Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » North American pointers for John McDonnell’s growth strateg

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited October 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » North American pointers for John McDonnell’s growth strategy

The biopic of Steve Jobs had its premiere of at the London Film Festival last weekend. Just days before, the company he founded was in the dock in a New York court – and lost.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,586
    First!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 32,586
    Gimmicky George Osborne?
    You mean "The Master Strategist", surely? :D
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,574
    ...and on a more interesting note:

    https://global.handelsblatt.com/edition/291/ressort/politics/article/european-conservatives-face-down-merkel

    "“We can no longer allow solidarity to be equivalent to naivety, openness to be equivalent to helplessness, freedom to be equivalent to chaos,” Mr. Tusk said in a speech. “And by that, I am of course referring to the situation on our borders.”

    Hilarious.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,488

    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.
  • glwglw Posts: 4,236
    I must say that the idea that Harriet Harman is seen as a Red Tory by some made me chuckle. If we could turn this new Old Labour Party's looniness into power we wouldn't need the Chinese money for Hinkley Point.
  • The US is also not above protectionism as a corollary of national security requirements, whether who hosts the Springfield High School website or who builds nuclear power stations.

    This also allows American companies, subsidised and protected, to become big enough to compete for business worldwide.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640
    Of course it was only Harper's creation of a surplus after 10 years in power which enabled Canadian voters to feel able to return the Liberals to power. Plus the fact Trudeau is a JFK clone while Labour are led by Worzel Gummidge
  • KingaKinga Posts: 59
    "US federal government cash was used by universities and research institutes to develop technologies which are the foundation for the success of Apple products"

    Sounds suspiciously like corporate welfare to me. Next they'll be expecting government to prop up failing industries.

    Oh..
  • JackWJackW Posts: 13,349
    Don notes :

    “These are early days to be writing off Mr McDonnell,” says Keegan. I agree.

    ...................................................................................................................................

    The difficulty for McDonnell isn't that he's being written of. It's far worse - He hasn't even been written in.

    The voters will not elect, or indeed vaguely contemplate, another Labour government until they are convinced Labour has a handle on running the economy. That scenario is as far off as I've ever known it .... and that's a mighty long time !!

  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,841
    glw said:

    I must say that the idea that Harriet Harman is seen as a Red Tory by some made me chuckle. If we could turn this new Old Labour Party's looniness into power we wouldn't need the Chinese money for Hinkley Point.

    Now you know how we feel when people claim the Tory government is not right-wing enough.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,925
    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,584
    edited October 2015
    Mazzacato is out to bust the myth that innovation can be left to the private sector.
    Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I read was - "A US university has just won a big law suit against a private company, therefore we can solve the deficit by taking legal action against private companies in the UK."
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,841
    HYUFD said:

    Of course it was only Harper's creation of a surplus after 10 years in power which enabled Canadian voters to feel able to return the Liberals to power.

    I'm not convinced that logic follows. If anything, the fact surpluses are more ingrained in the Canadian political culture would surely mean the idea of running a deficit would be seen as MORE taboo there than it would've done in the UK if Labour had had the balls to run on an anti-austerity message this year.

    Although Trudeau should not really give any comfort to Corbyn, since the latter has additional patriotism/national security perception problems that the former doesn't, Trudeau definitely ran to the Left of Ed Miliband.
  • Not quite sure what the point of Don's article is. Be that as it may, on this bit:

    By contrast to Osborne and the Tories the Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which provided a near $800 billion stimulus package – equal to about 4% of America’s GDP.

    And the result?

    Since Q2 2009, the UK and US recoveries in GDP have been.... identical.

    See Chart 2 here:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-economic-recovery-v-the-united-states-2015-8


  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Curses!

    FPT

    Morris_Dancer said:
    Miss Plato, legal highs seem very difficult. Anything effective may be so broad that the legislation traps other, perfectly legitimate (as it were) drugs. Anything specific can be, and has been, easily side-stepped by tweaking the chemical composition of the drug.

    Of course, if some people weren't bloody muppets, taking weird, unknown drugs with unknown effects, this wouldn't be an issue.

    Never taken drugs myself (and very rarely drink), but legal highs seem far more foolish to me than even 'established' drugs, where you have a better idea of what they're supposed to do (although bad batches and being cut with rat poison remains a problem).
    People take legal highs because they want the effects of the "real" drug but are afraid of the criminal consequences.
    It would be much safer all round if the real deal were legal and controlled.
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626
    Double drat...

    FPT

    Casino_Royale said (regarding isam's suggested spoon):
    Seconded. Excellent idea.
    I think the packaging needs to show both the number of teaspoons per package and per serving, or if just one then per package.
    People also need to know how this translates to the recommended intake (6/7 per day)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640
    edited October 2015
    Danny565 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Of course it was only Harper's creation of a surplus after 10 years in power which enabled Canadian voters to feel able to return the Liberals to power.

    I'm not convinced that logic follows. If anything, the fact surpluses are more ingrained in the Canadian political culture would surely mean the idea of running a deficit would be seen as MORE taboo there than it would've done in the UK if Labour had had the balls to run on an anti-austerity message this year.

    Although Trudeau should not really give any comfort to Corbyn, since the latter has additional patriotism/national security perception problems that the former doesn't, Trudeau definitely ran to the Left of Ed Miliband.
    I don't think Canada is more fiscally conservative after all we had Thatcher as PM when they had Trudeau senior. Ideologically Trudeau is to the right of Corbyn but close to Ed Miliband but Trudeau is more telegenic and charismatic which is crucial in elections today even if Ed M may be brighter. Trudeau's 3 year capital investment plan is close to what Miliband offered
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,925
    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 30s30 seconds ago
    Lincoln Chafee drops out of race for Democratic nomination for US presidential election in 2016
  • Double drat...

