For other types of media
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
#319024
Tubby Isaacs wrote:And the venture capitalists can get money off us.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econ ... -cuts.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Or as Heath puts it, we can reduce the size of the state.
The Office for Budget Responsibility has run various scenarios as part of its Fiscal Sustainability Report. Its central projection is that health spending will rise from 6.8pc of GDP in 2016-17 to 9.1pc by 2061-62 as the population ages. Even such a modest rise would devastate the public finances.
10. Most controversially of all, the only way we are going to spend more on health without bankrupting the state is to encourage the public to pay more itself, as already happens in almost every other country. We need a European-style, insurance-based universal health system, with co-payments by those who can afford it and much greater private provision.
So Heath's solution to prevent people having to spend more on health is to get people to spend more on health.

But of course expanding growth in private health is all free money.
By new puritan
Membership Days Posts
#319090
It's always pretty funny when Allister Heath of all people bangs on about state largesse. He edits City AM, for fuck's sake. His readership have had trousered no shortage of state handouts themselves over the last five years or so.
By new puritan
Membership Days Posts
#319172
Of course Telegraph readers have got it all sussed out.
quartz
14 minutes ago
I agree, they should start by sending all muslim aliens back to their countries of origin...

BLiar and gang extolled all the virtues they would bring with them - well, all I have seen are curry cafes and I wouldn't be seen dead in one of those - who knows whose cat or dog you could be eating - or even how many times a piece of meat has cycled thru the system.

That's do for starters.
nickleiden
5 minutes ago
We cannot send Muslim residents back but we must stop asylum seekers from Muslim countries (22k per year) being allowed in. By definition all women in Muslim countries should be entitled to sanctuary but not in my books. We should stop all Muslim faith schools as they just propogate ignorance and a culture of failure and therfore disharmony.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#323569
Heath- computers will get rid of lefty "technophobe" teachers and shake up university so that only the top remain... like Oxbridge which will presumably chuck out its tutorial system and become like some online people.

Getting a universal kicking.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/news ... hobes.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
By canus insanus
Membership Days
#323577
new puritan wrote:Of course Telegraph readers have got it all sussed out.
quartz
14 minutes ago
I agree, they should start by sending all muslim aliens back to their countries of origin...

BLiar and gang extolled all the virtues they would bring with them - well, all I have seen are curry cafes and I wouldn't be seen dead in one of those - who knows whose cat or dog you could be eating - or even how many times a piece of meat has cycled thru the system.

That's do for starters.
nickleiden
5 minutes ago
We cannot send Muslim residents back but we must stop asylum seekers from Muslim countries (22k per year) being allowed in. By definition all women in Muslim countries should be entitled to sanctuary but not in my books. We should stop all Muslim faith schools as they just propogate ignorance and a culture of failure and therfore disharmony.
Well there's a pair of cunts I'd like to see on the next flight to Harare, one way only.
Canus Insanus 1 minute ago
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#329104
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econ ... lture.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The rest of the UK needs to copy London's capitalist culture
Obviously the fact my part of London has loads of estate agents doing brisk business (despite the poverty) is down to the "capitalist culture" they don't have in eg poor parts of Stoke or Merthyr.

Something for everyone here. People can hate the lazy northerners and also foreigner-infested London. It's all about strong opinions in Clickbait World.
 
By youngian
Membership Days Posts
#329117
Tubby Isaacs wrote:Heath- computers will get rid of lefty "technophobe" teachers and shake up university so that only the top remain... like Oxbridge which will presumably chuck out its tutorial system and become like some online people.
Not a shred of evidence to back up his Luddite teacher theory. And I can't see his theory going down well with Telegraph readers who lament the lack of teachers with canes and mortar boards writing with chalk on blackboards.
By new puritan
Membership Days Posts
#329119
Shockingly, public spending is equivalent to more than half of GDP in the North East, North West, Yorkshire and Humberside, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, according to an analysis of the 2010-11 data by the Centre for Economics and Business Research. So even if businesses are doing better, overall spending in those regions will remain depressed as the state retrenches.

Paradoxically, while these parts of the UK were flooded with public spending during Gordon Brown’s reckless splurge, giving them a short-term boost, this also crowded out their private sectors, undermining their long-term prosperity and camouflaging the decline of manufacturing.
Oh my fucking god. Hundreds of billions thrown at his fucking useless City mates when they got themselves in the shit and apparently it's the rest of us who are mollycoddled by the state. Fuck off.
By new puritan
Membership Days Posts
#332792
More Thatcherite theology from Heath. Syria needs liberal capitalism, apparently, as if the latest global crisis of liberal capitalism didn't play any part in triggering the Arab Spring in the first place.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econ ... siles.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The best explanation of what is going wrong in Syria and why the Arab Spring has turned into a bloody winter of discontent can be found in Why Nations Fail: the Origins of Power, Prosperity and Poverty, a fascinating tome by two US economists, Daron Acemoglu and James A Robinson, which ought to be on everybody’s reading list at the Foreign Office. The book, one of the best written on economics in recent years, has a thesis that is as simple as it is powerful. Countries can be divided into two broad groups, it argues, depending on economic and political structures.

The first, small but fortunate group of countries includes Britain, other Western economies and countries such as Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, South Korea, Japan and Botswana. These nations have in common something that is far more important than their differences: inclusive economic institutions that encourage and incentivise the vast majority to take part in freely chosen economic activities that make the best use of their talents, skills and interests.

Such benign economic institutions include secure and well-respected property rights; a good, reliable and trusted system of law and order, upholding the sanctity of contracts; a decent infrastructure; a sound and supportive regulatory framework for markets; low barriers to entry that allow individuals and firms to enter new markets and compete with incumbents; and access to education and economic opportunity for the great majority of the public.
I'd be fascinated to learn more about these 'inclusive economic institutions' which apparently played such a crucial and 'benign' role in the rise of British capitalism. Also, it's pretty baffling that the state-led conservative corporatism of Japan, South Korea and Singapore is lumped together with the British/Australian/NZ model as if they're one and the same (even though modern-day liberal capitalist countries have historically been happy to resort to protectionism when it suited).

This, however, is actually quite an accurate description of actually-existing capitalism as most people around the world experience it:
By contrast, the second group of countries, which include Syria, Egypt and all of the other failed states globally, have been saddled with what Acemoglu and Robinson describe as extractive political institutions. These are deliberately designed to grab the incomes and wealth generated by the economy for the benefit a small elite and are buttressed by equally extractive political institutions which have handed all the power to these same few, with limited or no checks and balances and no rule of law. In these countries, the best and often only way to get rich is to have good connections and to exploit the power of the state to crush competitors.

Supposedly private firms don’t stay ahead because they provide the best products but because they have friends in high places, are able to ensure that laws and red tape keep out competitors and pay bribes to grab all the best contracts.
 
By Tubby Isaacs
Membership Days Posts
#332826
Glad economic insitutions fix every thing. We had the same ones here as in Northern Ireland, but didn't stop 25 years of terrorism over there.

Actually perhaps Heath traces the problem in Northern Ireland to our being too socialist, and transferring money there.
Brexit Fuckwit Thread

Oh and why the fuck has no journalist covered t[…]

Europe? And the Future of Britain in Europe

Very good point re Brexit vox pops. https://twitt[…]

Fawning over the royal family

We know William and Harry are now despised but Phi[…]

Paul Thomas Redux

Could be worserer. According to Mac he had to prov[…]