Food poverty-the way out

[Jdsk]

"Shovel? You were lucky to 'ave shovel."

etc

: - )

Jonathan

[jois]

"Shovel? You were lucky to 'ave shovel."

etc

: - )

Jonathan

I had nicked the shovel from a road works. Whilst they were having a brew . Bet he spent a long time wondering how a shovel had disappeared from the bottom of a hole.

[Jdsk]

: - )

Jonathan

[mumbojumbo]

An earlier post asserted that there is no such thing as free lunch. That can be disproved by using an example. If food cooked in a restaurant,as about to be thrown away, and staff are invited to eat it or take home, than it is free ,as there is no alternative use placed in jeopardy

[pete75]

No one wants a return to those days, it was pretty hellish, but....your initial borrowing shrunk rapidly when rampant inflation struck, but wages and salaries did keep pace.

Apparently £200,000 mortgages are fairly common, scary as interest rates rise from absurdly low levels. Apparently people are dashing to get new fixed rates even before their deals are up.

Al

The recent "budget" is reminiscent of Barber's 1972 budget. That budget, along with the 1973 oil price rises, lay behind most of the problems of that decade.
Despite that the seventies were a decade of relative prosperity for very many working people and Britain was a far more egalitarian society than now. It was the eighties that started screwing things up and built the path leading to the impoverished state many working folk find themselves in today.

[pete75]

It's as well to recall that there is, famously, no such thing as a free lunch...

Like many a cliche, that's untrue.

[Mick F]

It was the eighties that started screwing things up and built the path leading to the impoverished state many working folk find themselves in today.

Eighties = Thatcherism.

[Biospace]

The recent "budget" is reminiscent of Barber's 1972 budget. That budget, along with the 1973 oil price rises, lay behind most of the problems of that decade.
Despite that the seventies were a decade of relative prosperity for very many working people and Britain was a far more egalitarian society than now. It was the eighties that started screwing things up and built the path leading to the impoverished state many working folk find themselves in today.

The better and more egalitarian aspects of the 70s were as much a result of a series of political and economic legacies from decades passed when the UK was still insulated against the world economy, or thought it was. Also, the gradual opening up of property ownership for the masses. Plenty of working people were financially ok in the 709s, but inflation was rapidly eroding savings of those who'd spent a life working hard and who'd put a little by for retirement, the nation's debt was spiralling and labour relations and productivity were poor.

The strict money controls of Thatcher's first phase would have been similar no matter what colour of government had won in 1979 given the involvement of the IMF. Excessive debt and inflation were brought under control and the driver of the successful German economy, small and medium size business, was massively encouraged.

The second half of the leadship went wrong progressively badly, her Spitting Image character was unswervingly accurate caricaturing her as a shell-shocked, out-of-control General who'd won bloody battles against those on her own side as well as the offficial enemies.

What surprised me most was the total lack of interest of the Labour party to undo even some of the most socially damaging policies.

What so few seem to mention is that increasing concentrations of wealth are indicative of money going into less productive resources - ownership of land and the subsequent charging of rents being more profitable than investing in productive labour. This retards economic productivity and growth, yet land continues to be free of inheritance tax.

[pete75]

The better and more egalitarian aspects of the 70s were as much a result of a series of political and economic legacies from decades passed when the UK was still insulated against the world economy, or thought it was. Also, the gradual opening up of property ownership for the masses. Plenty of working people were financially ok in the 709s, but inflation was rapidly eroding savings of those who'd spent a life working hard and who'd put a little by for retirement, the nation's debt was spiralling and labour relations and productivity were poor.

The strict money controls of Thatcher's first phase would have been similar no matter what colour of government had won in 1979 given the involvement of the IMF. Excessive debt and inflation were brought under control and the driver of the successful German economy, small and medium size business, was massively encouraged.

The second half of the leadship went wrong progressively badly, her Spitting Image character was unswervingly accurate caricaturing her as a shell-shocked, out-of-control General who'd won bloody battles against those on her own side as well as the offficial enemies.

What surprised me most was the total lack of interest of the Labour party to undo even some of the most socially damaging policies.

What so few seem to mention is that increasing concentrations of wealth are indicative of money going into less productive resources - ownership of land and the subsequent charging of rents being more profitable than investing in productive labour. This retards economic productivity and growth, yet land continues to be free of inheritance tax.