    FPT

    Casino_Royale said (regarding isam's suggested spoon):

    Seconded. Excellent idea.
    I think the packaging needs to show both the number of teaspoons per package and per serving, or if just one then per package.
    People also need to know how this translates to the recommended intake (6/7 per day)

    No, keep it simple, otherwise like the existing nutritional info it will be ignored. Just do it on those cans of revolting sugary drinks.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    "But the shadow chancellor is plainly aware of Denis Healey’s dictum: “When you are in a hole, don’t dig deeper.”

    Perhaps Mr Brind's BFF Mr Corbyn should be paying attention then, given he's just appointed a Stalinist as his Comms & Strategy Dir.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 19,637
    Don you do know that the UK government spends a huge amount on basic research via HEFCE and other sources?

    We are not good enough at translating that basic research into commercial products but, FWIW, I chair a committee at a university that attempts to do just that. The problem is with the unwillingness of academics to let go/finalise their research (they love to tinker).

    This would absolutely not be helped by the government getting involved!

    Encourage universities to commercialise more effectively - perhaps give them additional funding on a matched basis or something. But don't try and develop the ideas directly.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 3,589
    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Purely British examples. Fact is so many of America's advances have relied in some way on public investment. In the almost hysterical determination (particularly in the US) over the last 40 years to decry socialism, that's been forgotten.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 41,640
    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 30s30 seconds ago
    Lincoln Chafee drops out of race for Democratic nomination for US presidential election in 2016

    Just over a decade ago he was a Republican Senator and was polling close to zero, no great surprise
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 3,633
    Anyone who can seriously assert that McDonnell's performance on QT was 'assured' is clearly unable to think critically.

    The man lied, lied and lied again.

    That is not assured. That is lying.

    Anything else you try to argue when this sort of thinking is at the heart of your piece is utterly meaningless.

    I am sorry - but these Friday postings from Mr Brind are not worth the pixels.
  • "But the shadow chancellor is plainly aware of Denis Healey’s dictum: “When you are in a hole, don’t dig deeper.”

    Perhaps Mr Brind's BFF Mr Corbyn should be paying attention then, given he's just appointed a Stalinist as his Comms & Strategy Dir.

    A more pertinent Denis Healey quote would be this one, on Labour losing the 1983 election: “The election was lost not in the three weeks of the campaign but in the three years which preceded it…in that period the Party itself acquired a highly unfavourable public image, based on disunity, extremism, crankiness and general unfitness to govern.”
  • DaemonBarberDaemonBarber Posts: 1,626

    Double drat...

    FPT

    Casino_Royale said (regarding isam's suggested spoon):

    Seconded. Excellent idea.
    I think the packaging needs to show both the number of teaspoons per package and per serving, or if just one then per package.
    People also need to know how this translates to the recommended intake (6/7 per day)
    No, keep it simple, otherwise like the existing nutritional info it will be ignored. Just do it on those cans of revolting sugary drinks.

    Then it needs to be spoons per package or they'll get round it by saying that a can of fizzy-x contains 2 servings...
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    edited October 2015

    Double drat...

    FPT

    Casino_Royale said (regarding isam's suggested spoon):

    Seconded. Excellent idea.
    I think the packaging needs to show both the number of teaspoons per package and per serving, or if just one then per package.
    People also need to know how this translates to the recommended intake (6/7 per day)

    It kind of already does but in a less user friendly way

    The 'carbohydrates of which sugars' number divided by 4 is the number of teaspoons of sugar, I think, and this is shown per 100g and per pack on most items

    I was talking about soft drinks which would just need one symbol, as would most fast foods

  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474

    Anyone who can seriously assert that McDonnell's performance on QT was 'assured' is clearly unable to think critically.

    What else would you expect from a Labour Party Press Officer?

  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    It'd be refreshing for Mr Brind to respond to comments and engage.

    Sticking a hagiography de jour up doesn't do much at all.
    watford30 said:

    Anyone who can seriously assert that McDonnell's performance on QT was 'assured' is clearly unable to think critically.

    What else would you expect from a Labour Party Press Officer?

  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    Radical Muslims have been trying to recruit at reception centres for recently arrived refugees, Norwegian Police Security Service (PST) warns.

    http://www.thelocal.no/20151023/islamists-recruiting-at-norway-asylum-centres

    This migrant crisis is a recipe for disaster.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Holy Witch Hunt http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson/11949110/Innocent-man-arrested-after-Tom-Watson-intervened.html
    An innocent man arrested by armed police following pressure from Tom Watson for the re-opening of a historic abuse case has told friends how the experience “destroyed” his family life and left him with a legal bill running into tens of thousands of pounds.

    The alleged victim is the wife of a Labour politician who has known Mr Watson for many years.

    The case was reopened as a result of a letter written by Mr Watson to Sir Keir Starmer, the then director of public prosecutions (DPP), who went on to join the Labour front bench. The Crown Prosecution Service had previously decided to take no further action.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474

    It'd be refreshing for Mr Brind to respond to comments and engage.

    Sticking a hagiography de jour up doesn't do much at all.

    watford30 said:

    Anyone who can seriously assert that McDonnell's performance on QT was 'assured' is clearly unable to think critically.

    What else would you expect from a Labour Party Press Officer?

    For balance, perhaps Craig Oliver should be invited to post a weekly article?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    Governments (and especially the UK government) are terrible at picking winners, and terrible at funding things that might be winners. The disastrous Brabazon Committee mostly sent our civil aircraft manufacturers down the wrong routes (*), and the gigantic Princess flying boat was a glorious, costly failure.

