[Politics] Gary's Economics

[beorhthelm]

Please don’t think I’m trying to have a dig / I’m not. Truly.

A you articulate what you mean by the neoliberal consensus? In really simple terms?

just short hand for the liberal, free markets, globalisation, small state view of economics.

 

[Alex BH]

Don’t neoliberals just love ‘military interventions’ we’ll call it, here there and everywhere?

 

[London Irish]

I don’t understand why this geezer is getting all this exposure seemingly out of nowhere. I mean I like some of what he says, but I don’t like this look how working class I am I wear hoodies everywhere and don’t sit in chairs properly thing. The geezer must be absolutely loaded so what the heck is that all about. I’m very suspicious of him.

How do you cope in football crowds if you are suspicious of hoodies

 

[highflyer]

I don’t understand why this geezer is getting all this exposure seemingly out of nowhere. I mean I like some of what he says, but I don’t like this look how working class I am I wear hoodies everywhere and don’t sit in chairs properly thing. The geezer must be absolutely loaded so what the heck is that all about. I’m very suspicious of him.

He's been around for several years, certainly not 'out of nowhere", but I guess whatever he says is now resonating more and more with people. And his book doing well has brought him more attention. And he's probably getting better at saying what he says.

 

[Titanic]

If you can't sit through the whole 2.5 hours... just watch this summary... definitely thought provoking.

 

[RandyWanger]

I don’t understand why this geezer is getting all this exposure seemingly out of nowhere. I mean I like some of what he says, but I don’t like this look how working class I am I wear hoodies everywhere and don’t sit in chairs properly thing. The geezer must be absolutely loaded so what the heck is that all about. I’m very suspicious of him.

He's a plant.

 

[Guinness Boy]

He's a plant.

Venus fly trap? Or yukka?

 

[BadFish]

Gary talking about the diversion of immigration and how important it is to keep us divided, To me this is about the myth of the culture wars.

Many people for many years have been bemoaning the lack of an alternate voice that represents the people (to the point that they have clutched at the twin straws of Donald Trump and Nigel Farage to save them). Gary and the (seemingly*) growing number of economic and political commentators could be the answer we have been looking for.
*I say seemingly as they have probably been talking for years and i haven't noticed.

 

[BadFish]

What I find interesting about this stuff isn't explicitly stated as such but there seems to be a thread around the idea that to progress one must be entrepreneurial. Such people are lauded and highlighted as successes of our time. I can't help but wonder why these people with this personality type are the ones we choose, as a society to reward. This is over-simplified, but it does beg the question of how we decide which roles in our society we value and choose to reward with riches? The next question of course is how we look at changing those decisions.

 

[GoldstoneVintage]

What I find interesting about this stuff isn't explicitly stated as such but there seems to be a thread around the idea that to progress one must be entrepreneurial. Such people are lauded and highlighted as successes of our time. I can't help but wonder why these people with this personality type are the ones we choose, as a society to reward. This is over-simplified, but it does beg the question of how we decide which roles in our society we value and choose to reward with riches? The next question of course is how we look at changing those decisions.

Precisely. How can the current system be the right one when it rewards and gives immense power to the very worst kinds of people?

 

[BadFish]

Precisely. How can the current system be the right one when it rewards and gives immense power to the very worst kinds of people?

Perhaps it is not about giving power and wealth to people and more about them taking it (and never being satisfied)?

 

[BenGarfield]

His hearts in the right place but his basic diagram which he drew on the kitchen table has a false assumption that the money flows from the various groups in society to the government in the form of taxation on which government expenditure is dependent. Its the same old neo-liberal government is like a household myth dressed up in a trendy way. The govenment should address inequality by taxing the rich not because it needs their money but becaouse they are too rich and powerful. It can also make other groups more wealthy by introducing measures such as improving the heatlh service e.g. free dentistry and prescriptions, free social care for the elderly, massive house improvement and building programmes to provide cheap affordable housing, renationalising water, power and transport, abolishing NI contributions to reduce burden on small business, re-establishing proper sickness, disablement benefits, liberate local authorities from treasury straight jackets over their spending, council tax rates and borrowing limits. Abolish Bond issuance and set a zero rate of interest. Proper regional policy so that economic activity isnt concentrated in the south east. As famous Berwick resident, JM Keynes said "if we can do it, we can afford it"

 

[HeaviestTed]

I find him rather self-aggrandising - by various accounts he was not nearly as successful in his career as he likes to make out.

