advertisement


Labour Leader: Keir Starmer VII

klfrs said:
chill out

Will post as and when I wish. Subject to AUP, but not self-appointed fuzz.
Click to expand...
I’m perfectly relaxed sat here watching you tie yourself in knots, blithering on about ‘differences of opinions’ but not being able to formulate one of your own. Please keep going
 
ks.234 said:
I’m perfectly relaxed sat here watching you tie yourself in knots, blithering on about ‘differences of opinions’ but not being able to formulate one of your own. Please keep going
Click to expand...
unfucked.gif
 
klfrs said:
Comprehending opinions aren't facts would be the place to start. hth
Click to expand...
I was addressing exactly that. Opinions are just utterances without recourse to any sort of evidential basis. It's usually why I discount them. Don't try and clever-talk me though because it won't work. Throwing little world-salads to deflect questions. Answer the questions. If you're going to quote someone, expect to be asked to explain yourself. That 'I post as and when I wish' doesn't cut it. If you don't want to be asked to explain, don't quote people.
 
ks.234 said:
I’m perfectly relaxed sat here watching you tie yourself in knots, blithering on about ‘differences of opinions’ but not being able to formulate one of your own. Please keep going
Click to expand...
It's more of that little child's game hoping to cause a moderator to come and clean up the thread and remove posts in blocks. It hides rank incompetence.
 
Le Baron said:
I was addressing exactly that. Opinions are just utterances without recourse to any sort of evidential basis. It's usually why I discount them. Don't try and clever-talk me though because it won't work. Throwing little world-salads to deflect questions. Answer the questions. If you're going to quote someone, expect to be asked to explain yourself. That 'I post as and when I wish' doesn't cut it. If you don't want to be asked to explain, don't quote people.
Click to expand...
"What is Evidence" thread might help you. Linking to other opinions on the internet isn't evidential.

Le Baron said:
It's more of that little child's game hoping to cause a moderator to come and clean up the thread and remove posts in blocks. It hides rank incompetence.
Click to expand...
A 1960s head teacher grade tut-tutting.
 
klfrs said:
A "What is Evidence" thread might help you. Linking to other opinions on the internet isn't evidential.
Click to expand...
If you want a course, you'll have to pay me for it. I am saying stuff on a forum. It is based upon rigorous academic work, not 'opinions on the internet'. If you want to counter it, you are the one who will have to read up and then formulate arguments. I (and Ks and SuperBigote previously, and Klassik and laughingboy) do assist by highlighting key topics, terminology and authors and places. That's quite enough.
 
klfrs said:
A military grade tut-tutting.
Click to expand...
A prime example of what I was referring to? If you put away the pointless quips it might get somewhere. If you aren't interested in the topics and can't engage with them, there's no point entering the discussion. No-one's paying you to save them.
 
klfrs said:
I missed the link to your primary souce. Could you post again please?
Click to expand...
You're taking the mick I see. Are you planning on sifting through a backlog of economics papers from, say, the University of Missouri-Kansas City since the middle 90s? And yes, that was mentioned as a source of academic work.
Like I said, the work is yours, not mine. If you can't engage perhaps you ought to pipe down down and read for a while until you can.
 
klfrs said:
A "What is Evidence" thread might help you. Linking to other opinions on the internet isn't evidential.
Click to expand...
I have not relied on other opinions on the internet, that tax does not fund our government spending is true by logic, by definition and by observation.

So far you haven’t even been able to form an opinion to contradict that statement, let alone any evidence. There is plenty to chose from on the internet, if you were trying to make some sort of point against the actual post, you would have found one by now, perhaps of you’d done so before you posted, you might at least be able to say you were addressing the post, but it is clear now that such was not your intention.

If you have anything to say about anything I have actually posted, and if you ask in good faith, I will respond accordingly. Otherwise, I will not.
 
ks.234 said:
This is a tired old tactic, to ask an irrelevant question, then despite any number of attempts to answer it directly, you claim it hasn’t been answered because it doesn’t address the irrelevance of the question. The way forward has been answered time and time again. If you can only see a way forward that is in a vote for a mainstream political party, that’s up to you. But, for a recognition that tax does not fund government spending, the answer is not there.


I note your carefully worded sentence, so I will have to ask exactly what you mean by the “national credit card notion is bollocks”.

What is this “notional credit card notion” of which you speak, and how is it “bollocks”



A government that isn’t elected on known lies
Click to expand...
The main question I asked is not irrelevant, nor is it any kind of tactic. It is a question put forward in good faith. I’m interested in reality and the way forward.

I did not refer to a “notional credit card notion”, what I referred to was the existence of a “national credit card”. As for what that is and why it is bollocks....well, the notion of there existing a national credit card as mentioned by Sunak in 2 recent tv debates implying this is the same as an individual’s credit card is bollocks.
 
Brian said:
The main question I asked is not irrelevant, nor is it any kind of tactic. It is a question put forward in good faith. I’m interested in reality and the way forward.
Click to expand...
Thank you, and I appreciate you have not had a specific answer, to a specific question, but you have had a response which at least addresses the question. If it is still not what you’re after, I really can’t add anything to what I’ve already said. I agree with you that there is not a political party that agrees with my views.

I did not refer to a “notional credit card notion”, what I referred to was the existence of a “national credit card”. As for what that is and why it is bollocks....well, the notion of there existing a national credit card as mentioned by Sunak in 2 recent tv debates implying this is the same as an individual’s credit card is bollocks.
Click to expand...
Thank you again, I have been going on about Sunak an his national credit card and wasn’t sure it you meant him or me. My apologies.
 
ks.234 said:
Thank you, and I appreciate you have not had a specific answer, to a specific question, but you have had a response which at least addresses the question. If it is still not what you’re after, I really can’t add anything to what I’ve already said. I agree with you that there is not a political party that agrees with my views.


Thank you again, I have been going on about Sunak an his national credit card and wasn’t sure it you meant him or me. My apologies.
Click to expand...
You lost me with the 2nd paragraph.

Anyway, I too have earlier mentioned Sunak and his nonsense about the national credit card.

Tory Leadership Runners and Riders
 
doctorf said:
Can you give an example of a country using MMT as their economic model?
Click to expand...

That's a fair question, and the simple answer is there isn't one. Some countries though have given themselves over to Statism and printed loads of money, and have consequently enjoyed high levels of inflation and falling living standards e.g. Venezuela.
 
Kirk said:
That's a fair question, and the simple answer is there isn't one. Some countries though have given themselves over to Statism and printed loads of money, and have consequently enjoyed high levels of inflation and falling living standards e.g. Venezuela.
Click to expand...
If you are trying to draw a line between MMT and inflation, it is wrong. There are many causes of inflation and few of them are as simple as the usual “printing money” trope.

Weimar hyperflation for example was not due to printing too much money, it was to do with shortages, and those shortages has a lot to do with reparations and seizure of German assets. Venezula was subject to repeated economic attacks from the US.

The fact is that MMT is a description of money flow, it describes how money flows in this country. MMT also describes how to control our inflation better than we are managing at the moment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top