    On the railways, many millions were wasted on the pointless 1955 Modernisation Plan, and the hurried move from steam to diesel and electric wasted many more.

    When such centralised planning fails, it fails disastrously.

    What governments are good at wrt innovative industry are:

    *) helping define specifications that everyone can work to, rather than wasteful, clashing specifications;

    *) aiding research by producing pooled resources (e.g. Diamond Light Source) that individual organisations cannot afford;

    *) start prize funds to encourage competitive innovation in directions the governments wishes to head.

    Government should also try to encourage innovation through the tax system.

    Sadly, it seems McDonnell may be keen on the 'picking winners' approach.

    (*) Only the Type-IV Comey being a qualified success, and massive amounts of cash wasted on all the other planes.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    In John McDonnel's own words. - Embarrassing! Embarrassing! Embarrassing!’
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656
    "He routed the Tories despite the best efforts of Lynton Crosby which was the subject of my last post. One of my “good guys” won but I was disappointed with the outcome for the NDP.

    I was disappointed too with John McDonnell’s clumsy U-turn over Gimmicky George Osborne’s fiscal charter."

    Seriously? Do you write this stuff and not realise how much you come over as a Labour hack?

    Anyway, sure, public investment in research is a good thing. So is top quality healthcare, a no waiting lines and a well-equipped army. But the basic tension that conservatives recognise and leftists refuse to, is that there are limited resources for governments to spend. So how would you do this research in a cost efficient manner, and what would you cut to pay for it?

    As always, on these critical issues of credibility rather than having a wish list of nice-to-haves, Labour have no answers.
  • JEOJEO Posts: 3,656

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Purely British examples. Fact is so many of America's advances have relied in some way on public investment. In the almost hysterical determination (particularly in the US) over the last 40 years to decry socialism, that's been forgotten.
    Public investment which has then been taken on and maximised to its potential based on a very free market with low taxes and a population that works very hard. Labour wants the public investment, but not the business-friendly economy or the work-incentivised population that takes it to fruition.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,326
    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 30s30 seconds ago
    Lincoln Chafee drops out of race for Democratic nomination for US presidential election in 2016

    When will Lawrence Lessig drop out tho
  • Not quite sure what the point of Don's article is. Be that as it may, on this bit:

    By contrast to Osborne and the Tories the Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which provided a near $800 billion stimulus package – equal to about 4% of America’s GDP.

    And the result?

    Since Q2 2009, the UK and US recoveries in GDP have been.... identical.

    See Chart 2 here:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-economic-recovery-v-the-united-states-2015-8


    The one that shows the recovery started under Labour and was flatlined for a bit by Osborne? You are Ed Balls AICMFP.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I particularly enjoyed the capitalisation "Gimmicky George Osborne"
    JEO said:

    "He routed the Tories despite the best efforts of Lynton Crosby which was the subject of my last post. One of my “good guys” won but I was disappointed with the outcome for the NDP.

    I was disappointed too with John McDonnell’s clumsy U-turn over Gimmicky George Osborne’s fiscal charter."

    Seriously? Do you write this stuff and not realise how much you come over as a Labour hack?

    Anyway, sure, public investment in research is a good thing. So is top quality healthcare, a no waiting lines and a well-equipped army. But the basic tension that conservatives recognise and leftists refuse to, is that there are limited resources for governments to spend. So how would you do this research in a cost efficient manner, and what would you cut to pay for it?

    As always, on these critical issues of credibility rather than having a wish list of nice-to-haves, Labour have no answers.

  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    0_o They've been watching Mr Robot
    TalkTalk has received a ransom demand from someone claiming to be responsible for a cyber attack in which millions of customers bank details may have been stolen.

    TalkTalk, one of Britain's biggest communications companies, announced last night that it had suffered a 'significant and sustained cyber attack' in which the bank details and credit card information of its four million customers may have been accessed.

    The company said this morning that it has now been sent a ransom demand over the cyber attack. A spokesman for the firm said: 'We can confirm we were contacted by someone claiming to be responsible and seeking payment.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3285400/Four-million-TalkTalk-customers-bank-details-accessed-criminals-company-s-website-suffers-significant-cyber-attack.html#ixzz3pOZtMj00
  • Holy Witch Hunt http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson/11949110/Innocent-man-arrested-after-Tom-Watson-intervened.html

    An innocent man arrested by armed police following pressure from Tom Watson for the re-opening of a historic abuse case has told friends how the experience “destroyed” his family life and left him with a legal bill running into tens of thousands of pounds.
    The alleged victim is the wife of a Labour politician who has known Mr Watson for many years.
    The case was reopened as a result of a letter written by Mr Watson to Sir Keir Starmer, the then director of public prosecutions (DPP), who went on to join the Labour front bench. The Crown Prosecution Service had previously decided to take no further action.
    The stench around Labour.
    PS Mr Brind, the success of Apple was initially built on ideas from Palo Alto Rank Xerox allegedly. Nothing to do with the public sector.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,070
    edited October 2015
    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    ICI, Marconi, RBS, Lloyds ...

    The directors on the Boards of FTSE 100 companies are similar to senior civil servants in their entrepreneurial capabilities. Greedier but no more able to call the future and pick winners.

    True entrepreneurs are in SMEs and Universities. Governments can help them.

    Once your position in a market has disappeared (coal, steel, polyester fibre etc) because of differences in cost of raw materials, labour, capital then there is very little that the private or public sector can do to preserve it. Subsidy isn't the answer. Innovation is.

