Tax cuts for the rich, hurrah!

[JohnD]

I like the idea of a new national energy company where prices will be lower and profits kept by the British tax payer, rather than share holders.

You probably have something in common with many others.

Support for bringing energy companies back into public ownership

To what extent would you support or oppose bringing energy companies back into public ownership?

yougov.co.uk

Perhaps Truss will have the same idea. Who knows.

 

[motorbiking]

The problem with state run monopolies though is they tend to forget what the objective is and go all public sector p***ing money away on pointless projects.

But again - this is not what Sir K is promising apparently (i.e. not a supplier).

 

[Justin Passing]

Nationalising things is definitely attractive, I'd like very much to see "us" own our own energy, transport, ports, comms, medicine manufacture. And train and plane manufacture, and buses, and cars, and computers and phones and, hang on a minute, that's what Russia tries to do.

How well could we make our own comms equipment? Isn't it better to get other people to fight between themselves and come up with the best offer?
So, how far back up that chain of supplied stuff - and services too, do you want to go? Is it better to be less efficient than the best in the market, or to use one and pay them a profit?

Whichever, it's easy to bang the table and say it's not right.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

Nationalising things is definitely attractive, I'd like very much to see "us" own our own energy, transport, ports, comms, medicine manufacture. And train and plane manufacture, and buses, and cars, and computers and phones and, hang on a minute, that's what Russia tries to do.

How well could we make our own comms equipment? Isn't it better to get other people to fight between themselves and come up with the best offer?
So, how far back up that chain of supplied stuff - and services too, do you want to go? Is it better to be less efficient than the best in the market, or to use one and pay them a profit?

Whichever, it's easy to bang the table and say it's not right.

Personally. I think power (electric, gas, water) and probably major transport (train) should be state owned and run. Whether that is in competition against other suppliers or on its own doesn't really bother me.

pretty much everything else should or can be open to the market and it's forces.

so everyday essentials versus everything else

 

[ajohn]

I don't approve or disapprove. I like the idea of a new national energy company where prices will be lower and profits kept by the British tax payer, rather than share holders.

Fact is the entire utility area is questionable. Not just in terms of where profits go but also the fact that we are paying their corporation tax and indirectly supporting their debt. There is also evidence that the gov still interferers with what they do - seen as problem when things are nationalised eg adding subsidies rather than increasing prices. Not shedding labour when needed. The other aspect such as for ever manufacturing BT phones is seen as being due to the direction they were given. There is no reason why a privatised BT shouldn't expand in the same way. Effectively they need to be run as businesses by suitable people. Competitiveness in terms of exports will still be a problem but what solution to all sorts of things is perfect - generally none. Some still buy BT phones, some buy others. Where are BT phones made? Mine doesn't say. Do they export any or even try? All business decisions.

Say the gov owned BP.. They could dictate where the profits went. Say they bought it and did that. Share prices would fall but who cares. That doesn't matter unless they sell it. If they did they wouldn't be listed anyway. They could also cream off the profits. That is what Norway did. Fance owns EDF. Germany owns some of it's railway.They also subsidise it somewhat. There can be good reasons for that - to cover uneconomic areas to level out prices for all. Subsidy can also be good for votes - not so good. A look at the council house accounts when there was loads of them might be interesting. There are still businesses maintaining them - where I found a plasterer from recently. Someone around the corner works for them and I asked if he knew a plasterer. Some one from the same company arrived. Are the tenants covering the costs? Maybe they can't now.

 

[Justin Passing]

Personally. I think power (electric, gas, water) and probably major transport (train) should be state owned and run. Whether that is in competition against other suppliers or on its own doesn't really bother me.

pretty much everything else should or can be open to the market and it's forces.

so everyday essentials versus everything else

If they're state owned and run as you put it, they can't really in a competitive marketplace..

A personal niggle is NHS drugs, Most are off patent, so why don't we make most of them, and sell them at a profit, rather than pay factories around the world to make them. We've got a massive single customer!! Plent of factories in Europe, not just 3rd world. Same with all that med eqpt you get in hospitals. I saw one thing that was French. I asked if they had a different one to use. But I was asking a Filipino. You can tell where I spend time.

