Comments by "David McCulloch" (@davidmcculloch8490) on "Richard J Murphy" channel.

  1. The term 'responsible capitalism' describes a noble aspiration, but it's proving to be an oxymoron with the irresponsible idiots in charge.
    15
  2. A great explanation. Prof Bill Mitchell (in his book Reclaiming the State) refers to this limit as the productive resources, which probably amounts to the same thing. He also wisely differentiates between the real economy and the financial one. If we spend wisely, such as on the infrastructure and green investment, we not only address under-employment but also help to mitigate climate change.
    15
  3. The best news I've heard or read in the last few years. The neoliberal model, propped up by government sociopathy, has failed. The city of London is a club, with its own unelected representative taking a seat in parliament behind the speaker's chair. We need economics for society, and not to preserve the wealth and power of the few. Voices of learning and reason should be consulted by government and listened to. Time for change... We really haven't had enough of experts, as Brexit has proved beyond doubt.
    14
  4. To my knowledge, no government has been brave enough to embrace MMT, probably to maintain the status quo and preserve inequality by keeping power in the hands of the financial sector. I first became aware of MMT by reading Reclaiming the State (Mitchell and Fazi). Neoliberalism has suppressed growth by creatiing inequality and we need a government brave enough to reverse it.
    14
  5. The excuse of tax and spend, used to excuse austerity is the exact opposite of reality: which is spend and tax
    14
  6. Whereas letting the economy collapse? Who would have suffered most?
    14
  7. Trump lives on planet Ego and is consumed by greed.
    14
  8. This commentary hits the nail on the head. It's all about power and the preservation of failed neoliberalism. The main reason why no government is brave enough to implement MMT (imo) is fear: that the financial markets will rail against it. There is a good reason why Mitchell and Fazi titled their early book on MMT "Reclaiming the State". It's the antidote for neoliberalism, and the best potential solution to its inevitable scourge of inequality, which coincidentally suppresses growth.
    14
  9. Using interest rates as the sole tool to control cost-push inflation is like a golfer playing a national championship with a single club in their bag. (To paraphrase Ted Heath.) When Gordon Brown gave this power to the BofE, I could see the benefit of depoliticising it and involving professionals. Unfortunately said professionals applied too light a touch and allowed greed to cause the banking crash. Giving politicians an excuse to blame someone else is always dangerous, so, yes, on balance, government should be involved in setting interest rates. Currently, we work for banks instead of them working for society.
    13
  10. A great message. Time to think of others and replace greed with compassion and a sense of community.
    13
  11. Absolutely true...a nation of cap doffers. We need to develop bullsh1t detectors and engage critical thinking.
    12
  12. Totally agree and love the fact that you adopt MMT. One of the great gaps in Labour was the fact that they did not advocate MMT principles. Your explanations are clear and concise.
    12
  13. The man named after a giant fart will be a disaster for the environment. Let's listen for the Tories denouncing his "protectionist" policies. Don't hold your breath...
    12
  14. I couldn't agree more. FPTP is simply undemocratic in my view: there is no such thing as unrepresentative democracy. The party whip is a further impediment to democracy, particularly if it is overused. Seeing compromise as a dirty word may suit oligarch media owners but it is folly because life is a series of compromises in the pursuit of peace, happiness and improvement.
    12
  15. Indeed. Teaching critical thinking would be a good start. Albeit against the interests of dodgy politicians.
    12
  16. ​​ @adenwellsmith6908 You have identified a deliberate weakness: in the method of accounting. Why is a balance sheet not published, showing state asset values? Fixation on "debt" (largely indebtedness to ourselves) is designed to keep us compliant with the propaganda of neoliberalism.
    11
  17. Couldn't agree more, Richard. It's what makes us human. Greed is not good; ambition is. Many of us find ultimate pleasure in helping others. Some work extremely hard for the benefit of society.
    10
  18. Unfortunately government constrains us by failing to subscribe to MMT (modern monetary theory) as explained here. Why? I suspect it's about keeping control in the hands of banks to protect the wealth of the few. Why must we work for the benefit of the financial sector when it should work for society? A further dilemma on the state balance sheet is the lack of assets. We have sold them off and most are owned by private companies and foreign governments. This means that we need to use an overdraft for investment, to stimulate growth. Many say that Brown sold off the gold. More serious imo is that Thatcher started a fire sale of our national infrastructure. It was sold far too cheaply for the benefit of private profit and the lie of trickle down.
    10
  19. Singapore will verify your claim. Spot on
    10
  20. ​ @Leapops never assume that intelligence is commensurate with wealth.
    10
  21. PFI was a wheeze recommended by business consultants to keep asset values off balance sheet. A wheeze that has cost us far more than "borrowing" through bond issues.
    10
  22. My summary of Westminster government is: being seen to do something; rarely the right thing; never enough. Devolution was the right thing, so Westminster did a half-arsed job to keep hold of the strings.