The most egalitarian aspect of the seventies was that the percentage of national income going to the poorest 20% was much higher than it is now and the percentage going to the richest 20% was much lower, that was nothing to do with Britain being insulated against the world economy even if it was, which is unlikely.
Debt as a proportion of GDP was much lower in the seventies than at any time in the past fifteen years and it was being brought down under Denis Healey's chancellorship as was inflation, down to 8.3% in 1978. The Tory party gained office in 1979 and, under them, inflation jumped to 18% in 1980.
You're right about the Thatcher government encouraging middle sized businesses. Under it many large manufacturing concerns ended up as middle sized or smaller.
What enabled the Tories in the eighties to pay off debt was the flogging off of many nationalised industries and North Sea oil revenues starting in a big way.

[Biospace]

The most egalitarian aspect of the seventies was that the percentage of national income going to the poorest 20% was much higher than it is now and the percentage going to the richest 20% was much lower, that was nothing to do with Britain being insulated against the world economy even if it was, which is unlikely.

A direct result of what had gone before, the enlightened policies of post-war governments. We were hugely insulated and protected compared with today, as the old nations of empire continued to purchase from us.

Debt as a proportion of GDP was much lower in the seventies than at any time in the past fifteen years and it was being brought down under Denis Healey's chancellorship as was inflation, down to 8.3% in 1978. The Tory party gained office in 1979 and, under them, inflation jumped to 18% in 1980.

The International Monetary Fund stepped in to loan us money and stabilise the economic mess we'd become, by the 1970s.

Debt is higher today because of the questionable propping up of the banks after the financial collapse 15 years ago and the more recent money printing to encourage people to stay locked up away from Covid-19, hospitals were quieter through the Spring and summer of 2020 than they are now. Both policies which struggle to justify themselves, when observed with all the facts available. I'm nearly convinced someone wants the Western economy to collapse completely.

You're right about the Thatcher government encouraging middle sized businesses. Under it many large manufacturing concerns ended up as middle sized or smaller.
What enabled the Tories in the eighties to pay off debt was the flogging off of many nationalised industries and North Sea oil revenues starting in a big way.

British Leyland springs to mind. The quality of its products had declined steadily as a result of the laziness associated with protected markets then long-term economic support as these dwindled (compare the three years VW was given by the Germans to turn their business around).

Many, many successful businesses were started in the 80s, many smaller ones have been dealt a death blow with the way we crashed the economy through the pandemic.

North Sea Oil revenues funded the high levels of unemployment as the economy 'adjusted' through the 80s. We weren't alone in closing old heavy industries which were being undercut by those in the Far East, but we did a more thorough job than most. Not so clever, in the long term.

[simonineaston]

A rare gift to the opposition.

[Vorpal]

North Sea Oil revenues funded the high levels of unemployment as the economy 'adjusted' through the 80s. We weren't alone in closing old heavy industries which were being undercut by those in the Far East, but we did a more thorough job than most. Not so clever, in the long term.

But now, they are funding nothing because the oil & gas companies have paid no taxes the last few years.

[Biospace]

North Sea Oil revenues funded the high levels of unemployment as the economy 'adjusted' through the 80s. We weren't alone in closing old heavy industries which were being undercut by those in the Far East, but we did a more thorough job than most. Not so clever, in the long term.

But now, they are funding nothing because the oil & gas companies have paid no taxes the last few years.

The way we've dealt with energy companies and developed a complete lack of energy security is a lesson in how not to do it, in my view. But we're not the only country whose governments bend to the will of the oil giants, similarly with Big Tech and Big Pharma. Just that the oil giants have been around a little longer, so know how to exert the maximum pressure.

[Jdsk]

Today's ONS figures for the Consumer Price Index:

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/inflatio ... ion/latest

Jonathan

[Jdsk]

NB date.

Roughly how low could we drop per capita GDP and provide acceptable levels of healthcare and social care and education and policing?

I suspect that you’re asking me questions to which you already know the answer. IMHO GDP is the wrong measure of a country’s success and we should be looking towards other measures such as happiness and the provision of services. Services do cost money but if everyone is on a lower wage then vast amounts of money are not spent and if people aren’t chasing high cost homes and high cost vehicles there’s a lot more money left for them to enjoy living on which would include providing acceptable levels of healthcare, social care, education and policing.

The answer is that we need to increase productivity and wealth creation if we want world-class public services.

But I totally agree about the importance of measuring and publishing studies of happiness and quality of services.

World Happiness Report, 2023:
https://worldhappiness.report

Jonathan