FuckyWucky [none/use name]

Pro-stealing art without attribution

  • 2 Posts
  • 164 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: March 21st, 2023

help-circle



  • The UK’s aim to develop cleaner energy has taken a step forward after 131 clean energy projects won state subsidy contracts in this year’s auction round — which the government said was enough to potentially power about 11mn homes.

    For a Government which harps on about fiscal prudence they sure have the most inefficient ways of funding clean energy, subsidies.

    They are already constrained by their self inflicted rules. Capitalists don’t invest unless there is money to be made, it is a simple fact. The subsidies are just incressing capitalist profits.

    Alternate way, setup a state owned energy company, hire workers directly. No capitalists parasite middlemen.




  • UK chancellor plans to raise social rents to boost affordable housebuilding

    you don't even have to be a Marxist to see this is complete bullshit

    For some weeks at this hour, you have enjoyed the day-dreams of planning. But what about the nightmare of finance? I am sure there have been many listeners who have been muttering:

    “That’s all very well, but how is it to be paid for?”

    Let me begin by telling you how I tried to answer an eminent architect who pushed aside all the grandiose plans to rebuild London with the phrase: “Where’s the money to come from?”

    “The money?” I said. “But surely, Sir John, you don’t build houses with money? Do you mean that there won’t be enough bricks and mortar and steel and cement?”

    “Oh no,” he replied, “of course there will be plenty of all that.”

    “Do you mean,” I went on, “that there won’t be enough labour? For what will the builders be doing if they are not building houses?”

    “Oh no, that’s all right,” he agreed.

    “Then there is only one conclusion. You must be meaning, Sir John, that there won’t be enough architects.” But there I was trespassing on the boundaries of politeness. So I hurried to add: “Well, if there are bricks and mortar and steel and concrete and labour and architects, why not assemble all this good material into houses?”

    But he was, I fear, quite unconvinced. “What I want to know,” he repeated, “is where the money is coming from.”

    To answer that would have got him and me into deeper water than I cared for, so I replied rather shabbily: “The same place it is coming from now.”

    https://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=F79FF7271C9562973CE7ACBB90263723









  • I mean, it is a finance in so much as how you choose to fund things matters. Spending money not replaced with income has a cost, long or short term. And choosing to eat that cost is a fiscal decision

    it really doesn’t, the Government is the only sector which can continuously run deficits. U.K. has run continuous deficits (though clearly not enough and not to the right people). Almost Every country runs deficits long term (except developed countries with external surpluses like Norway), nothing wrong with that. China has a massive trade (current account) surplus yet they also run massive fiscal deficits. They know the only way for the country to grow and develop is with Government spending. Financial cost isn’t real cost.

    I would argue they should just create the money without issuing debt because the interest on debt mostly goes to financial asset holders who are rich, you can see this in the U.S. with the higher interest rates is stimulating demand instead of reducing it. The capitalists don’t want the Government to spend without issuing debt, Government debt is a way for them to park their wealth in a risk-free asset and earn an interest at the same time.

    Be that cost weaker currency o trade with 3rd party nations

    This is only partly true. Yes, if the British Government decides to rid themselves of the shackles put on them by the capitalists and spend without issuing debt, there will likely be capital flight (since UK relies on other bringing foreign currency and working like a tax-haven) and exchange rate depreciation which could result inflation. But the Government can use capital controls, many developing countries do, China does it very effectively for instance.

    Also keep in mind a weaker currency isn’t inherently bad. It discourages imports of foreign luxury goods. U.K. has kinda fallen off on manufacturing so I don’t know how much export-promotion would occur because of this.

    Regardless of how the Government spends the ‘markets’ won’t like it. They could try taxing the rich and only afterwards increase spending to keep fiscal deficit (as %) low but then too there may be capital flight. They could issue debt and provide corporate welfare then also the markets won’t like it. The best solution imo is to spend without issuing debt (this doesn’t cause inflation, that’s neoliberal propaganda), impose strict capital controls and then go ‘deal with’ the rich.

    But it is also a problem of convincing voters. Something modern right wing labour has chosen not to do. And in fairness, fptp makes hard as only 30% of voters believing right wing ideals can turn the election.

    I completely agree with u on this.