The energy thing is something I'd like to know more about. We don't (mostly) drill our own oil, that's some independent company; but then what, who gets paid where to get it to our doors exactly... I did look a little, a while ago. It's not dead simple!

 

[ajohn]

Corbyn's point was competing with China. Only gov's can do that on infrastructure and that may need borrowing. There is also the privatisation issues.
Internet ideas. From his own lips. Hoped to involve Virgin. Chuck in the money and probably tell him to get on with it. A business plan can be formulated from that including any debt. Make it free - well that would have to be paid for somehow. Vrigin has a lot of higher end stuff anyway. BT pokes around with land lines and looks after major highways. Fact is the entire lot needs updating if we are to have state of the art internet. So say Virgin runs the lot. Given the set up he can't charge what ever he likes.: Maybe he will go on strike.

Only thing is it might cause problems with server farms - SEP maybe. Pass.

 

[ajohn]

We've got a massive single custome

And that gets us discounts much to the disgust of some US senators.

 

[blup]

The mechanics of fiat economies like the UK can be boiled down to this:

. Govt spends £s into existence
. Those £s are used (or saved)
. Each time they are used they attract taxation
. All govt spending, except that which is saved, eventually returns to the Exchequer

Inflation isn't simply a matter of the number of £s in existence.

Even more simply: Govt spending injects £s, taxation drains £s.

Here goes...

Government created currency is supposedly inherently worthless, at least since it ceased to be linked to the value of gold. But gold is not intrinsically valuable, it is more like a sophisticated form of barter. So, spending £s created by government only has a value in the context of supply and demand.

Taxation of £x of spending occurs over a very long period of time as the net spend reduces with each act of taxation. So very slow catch up.

Ultimately a fiat-based currency is only as successful as the faith people put in it, and they will quickly lose faith if it shows signs of not working, such as hyperinflation.

Like religion, whether God objectively exists or not, He exists if enough people believe in him, and act on that faith. But when doubts arise, or the orthodoxy is challenged, all hell breaks loose.

Blup

 

[wellyfish]

Here goes...

Government created currency is supposedly inherently worthless, at least since it ceased to be linked to the value of gold. But gold is not intrinsically valuable, it is more like a sophisticated form of barter. So, spending £s created by government only has a value in the context of supply and demand.

Taxation of £x of spending occurs over a very long period of time as the net spend reduces with each act of taxation. So very slow catch up.

Ultimately a fiat-based currency is only as successful as the faith people put in it, and they will quickly lose faith if it shows signs of not working, such as hyperinflation.

Like religion, whether God objectively exists or not, He exists if enough people believe in him, and act on that faith. But when doubts arise, or the orthodoxy is challenged, all hell breaks loose.

Blup

Yeah, fiat money is not commodity-based so it's not convertible to anything (gold, silver etc.) Obviously the £ is a fiat currency which is controlled by the UK government.

People are free to use whatever means of exchange they like but, ultimately, if you live in the UK you will have to use £s. Why?

Because the £ is the generally accepted unit of account, means of exchange and store of value in the UK and, crucially, all taxes have to be paid in £s.

So, as long as the UK govt imposes taxes (and it always will) the £ will be in use and have 'value'.

Taxation occurs over a long period? Not really. Taxation is anything that reduces demand.

A simple example:

. I spend £100 in Tesco
. Depending on what I've bought, some of that £100 may attract VAT
. Tesco use some of that £100 to pay their staff
. The staff pay income tax/NI on their salary
. The staff then spend their salary etc. and round it goes
. Every stage attracts taxation

There's also stuff like capital gains, stamp duty, inheritance tax, tv licence, fines etc and pretty much any other charges govt levy.

Hyperinflation: Yeah, it's never 'printing money' on it's own that causes currency collapse. That's a simplistic & reductive narrative. There's always some or all of the following:

. Production collapse
. Political instability/corruption
. Continued deficit spending