  • Charles said:

    Don you do know that the UK government spends a huge amount on basic research via HEFCE and other sources?

    We are not good enough at translating that basic research into commercial products but, FWIW, I chair a committee at a university that attempts to do just that. The problem is with the unwillingness of academics to let go/finalise their research (they love to tinker).

    This would absolutely not be helped by the government getting involved!

    Encourage universities to commercialise more effectively - perhaps give them additional funding on a matched basis or something. But don't try and develop the ideas directly.

    Graphene being an example of where we are now helping a Chinese telecoms giant.....
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    "True entrepreneurs are in SMEs and Universities. Governments can help them."

    And also hammer them with red tape, high taxation and a command economy to trade with.

    Exactly what McDonnell is planning, in other words.
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    JEO said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Purely British examples. Fact is so many of America's advances have relied in some way on public investment. In the almost hysterical determination (particularly in the US) over the last 40 years to decry socialism, that's been forgotten.
    Public investment which has then been taken on and maximised to its potential based on a very free market with low taxes and a population that works very hard. Labour wants the public investment, but not the business-friendly economy or the work-incentivised population that takes it to fruition.

    The US space programme (sp) provided a large technological stimulus for US tech industry. I would guess that it resulted in large improvements in the design and manufacture of integrated circuits (lower weight. less volume more efficient power consumption) but I have not seen a detailed breakdown of the resulting spin offs.

  • JEO said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Purely British examples. Fact is so many of America's advances have relied in some way on public investment. In the almost hysterical determination (particularly in the US) over the last 40 years to decry socialism, that's been forgotten.
    Public investment which has then been taken on and maximised to its potential based on a very free market with low taxes and a population that works very hard. Labour wants the public investment, but not the business-friendly economy or the work-incentivised population that takes it to fruition.

    Low taxes? Income tax is roughly the same for most people, once you remember to add state and federal, income and payroll taxes. And the Americans are complaining about companies holding money overseas to avoid US corporation tax.

    One thing many American companies can enjoy is a de facto local monopoly, simply because the country is so large. Sure there's another furniture store or car dealer in the next town, but the next town is hundreds of miles away.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,974
    edited October 2015

    Holy Witch Hunt http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson/11949110/Innocent-man-arrested-after-Tom-Watson-intervened.html

    An innocent man arrested by armed police following pressure from Tom Watson for the re-opening of a historic abuse case has told friends how the experience “destroyed” his family life and left him with a legal bill running into tens of thousands of pounds.
    The alleged victim is the wife of a Labour politician who has known Mr Watson for many years.
    The case was reopened as a result of a letter written by Mr Watson to Sir Keir Starmer, the then director of public prosecutions (DPP), who went on to join the Labour front bench. The Crown Prosecution Service had previously decided to take no further action.
    The stench around Labour.
    PS Mr Brind, the success of Apple was initially built on ideas from Palo Alto Rank Xerox allegedly. Nothing to do with the public sector.

    It's much more complex than that. If anything, it was based around the computer clubs where enthusiasts got together to build there own hardware - Jobs and Wozniak met at such a club. Where dreamers met talent and money. And yes, it was nothing to do with the public sector.

    Apple was just one of hundreds of firms setting up around that time, and many of them, with a little luck or a few different throws of the dice, been Apple. The same can definitely be said for Microsoft.

    If the US government had tried to pick companies as a winner, IBM would have been that winner. And that company only made one Don Estridge.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    edited October 2015
    I have to say, the idea that the successes of the USA, of all countries on this earth, somehow provide support for the economic policies of John McDonnell - he who wants to 'ferment [sic] the overthrow of capitalism' - is just brilliantly bat-shit crazy.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,070

    In John McDonnel's own words. - Embarrassing! Embarrassing! Embarrassing!’

    He should have said - "We support the fiscal charter as it applies to current spending, but as we stated in the Labour manifesto, we believe capital investment can be financed by an appropriate amount of borrowing.

    The Government chooses to borrow through the French and Chinese public sector e.g. for Hinkley C and pays the interest through subsidised energy prices over the next 35 years. We believe in transparency in public sector capital investment and will never again support off balance sheet and PFI schemes which disguise the impact on public finances and pushes the cost onto future generations.

    Unfortunately the Government is not allowing any amendments to its Fiscal Charter motion so regretfully we have to vote against it in its unmodified and dangerous form."

    Not embarrassing at all.
  • Holy Witch Hunt http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tom-watson/11949110/Innocent-man-arrested-after-Tom-Watson-intervened.html

    An innocent man arrested by armed police following pressure from Tom Watson for the re-opening of a historic abuse case has told friends how the experience “destroyed” his family life and left him with a legal bill running into tens of thousands of pounds.
    The alleged victim is the wife of a Labour politician who has known Mr Watson for many years.
    The case was reopened as a result of a letter written by Mr Watson to Sir Keir Starmer, the then director of public prosecutions (DPP), who went on to join the Labour front bench. The Crown Prosecution Service had previously decided to take no further action.
    The stench around Labour.
    PS Mr Brind, the success of Apple was initially built on ideas from Palo Alto Rank Xerox allegedly. Nothing to do with the public sector.
    It's much more complex than that. If anything, it was based around the computer clubs where enthusiasts got together to build there own hardware - Jobs and Wozniak met at such a club. Where dreamers met talent and money. And yes, it was nothing to do with the public sector.
    Apple was just one of hundreds of firms setting up around that time, and many of them, with a little luck or a few different throws of the dice, been Apple. The same can definitely be said for Microsoft.
    If the US government had tried to pick companies as a winner, IBM would have been that winner. And that company only made one Don Estridge.
    Yes I should have narrowed it to "windows". IBM thought itself untouchable when I first worked there in 1977.
  • According to TalkTalk CEO Dido Harding's wikipedia page, she did PPE with David Cameron. It turns out neither was paying much attention the day the class studied information security.

