The 'money supply' is not controlled. It can't be because it is a function of numerous factors out of the control of any single entity or group.
Yet we don't have hyperinflation.
Except the government could print more paper money, which was the point Zhivago was making.
a) Why aren't you up in arms at Quantitative Easing?
b) Print is so anachronistic - modern money is credit in 1s and 0s - electronic. Just a term, don't get hung up on it.
c) Money supply is not controlled at the moment - money supply is endogenous and is created in response to demand for loans, by private banks. This demand is mostly not investment, but speculation or desire for basic necessities such as housing. Most of the money created at the moment is created for speculation. It's highly damaging to the economy.
d) Have you not heard of the idea of helicopter money? It's something mainstream economists are starting to consider now. But you are still living in the past mainstream because you are an unthinking believer of orthodox ideology.
Sandydragon wrote:Relative poverty is s nonsense, the only measure should be absolute poverty.
On the contrary. Relative poverty measures are a good indicator of how well people in the lower deciles of the income range are able to participate in any meaningful way in society.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Anyway, back on topic. The NEC says Corbyn can stand - on the report of the rules that seemed inevitable and I'm mystified that someone apparently thought otherwise.
The anti - Corbyn votes currently look to be split.
The election rules look bizarrely complicated as to who can vote, but the headline is that £25 is now the cost of entryism.
They use AV
Good point well made. In which case they've probably got the optimal number of candidates to get rid of him.
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Anyway, back on topic. The NEC says Corbyn can stand - on the report of the rules that seemed inevitable and I'm mystified that someone apparently thought otherwise.
The anti - Corbyn votes currently look to be split.
The election rules look bizarrely complicated as to who can vote, but the headline is that £25 is now the cost of entryism.
They use AV
Good point well made. In which case they've probably got the optimal number of candidates to get rid of him.
Well McTernan is backing Owen Smith and he's never been right about anything.
I don't think they have any rabbits to pull out of their hats.
JC has the overwhelming support of the membership.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
Eugene Wrayburn wrote:Anyway, back on topic. The NEC says Corbyn can stand - on the report of the rules that seemed inevitable and I'm mystified that someone apparently thought otherwise.
The anti - Corbyn votes currently look to be split.
The election rules look bizarrely complicated as to who can vote, but the headline is that £25 is now the cost of entryism.
They use AV
Good point well made. In which case they've probably got the optimal number of candidates to get rid of him.
Slight problem that the options being run against him aren't the big hitters, Cooper and Burnham may have blown their chance with the inept campaign Vs Corbyn, I can't say I much to take the Balls, but they need a Jarvis or Umunna to make them relevant again
Good point well made. In which case they've probably got the optimal number of candidates to get rid of him.
Slight problem that the options being run against him aren't the big hitters, Cooper and Burnham may have blown their chance with the inept campaign Vs Corbyn, I can't say I much to take the Balls, but they need a Jarvis or Umunna to make them relevant again
It's kind of funny to see Tories demanding that Labour select closet Tories to make them 'relevant'.
Labour doesn't need to be relevant to you, buddy. You're a Tory.
Labour needs to be relevant to labour. Your boys Chukka and Dan aren't.
The Blair wing of the Labour Party is done. They're hated.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
Donny osmond wrote:
Exactly what it says. All these other attributes are great and desirable but don't mean anything if a politician isn't intelligent enough to know how to use them. Perfect example: allowing his words at the publication of a report into antisemitism to be construed as antisemitic. He had the decency and courage to stand up for his beliefs, but is too dumb to be able to do that and construct a sentence that couldn't be misconstrued. My problem with Corbyn isn't his beliefs, a lot of which I probably share, its that he's too thick +/or self-centered to be able to inspire anyone to go along with him.
Sent from my XT1052 using Tapatalk
I could understand your point, but that example is bollox. Find me a clearer way to say the same thing. The problem was the transcript, which made it sound wrong. Accident or sabotage?
Well, if he was intelligent enough to be a leader then he would've changed the transcript...?
But Ok, you want another example, witness his bullshit attempt to support an EU remain campaign that he clearly disagreed with.
Sent from my XT1052 using Tapatalk
The irony of zionists accusing people of racism seems to have escaped you Donny.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
Sent off the application for full membership, seems a waste of £25 even before Jeremy is likely to win, but there isn't much else to be done. I'm hoping if Jeremy does win this ballot another challenge is announced with a more serious alternative putting their name forward.
Digby wrote:Sent off the application for full membership, seems a waste of £25 even before Jeremy is likely to win, but there isn't much else to be done. I'm hoping if Jeremy does win this ballot another challenge is announced with a more serious alternative putting their name forward.
Id be amazed if there were. I think this leadership election is a one time deal. Lose and the rebels will either need to play very nicely or move along the green benches.
Digby wrote:Sent off the application for full membership, seems a waste of £25 even before Jeremy is likely to win, but there isn't much else to be done. I'm hoping if Jeremy does win this ballot another challenge is announced with a more serious alternative putting their name forward.
Id be amazed if there were. I think this leadership election is a one time deal. Lose and the rebels will either need to play very nicely or move along the green benches.
It's reached an absurd point, and if they're not going to strike out on their own then they may as well launch a new challenge as soon as an unsuccessful one is over. And I'd certainly expect another challenge if Corbyn takes about 55% of the vote or lower absent of £3 voters, and that might perhaps come from a serious candidate
Digby wrote:Sent off the application for full membership, seems a waste of £25 even before Jeremy is likely to win, but there isn't much else to be done. I'm hoping if Jeremy does win this ballot another challenge is announced with a more serious alternative putting their name forward.
Id be amazed if there were. I think this leadership election is a one time deal. Lose and the rebels will either need to play very nicely or move along the green benches.
It's reached an absurd point, and if they're not going to strike out on their own then they may as well launch a new challenge as soon as an unsuccessful one is over. And I'd certainly expect another challenge if Corbyn takes about 55% of the vote or lower absent of £3 voters, and that might perhaps come from a serious candidate
Maybe, although the longer this goes on for the more absurd the rebels become. If the party membership does vote to maintain Corbyn, then risking another election is likely to annoy supporters as much as tempt them to their side.
To the wider electorate, this will look like Labour pissing about whilst there are more important things to deal with.
Given what is at stake, I would have thought that a serious candidate would have put themselves forward by now. With the vote of no confidence, a stalking horse candidate is a bit pointless.
Forgive me for not reading it, does it compare his treatment with that of other politicians from other parties or is it solely about him?
Sent from my XT1052 using Tapatalk
It was so much easier to blame Them. It was bleakly depressing to think They were Us. I've certainly never thought of myself as one of Them. No one ever thinks of themselves as one of Them. We're always one of Us. It's Them that do the bad things.