    10
  23. It's always the same question: stupidity or playing dumb to con the public? Either way, politicians follow a narrative that harms prosperity for the majority. Intentionally or inadvertently? Who do they work for?
    10
  24. Indicative these numbers may be but the fact that the government doesn't think things through is irrefutable.
    9
  25. This is the price of an elective dictatorship, where seats don't match votes so that votes are not equal. With true PR, a party with less than half the vote share would never have a majority of seats, and would have to work in partnership or by consensus.
    9
  26. Absolutely sound idea and the present level of permitted opacity is alarming. It's as though we are inviting corrupt practices to suit dodgy people in business. Wait a minute! Who funds these parties? Do they work for the people? Without transparency, democracy is a myth.
    9
  27. Small state gives us inferior health and education. Since when has society prospered with that? We need change, and your explanation is poignant.
    9
  28. Which politician will be brave enough to listen and modernise education? Gove promised to "drive up standards" with more reliance on learning by rote and exams. This was after Blair had appointed an ex school chief inspector who proposed less reliance on exams and greater use of a more flexible syllabus marked by teacher assessment. (Which Blair inevitably ignored.) Add to this economic and social inequality, damaging the planet's survival for greed, and how do we expect to fill our youth with hope?
    9
  29. I can think of another word beginning with D to describe Trump: Deranged. He simply lives in an alternate reality.
    9
  30. So accurate. We have a voting system that enables what Lord Hailsham called an elective dictatorship. A parliament that serves as a House of Lies, lacking effective scrutiny. How can we expect anything else when a manifesto is not a contract? Currently the best and most accurate summary on YouTube. Please keep up your good work.
    8
  31. The further problem of financialisation adds to this imbalance. When leading companies, such as Apple and Pfizer, spend more on share buy backs than on R&D we see the value of financial services to society being little more than a casino. Yet politicians talk about productivity...
    8
  32. Presumably, accounting priciples were designed when smaller entities created the majority of world trade. Today the larger companies thrive on opacity, as the rules have become outdated. It's hard to analyse a complex mass; instead it must be broken down into its component parts. It's impossible to get fair play if the most powerful set the rules. A great video by a true professional seeking justice and social fairness. Highly informative, as ever.
    8
  33. Thank you, Richard. I've been aware of your work for a few years and find it valuable and informative. If you help people to cut through the political smoke and mirrors, and discover the false narratives on macro economics, you have helped society in the most effective way possible through your specialist knowledge. You are a great human being and I appreciate your work.
    8
  34. Calling newly-created money part of the national debt is crazy for the reasons you have explained before: how can we borrow from ourselves? This is further exacerbated by allowing commercial banks to issue the money and charge interest on the balancing amount on their books. The Tories created new money to fill holes, and this ended up in banks for use by the wealthiest for asset ownership and rental. If we issued new money specifically for rebuilding our infrastructure, this would cut out the easy route to inequality where we are blackmailed by corporate interests and our politicians are subservient to them.
    8
  35. I first became aware of MMT by reading Reclaiming the State by Mitchell and Fazi. Using the economy for the benefit of society is a novel idea and far removed from neoliberalism. If only...
    8
  36. Which is also stifling growth.
    8
  37. ​ @mdt105 The cut to winter fuel payments was a novice error. Instead increase the windfall tax on energy companies or cap fuel energy prices properly.
    8
  38. Definitely robotic. Clueless or bribed?
    8
  39. Very true observation of our economy in general, being inward looking and recycling old assets. We don't invest in ourselves as a country.
    8
  40. And this time, leaving the door open to fascists
    8
  41. Interesting account name: pseudonym or troll?
    8
  42. The danger is in taking things at face value imo. As Gary Stevenson has observed: economics uses complex models, often applied to flawed assumptions. Assumptions and constraints are key.
    7
  43. A great, and concise, explanation of MMT. I'm also an advocate after reading Reclaiming the State by Mitchell and fazi. It's a pity that none of our political parties are brave enough to explode the myth on tax and spend. That said, the Tories won't because the class war of austerity is in their DNA.
    7
  44. And how would that benefit you or anyone else?
    7
  45. I once heard a parallel argument that the majority are always wrong. The reasoning being that it takes someone thinking or acting differently to change the course of events or to invent something useful. There is too much conformity and mediocrity around us. Your videos are an inspiration and a breath of fresh air.
    7
  46. Indeed. A pretence at democracy.
    7
  47. Cutting interest rates? Yes. Also targeted government investment in infrastructure and key services. Yet my concern is that lower interest rates will drive up house prices unless the government invests in quality social housing and caps private rents.
    7
  48. The last part is not necessarily true: it depends on relative valuations.
    7
  49. Cameron, Osborne and Hunt. The three sociopathic bringers of austerity and economic incompetence. Sorry, Major was the last decent person in charge of the Tories imo.
    7
  50. No. That's the antithesis. Listen again and you will understand why.
    7