    0_o They've been watching Mr Robot

    TalkTalk has received a ransom demand from someone claiming to be responsible for a cyber attack in which millions of customers bank details may have been stolen.

    TalkTalk, one of Britain's biggest communications companies, announced last night that it had suffered a 'significant and sustained cyber attack' in which the bank details and credit card information of its four million customers may have been accessed.

    The company said this morning that it has now been sent a ransom demand over the cyber attack. A spokesman for the firm said: 'We can confirm we were contacted by someone claiming to be responsible and seeking payment.'

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3285400/Four-million-TalkTalk-customers-bank-details-accessed-criminals-company-s-website-suffers-significant-cyber-attack.html#ixzz3pOZtMj00
  • perdixperdix Posts: 1,806
    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 3,070
    taffys said:

    "True entrepreneurs are in SMEs and Universities. Governments can help them."

    And also hammer them with red tape, high taxation and a command economy to trade with.

    Exactly what McDonnell is planning, in other words.

    No evidence that that is what he is planning.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,517
    edited October 2015
    perdix said:

    The US space programme (sp) provided a large technological stimulus for US tech industry. I would guess that it resulted in large improvements in the design and manufacture of integrated circuits (lower weight. less volume more efficient power consumption) but I have not seen a detailed breakdown of the resulting spin offs.

    I think the opposite in fact. Because of the difficulties in certifying flight hardware, computers in space have always been massively outdated.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited October 2015
    perdix said:

    JEO said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Purely British examples. Fact is so many of America's advances have relied in some way on public investment. In the almost hysterical determination (particularly in the US) over the last 40 years to decry socialism, that's been forgotten.
    Public investment which has then been taken on and maximised to its potential based on a very free market with low taxes and a population that works very hard. Labour wants the public investment, but not the business-friendly economy or the work-incentivised population that takes it to fruition.

    The US space programme (sp) provided a large technological stimulus for US tech industry. I would guess that it resulted in large improvements in the design and manufacture of integrated circuits (lower weight. less volume more efficient power consumption) but I have not seen a detailed breakdown of the resulting spin offs.

    It's always interesting to remember that NASA outsourced the space programme to private businesses such as Rockwell, and McDonnell-Douglas. Not sure Corbyn's lefty chum would have done that.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,875
    FPT Thanks, Mr Morris_Dancer

    That makes sense re: full time writer/part time editor (or editor of such a small production that the stipend is low).

    My objection, I suppose, is whether the state should subsidise what is in most cases a lifestyle decision. I really doubt the only competitive advantage of that author is in writing. I'm sure she could get a higher paying job. I could get most people with her qualifications a job in the book trade paying more than that.

    The tried and tested argument is why should someone slugging their guts out doing a lowish paid manual job that they detest, who is ineligible for the tax credits, pay for the life choices of others - whether it is having children they cannot afford to sustain, a life of leisure that they cannot afford to sustain, or a pleasant job that they cannot afford to sustain....
  • Barnesian said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    ICI, Marconi, RBS, Lloyds ...

    The directors on the Boards of FTSE 100 companies are similar to senior civil servants in their entrepreneurial capabilities. Greedier but no more able to call the future and pick winners.

    True entrepreneurs are in SMEs and Universities. Governments can help them.

    Once your position in a market has disappeared (coal, steel, polyester fibre etc) because of differences in cost of raw materials, labour, capital then there is very little that the private or public sector can do to preserve it. Subsidy isn't the answer. Innovation is.

    Ernest Harrison and Gerry Whent and the Vodafone founders were buccaneers.
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    edited October 2015
    When labour talk about 'investment' they mean sky's the limit salaries and payoffs in the public sector and unlimited benefits payments to lawless baby factory families where nobody has worked for generations.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited October 2015
    DJL..I was not aware that Cameron had a second job..Head of Cyber Security at Talk Talk..who'd a thunk it
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975
    "Looking back at the records of Tory Chancellors Anthony Barber, Geoffrey Howe and Nigel Lawson Keegan says the “argument that the Conservatives have always been the party of economic and fiscal responsibility takes some swallowing ..."

    LOL. Howe defeated inflation and laid the basis for the 1980s recovery. Lawson delivered a budget surplus and cut taxes. Both trended the structural deficit down, which is surely the definition of fiscal responsibility. The sole basis for the above quote is one chancellor, nearly half a century ago. Keegan might have mentioned Clarke and Osborne are more pertinant reference points but then again that wouldn't have suited his case would it?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,326
    Barnesian said:

    In John McDonnel's own words. - Embarrassing! Embarrassing! Embarrassing!’

    He should have said - ".Snip"

    Not embarrassing at all.
    Oh yes, certainly he should have said that lot.

    But he didn't :)
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited October 2015
    Scott_P said:

    perdix said:

    The US space programme (sp) provided a large technological stimulus for US tech industry. I would guess that it resulted in large improvements in the design and manufacture of integrated circuits (lower weight. less volume more efficient power consumption) but I have not seen a detailed breakdown of the resulting spin offs.

    I think the opposite in fact. Because of the difficulties in certifying flight hardware, computers in space have always been massively outdated.
    Space hardened chips are ancient technology, as are many military IC's. Radiation is the problem.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 11,267

    DJL..I was not aware that Cameron had a second job..Head of Cyber Security at Talk Talk..who'd a thunk it

    Luck’;s run out there then. Where next?
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,466

    Anyone who can seriously assert that McDonnell's performance on QT was 'assured' is clearly unable to think critically.

