Comments by "David McCulloch" (@davidmcculloch8490) on "TLDR News EU" channel.

Seems like a necessary step to stop the growth of a rentier economy but hard to do in isolation. Viewing a house as an investment rather than a place to live is deeply engrained in our mindset (certainly in the UK.) Probably because many would be reduced to poverty in old age without it.
36
Like everyone, she made mistakes. I found her humanity in the refugee crisis both brave and compelling. Compare her approach with Patel and Johnson - populist British leaders - and we find a true stateswoman in Merkel.
2
Surely the European Central Bank can simply "print" more money, as explained by MMT (modern monetary theory) to make up at least part of the contribution deficit and use this for EU projects. Tax and spend is an outdated concept that is often used as an excuse for austerity.
1
@stephenconway2468 I disagree about the exchange rate, at least beyond the very short term. It's a question of confidence: if the financial community sees issued money used for sensible investment, this will benefit the exchange rate. Austerity has certainly suppressed the exchange rate, say, in the UK.
1
@stephenconway2468 I understand your concerns and those of many traditional economists. Since opinion is divided, we can use Proof of the Pudding as a test. In a.period of 8 months last year, the BofE used QE to issue £450 billion, the £ remained stable. After the financial crash in 2008, QE was used and again the £ remained stable. The greatest shock to the £ was the Brexit vote. It's not populist politicians who like MMT, it's reforming politicians. The main fear is that it will be used to rebuild the state and venture capitalists may lose out. The EU is big enough to rides y storm, but I suspect not brave enough.
1
@stephenconway2468 ps QE is effectively a tool of MMT. It increases the money supply by creating a theoretical debt: where the left pocket owes the right pocket. I recommend Mitchell and Fazi on Reclaiming the State.
1
@stephenconway2468 WRONG! QE involves "printing" more money against newly issued bonds. In the same way, issuing money under MMT does not increase the national debt. It's precisely the same process. Where do you think the "existing money" comes from. As I said, read the work of Bill Mitchell or listen to the YouTube explanations of Richard Murphy.
1
@stephenconway2468 I have given you sources but can't add links to prove my reasoning. We did produce new money twice, in a small part to buy existing bonds but in the larger part newly-created government ones. It seems that we can use QE to prop up failing banks, or for furlough schemes, but not for forward development That's the real reason traditional economists rail against MMT - more control for the financial sector. We will never agree on this, as most economists can't. If the process worked as you describe, banks would have gone bust in 2008. We are a sovereign nation with the right to issue our own fiat currency, and we do when it suits us.
1
Another example that will be used to justify our archaic FPTP system. We should actually see this as a benefit: apart from compromise prohibiting extreme policies, the politicians can do less damage while deciding on government.
1
Hopefully, people are wakening to the fact that inequality is not inevitable. It's the product of neoliberalism, as planned in the 1947 meeting of the Mont Pelerin Society. Trickle-down was always a lie. Experience proves that wealth gushes up and drips down where they can't fix the leaks.
1