruit. I now cannot bear watching the mainstream news, it's kind of like " Nothing to see here folks" except Pippa's arse perhaps. I much prefer my alternate universe with all it's amazing contributions & links.
Unfortunately I think it will be sometime before Nostromo takes to the skies, unless they can rake in enough money from bankers going on space tourism trips. In the meantime it will probably be shooting polar bears, raping the polar regions & sending the desperate in 3rd world countries down mines to scrape out the last of what this tired old planet has got to offer.
I cannot help being optimistic though, maybe all the like minded people will eventually link up & create a force strong enough to be heeded, I think it was Pat Flannery who suggested a global network, I live in hope.
I couldn't help but guffaw at Hutton's ludicrous "permanent economic growth" comment. Reminds me of reading Isaac Asimov as a kid and being inspired by his concept of stripping the Solar System's resources, i.e planets, to build and power massive spaceships to colonise the galaxy. That was in a much less politically correct age and, largely, conjecture.
I am disappointed that a, supposedly, mainstream economist like Hutton could not see that what is really required to get us out of our current predicament is sustainably using the resources on this world rather than looking for some 'pie in the sky' idea of constant growth.