    The man lied, lied and lied again.

    That is not assured. That is lying.

    Anything else you try to argue when this sort of thinking is at the heart of your piece is utterly meaningless.

    I am sorry - but these Friday postings from Mr Brind are not worth the pixels.

    The general view on PB (not a forum alien to criticism of Labour people) was that he did surprisingly well (until the final exchange about the anthem, which most people here didn't think was credible). You clearly disagree, but there's no point in abusing Brind for taking a common view that you happen to disagree with.

    You don't like his columns? You don't have to read them.
  • DJL..I was not aware that Cameron had a second job..Head of Cyber Security at Talk Talk..who'd a thunk it

    A subtle reference to the derision which greeted government proposals to ban encryption.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    edited October 2015
    It's also amusing to see how the left have fabricated a Lynton Crosby myth for themselves.

    In reality:

    In an email to Fairfax Media on Thursday, Mr Crosby denied involvement.

    "The 'niquab [sic] issue' was something I learnt about when I read the media like most people," he said adding, "I have watched with bemusement suggestions I was running the campaign or somehow on the campaign team. I wasn't".

    Mr Crosby said that he had only ever been to Canada once in his life, but didn't specify when.

    "I wasn't engaged on the Canadian election and wasn't there during the election campaign. It follows that the strategy wasn't 'mine'," he said.


    http://www.smh.com.au/world/lynton-cosby-bemused-at-reports-of-involvement-in-canadian-elections-20151022-gkfp35.html
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 8,925
    perdix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

    DB control or are the parent company of Chiltern Trains, Arriva Wales, Cross Country and Grand Central.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 13,975
    On topic, pure research is an area that government/s can and should get involved in. There is rarely an obvious payoff but the brilliance of individuals and companies to exploit the knowledge it produces can be highly beneficial. I'm not sure whether the universities should hold money-making copyright or patent on that research though: if it's funded for the good of the nation (or world) then it should be free to all with the proviso that no-one else should make money out of it (as opposed to making money out of applications using it).

    However, while pure research is certainly a legitimate role for state-sponsored universities / programmes, innovation is a rather different beast as innovation is usually delivered with an aim to some specific end. To what end should the state engage in that research? It's not a black-and-white issue and there will be times when the state should encourage innovation through prizes, commissioning or government-run programmes but in general, picking winners is not something that governments are good at.
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 5,521
    The l;eft= economic incompetence...., that's the message, because its always been true.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    watford30 said:

    perdix said:

    JEO said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Purely British examples. Fact is so many of America's advances have relied in some way on public investment. In the almost hysterical determination (particularly in the US) over the last 40 years to decry socialism, that's been forgotten.
    Public investment which has then been taken on and maximised to its potential based on a very free market with low taxes and a population that works very hard. Labour wants the public investment, but not the business-friendly economy or the work-incentivised population that takes it to fruition.

    The US space programme (sp) provided a large technological stimulus for US tech industry. I would guess that it resulted in large improvements in the design and manufacture of integrated circuits (lower weight. less volume more efficient power consumption) but I have not seen a detailed breakdown of the resulting spin offs.

    It's always interesting to remember that NASA outsourced the space programme to private businesses such as Rockwell, and McDonnell-Douglas. Not sure Corbyn's lefty chum would have done that.
    Still it was public money. Israel does the same. In fact, renewal of Trident is public money - wrongly to be spent.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    perdix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

    Exactly. Why can't we do that ? Because we are too short-termists.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    edited October 2015
    surbiton said:

    perdix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

    Exactly. Why can't we do that ? Because we are too short-termists.
    We do do that. Have you never heard of National Grid, Centrica, Vodafone, Stagecoach, BAA, BP, Barclays, or GlaxoSmithKline?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,488
    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Breaking News ‏@BBCBreaking 30s30 seconds ago
    Lincoln Chafee drops out of race for Democratic nomination for US presidential election in 2016

    Who?
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549

    surbiton said:

    perdix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

    Exactly. Why can't we do that ? Because we are too short-termists.
    We do do that. Have you never heard of National Grid, Centrica, Vodafone, Stagecoach, BAA, BP, Barclays, or GlaxoSmithKline?
    Some of them were public sector companies.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,488

    Not quite sure what the point of Don's article is. Be that as it may, on this bit:

    By contrast to Osborne and the Tories the Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which provided a near $800 billion stimulus package – equal to about 4% of America’s GDP.

    And the result?

    Since Q2 2009, the UK and US recoveries in GDP have been.... identical.

    See Chart 2 here:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-economic-recovery-v-the-united-states-2015-8


    The one that shows the recovery started under Labour and was flatlined for a bit by Osborne? You are Ed Balls AICMFP.
    It's heroic to describe a couple of quarters of growth, after a drop of 7% in GDP as a "recovery."
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    dr_spyn said:

    perdix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

    DB control or are the parent company of Chiltern Trains, Arriva Wales, Cross Country and Grand Central.
    This is nothing. Soon the Chinese will decide whether the lights will be on or not. Our "ever closer" partners.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,488
    Barnesian said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    ICI, Marconi, RBS, Lloyds ...

    The directors on the Boards of FTSE 100 companies are similar to senior civil servants in their entrepreneurial capabilities. Greedier but no more able to call the future and pick winners.

    True entrepreneurs are in SMEs and Universities. Governments can help them.