It is funny that when someone does a good job there is always someone who tries to find fault with their past - it reminds me of the “Rachel from accounts isn’t an economist because some random guy said she worked for him in retail banking” stuff.

 

[Mellotron]

If you can't sit through the whole 2.5 hours... just watch this summary... definitely thought provoking.

Been listening to that (via YouTube Premium) on my drive the last couple of days. An interesting, nuanced discussion between the two.

 

[schmunk]

It is funny that when someone does a good job there is always someone who tries to find fault with their past - it reminds me of the “Rachel from accounts isn’t an economist because some random guy said she worked for him in retail banking” stuff

Do you not think people should be held to account for the things they say and do? In Gary Stevenson's case it appears he has made several significant and specific lies about his background, both in the level of poverty/disadvantage of his childhood was and the success of his career - n.b. he only worked in banking for about 6 years, having been sidelined to Tokyo part way through, spending 6 months on sick leave and the last year in a middle/back office "admin job".

Rachel Reeves' CV exaggerations are noteworthy but not really in the same league. As for calling her "Rachel from accounts", what kind of wanker would do that?

 

[stewart12]

Not a new argument, but the policy hasn't been tried for 50 years.
Which for people of his age is like talking about the second world war to people of my age.

Quite. I'm 38 and have never experienced a government giving this a good go, and in fact whenever it's presented to the British public we actively vote against it

The concept of genuine wealth distribution that can adequately fund public services to a good level and provide better opportunities for normal working people is a pipe dream for me really

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Do you not think people should be held to account for the things they say and do? In Gary Stevenson's case it appears he has made several significant and specific lies about his background, both in the level of poverty/disadvantage of his childhood was and the success of his career - n.b. he only worked in banking for about 6 years, having been sidelined to Tokyo part way through, spending 6 months on sick leave and the last year in a middle/back office "admin job".

Rachel Reeves' CV exaggerations are noteworthy but not really in the same league. As for calling her "Rachel from accounts", what kind of wanker would do that?

Not sure why the character assassination is relevant in GS case.
He is proposing a very specific economic policy.

He did make money by betting against UK government economic policy, because he knew it was based on a false premise.
Nothing has changed in relation to government economic policy and the state of the economy.

Whether his version of his past is 100% bulletproof is pretty irrelevant isn't it?

 

[Machiavelli]

Please don’t think I’m trying to have a dig / I’m not. Truly.

A you articulate what you mean by the neoliberal consensus? In really simple terms?

The neoliberal consensus basically says 'markets are efficient' and 'governments are not' and, as a consequence, the government's role is to relinquish (the vast majority of) control over the economy, which means deregulation, privatisation and financialisation. That's what has been imposed upon most of the world for the past half century although as @highflyer indicates, there are plenty of (more) successful economies that have gone down -- or remained closer to -- different models.

 

[Machiavelli]

Don’t neoliberals just love ‘military interventions’ we’ll call it, here there and everywhere?

Nope. This is a myth, perpetrated by Marxists and those that like to bang on about 'the military-industrial complex'. Capitalism doesn't like wars because they're a departure from the operation of the free market and capital accumulation.

 

[Machiavelli]

I am yet to watch a podcast but have heard him contribute to a few news items; I doubt I will watch a podcast too.
But podcasts are popular and all to the good someone focusing on wealth inequality. I'd offer two things. First, if you really want to find out about anything reading is a better route than podcasts, because we absorb more information through reading than via any other format. Second, if you want to know about wealth inequality then Thomas Piketty is the go-to. Within that, if you want Piketty's solution then go straight to ch17 of Capital & Ideology.