piddlywiddly
Player Valuation: £500k
.....he is a 'proper' economist and apparently government ministers are reluctant to debate with him because he has a real intellect..
You literally cannot be serious?
.....he is a 'proper' economist and apparently government ministers are reluctant to debate with him because he has a real intellect..
Ok. In regards to your post
My argument is, Well at least he is an economist, as opposed to an historian without any qualifications in maths higher than an O level
You literally cannot be serious?
TBH - I feel when elected most of the have their head suck up the middle of it!Does he scratch his left cheek or right cheek?
4 year old article written by the Deputy Editor of the Telegraph.
Very objective.
The point being that regardless of who you support or vote for, you can't simply criticise the opposition when you know full well your own man is as guilty.
4 year old article written by the Deputy Editor of the Telegraph.
Very objective.
and therefore the factual content is irrelevant because the content doesn't suit your political agenda?
But he isn't as guilty. I have criticised Osborne and his party for many things Balls has not been guilty of. You seem absolutely intent on proving that Balls isn't up to the job. He may well not be, but compared to the current Chancellor, his experience thus far (which other posters have elaborated on) would suggest otherwise. You argument here is that we cannot criticise the current Chancellor without criticising a man who has never been Chancellor?
If there was any factual content then that would be fine, however it's an opinion piece no more relevent than your or my view of Ed Balls.
.....don't shoot the messenger, apparently he's very highly rated as an economic gnu.
If Balls has learned everything he knows from Gordon Brown then you should probably read this, from This Is Money - A Daily Mail publication no less.
Gordon Brown is bad-mouthed in Britain but he's an economic hero. It's time to listen to him
By WILLIAM KEEGAN
PUBLISHED: 21:57, 2 June 2013 | UPDATED: 17:04, 3 June 2013
Although it is by now widely accepted that Gordon Brown did this country a great service in keeping our economy out of the eurozone, the sad truth is that one of our former prime minister’s other great causes has been sidelined, and as a result both the UK and the eurozone are suffering more economic hardship than is necessary.
I refer to Brown’s championing, at a national and international level, of a Keynesian approach to economic policy.
Domestically, this essentially involves concentrating on balancing the economy, rather than the budget.
Internationally it means regular consultation and co-ordination, so that different economies can conduct economic policy in a way that benefits each and every one of them, and does not involve a ‘beggar my neighbour’ approach.
The great lesson of the interwar years – a lesson which Keynesians hoped would never be forgotten – was that an obsession with balancing the budget can reinforce the natural tendency of a capitalist or market economy to settle at a level well below the full employment of the workforce and of the resources of plant, machinery and the various service sectors which make up a modern economy.
By intervening to boost demand when resources lie idle, governments can balance the budget at a much higher level of output.
For all the bad-mouthing he suffered in this country during his ill-fated premiership, Gordon Brown was considered a hero by Presidents Obama and Sarkozy.
He was the driving force behind the recapitalisation of the Western banking system in 2008.
And, as chairman of the Group of 20 in April 2009, he masterminded the combined ‘stimulus’ – of tax cuts, spending increases and augmentation of the resources of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund – which arrested the dramatic decline in world trade that year.
That was the high point of international economic policy co-ordination in this relatively young century.
After the stimulus was agreed at the London G20 Summit, Brown tried to persuade Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, to build on this by signing up to a global economic growth target.
She refused, and proceeded to be a champion of the programme of austerity which has been impoverishing so many citizens of southern Europe, and whose ramifications are even beginning to drag down Germany’s own economic performance.
Merkel was not the sole culprit. The European Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund were all in it together as preachers of austerity.
It is all very well for the ECB President Mario Draghi to promise to do ‘whatever it take’ to preserve the eurozone; but, unfortunately, it is a eurozone whose design is faulty, indeed pre-Keynesian, in the way it demands spending cuts and tax increases of economies that are already on their knees.
By not signing up to the eurozone, the UK has at least been able to adjust its exchange rate to the realities of its uncompetitive trading position. The Greeks, the Italians, the Spanish and even the French cannot do that.
But merely to air the subject of overvalued exchange rates and competitive devaluation – the Chinese, the Japanese, even the Americans seem to be happy to tolerate exchange rate depreciation – suggests there is a woeful lack of demand in the world economy. We cannot all devalue against Mars in order to boost exports and output.
After the Second World War policymakers were mindful of the social and economic horrors that can arise from protectionist pressures, and designed rules for international policy co-ordination which lasted for many decades.
Even after the breakup in the early 1970s of what was known as the Bretton Woods system, the spirit of such co-operation lingered on at the many international meetings attended by financial journalists over the years.
That spirit needs to be revived!
Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/...d-hes-economic-hero-others.html#ixzz3XNiK3rFl
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
You are of course suggesting that nothing in that article is true? Fair enough, not a debate i can therefore continue in.