    Once your position in a market has disappeared (coal, steel, polyester fibre etc) because of differences in cost of raw materials, labour, capital then there is very little that the private or public sector can do to preserve it. Subsidy isn't the answer. Innovation is.

    For sure, there are incompetents in the private, as well as the public, sector.

    But, entrepreneurship really isn't the business of the State.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    edited October 2015
    surbiton said:

    Some of them were public sector companies.

    Yes, they were, and once they were free of that constraint they prospered, upped their game dramatically, and have expanded overseas by acquisition.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Hohoho

    . @GeorgeOsborne congratulates the Labour leaders sitting next to him for "courage and foresight"
  • Sean_F said:

    It's heroic to describe a couple of quarters of growth, after a drop of 7% in GDP as a "recovery."

    Especially when you're borrowing, as Darling was, one pound for every three raised in tax, just to cover current expenditure.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,488

    "Looking back at the records of Tory Chancellors Anthony Barber, Geoffrey Howe and Nigel Lawson Keegan says the “argument that the Conservatives have always been the party of economic and fiscal responsibility takes some swallowing ..."

    LOL. Howe defeated inflation and laid the basis for the 1980s recovery. Lawson delivered a budget surplus and cut taxes. Both trended the structural deficit down, which is surely the definition of fiscal responsibility. The sole basis for the above quote is one chancellor, nearly half a century ago. Keegan might have mentioned Clarke and Osborne are more pertinant reference points but then again that wouldn't have suited his case would it?

    I remember Keegan published a book in 1986 called "Britain without oil". It predicted a horribly impoverished future for the UK.

    Just as the economy took off.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 20,367

    Not quite sure what the point of Don's article is. Be that as it may, on this bit:

    By contrast to Osborne and the Tories the Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which provided a near $800 billion stimulus package – equal to about 4% of America’s GDP.

    And the result?

    Since Q2 2009, the UK and US recoveries in GDP have been.... identical.

    See Chart 2 here:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-economic-recovery-v-the-united-states-2015-8


    Its actually much worse than that.

    The US kept going with QE on a vastly greater scale than we did for far longer essentially abusing their position as the reserve currency of the world and making everyone else contribute to their growth. They have actually exploited their shale reserves in a massive way and are very close to becoming a net oil producer again whilst we faff about. They have used restrictions on the export of oil and gas to rig their domestic energy market in such a way that industrial production in the US has become highly competitive again (compared with us killing our steel industry by ecological tariffs) and they still only had the same growth as us.

    The correct conclusion to draw is that McDonnell's theory that faster growth driven by higher public spending is somehow the answer to our structural deficit is completely stupid. Not just illiterate and wrong but stupid.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited October 2015

    It's also amusing to see how the left have fabricated a Lynton Crosby myth for themselves. [snip]

    "I wasn't engaged on the Canadian election and wasn't there during the election campaign. It follows that the strategy wasn't 'mine'," he said.

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/lynton-cosby-bemused-at-reports-of-involvement-in-canadian-elections-20151022-gkfp35.html

    Interesting – Other than Mr Brind’s threads, I wonder where that rumour first appeared.
  • Sean_F said:

    It's heroic to describe a couple of quarters of growth, after a drop of 7% in GDP as a "recovery."

    Especially when you're borrowing, as Darling was, one pound for every three raised in tax, just to cover current expenditure.
    Also when that so-called recovery was very stop-start and pretty much just a dead cat bounce from the depths of the worst recession in our lifetime.

    Serious and sustained growth kicked in from 2012 onwards according to that growth. Which is not under Darling.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,326
    surbiton said:

    dr_spyn said:

    perdix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

    DB control or are the parent company of Chiltern Trains, Arriva Wales, Cross Country and Grand Central.
    This is nothing. Soon the Chinese will decide whether the lights will be on or not. Our "ever closer" partners.
    The lights will be on, but at a nice price !
  • Sean_F said:

    Not quite sure what the point of Don's article is. Be that as it may, on this bit:

    By contrast to Osborne and the Tories the Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which provided a near $800 billion stimulus package – equal to about 4% of America’s GDP.

    And the result?

    Since Q2 2009, the UK and US recoveries in GDP have been.... identical.

    See Chart 2 here:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-economic-recovery-v-the-united-states-2015-8


    The one that shows the recovery started under Labour and was flatlined for a bit by Osborne? You are Ed Balls AICMFP.
    It's heroic to describe a couple of quarters of growth, after a drop of 7% in GDP as a "recovery."
    The drop was due to the global financial crisis. If you look at Richard Nabavi's graph, you can see it affected America too. The recovery started under Labour: sorry but them's the facts. You may recall this is because Gordon Brown saved the world. :-)
  • It's also amusing to see how the left have fabricated a Lynton Crosby myth for themselves. [snip]

    "I wasn't engaged on the Canadian election and wasn't there during the election campaign. It follows that the strategy wasn't 'mine'," he said.

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/lynton-cosby-bemused-at-reports-of-involvement-in-canadian-elections-20151022-gkfp35.html

    Interesting – Other than Mr Brind’s threads, I wonder where that rumour first appeared.
    I think it comes from here:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/10/canada-conservatives-lynton-crosby-election

    But it looks as though the story was much exaggerated, and in fact Crosby-Textor were not significantly involved at all.

    No doubt, though, the myth will be repeated ad nauseam.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    surbiton said:

    dr_spyn said:

    perdix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Advanced Gas Cooled Reactors, Concorde, British Railways, British Shipbuilders.
    It is noteworthy that German State Railways (DB) saw fit to buy the UK rail freight business but also bought Arriva , the large train and bus company, as well as others. Can you imagine British Rail ever doing that kind of thing?

    It is noteworthy that the motto of the German development bank is "Germany first".

    DB control or are the parent company of Chiltern Trains, Arriva Wales, Cross Country and Grand Central.
    This is nothing. Soon the Chinese will decide whether the lights will be on or not. Our "ever closer" partners.
    Of course, in your world, no foreign businesses are owned by British companies.
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    edited October 2015
    DJL....I doubt the possibility of cyber attacks and wholescale hacking would have been on the curriculum on that day they missed at UNI..
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    As a matter of instinct I am a free trader because I believe that free trade is the best method of delivering the maximum benefit to the maximum number of people. The problem comes when an open free trade economy has to treat with mercantilist economies - the free trader generally loses out.

    The most important economies for UK trade (China, the USA, Germany and France) are all, to one degree or another, far more protectionist and mercantilist than our own. We are losing out and this is now starting to bite us on the arse.

    Inward investment is to be welcomed as long as it is investment (a la Nissan and Honda). When it is disguised asset stripping and simple takeovers with the concomitant export of the nation's wealth and future we should be far less happy about it.
  • surbiton said:

    Some of them were public sector companies.

    Yes, they were, and once they were free of that constraint they prospered, upped their game dramatically, and have expanded overseas by acquisition.
    So we are agreed. Foreign nationalised companies good; British nationalised companies bad. Remarkably, that does seem to have been the position of both main parties from Mrs Thatcher's government onwards. Why?
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 36,517

    Foreign nationalised companies good; British nationalised companies bad. Remarkably, that does seem to have been the position of both main parties from Mrs Thatcher's government onwards. Why?

    Have you ever driven an Austin Allegro?
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976

    It's also amusing to see how the left have fabricated a Lynton Crosby myth for themselves. [snip]

    "I wasn't engaged on the Canadian election and wasn't there during the election campaign. It follows that the strategy wasn't 'mine'," he said.

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/lynton-cosby-bemused-at-reports-of-involvement-in-canadian-elections-20151022-gkfp35.html

    Interesting – Other than Mr Brind’s threads, I wonder where that rumour first appeared.
    I think it comes from here:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/10/canada-conservatives-lynton-crosby-election

    But it looks as though the story was much exaggerated, and in fact Crosby-Textor were not significantly involved at all.

    No doubt, though, the myth will be repeated ad nauseam.
    ‘The Globe and Mail’ story Mr Brind linked to in his previous PB article on the subject, pre-dates the Guardian story, albeit by a day. – More digging needed me thinks.

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/australian-political-strategist-isnt-the-conservatives-sinister-mastermind/article26764940/
  • surbiton said:

    Some of them were public sector companies.

    Yes, they were, and once they were free of that constraint they prospered, upped their game dramatically, and have expanded overseas by acquisition.
    So we are agreed. Foreign nationalised companies good; British nationalised companies bad. Remarkably, that does seem to have been the position of both main parties from Mrs Thatcher's government onwards. Why?
    Because the dead hand of the British state is bad.

    If foreign owned companies are nationalised they're only operating in the UK thanks to full and free competition and not because of being the civil servants pick as its state owned.
  • watford30 said:

    perdix said:

    JEO said:

    Sean_F said:


    One thing that the State is not, is entrepreneurial.

    British Leyland, Blue Streak, British Steel, the National Coal Board, can all attest to that.

    Purely British examples. Fact is so many of America's advances have relied in some way on public investment. In the almost hysterical determination (particularly in the US) over the last 40 years to decry socialism, that's been forgotten.
    Public investment which has then been taken on and maximised to its potential based on a very free market with low taxes and a population that works very hard. Labour wants the public investment, but not the business-friendly economy or the work-incentivised population that takes it to fruition.

    The US space programme (sp) provided a large technological stimulus for US tech industry. I would guess that it resulted in large improvements in the design and manufacture of integrated circuits (lower weight. less volume more efficient power consumption) but I have not seen a detailed breakdown of the resulting spin offs.

    It's always interesting to remember that NASA outsourced the space programme to private businesses such as Rockwell, and McDonnell-Douglas. Not sure Corbyn's lefty chum would have done that.
    A more cynical view is the American government (via NASA or the Pentagon) subsidised an awful lot of American industry, not just with orders but perhaps more importantly with soft research contracts. Both views are correct, to a point.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 44,326

    It's also amusing to see how the left have fabricated a Lynton Crosby myth for themselves. [snip]

    "I wasn't engaged on the Canadian election and wasn't there during the election campaign. It follows that the strategy wasn't 'mine'," he said.

    http://www.smh.com.au/world/lynton-cosby-bemused-at-reports-of-involvement-in-canadian-elections-20151022-gkfp35.html

    Interesting – Other than Mr Brind’s threads, I wonder where that rumour first appeared.
    I think it comes from here:

    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/10/canada-conservatives-lynton-crosby-election

    But it looks as though the story was much exaggerated, and in fact Crosby-Textor were not significantly involved at all.

    No doubt, though, the myth will be repeated ad nauseam.
    Would success have been an orphan too ;) ?
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,311
    edited October 2015

    So we are agreed. Foreign nationalised companies good; British nationalised companies bad. Remarkably, that does seem to have been the position of both main parties from Mrs Thatcher's government onwards. Why?

    It is true that Germany and France have some successful public-sector companies, which the UK really hasn't had (with a few small exceptions, mostly technical operations like the National Physical Laboratory). I've often wondered exactly why that is, but perhaps it was the grip of the unions on Labour which was the underlying cause, leading to too much political interference. I'm not sure, TBH, but, in the UK at least, the lesson is very clear: privatised industries are hugely better than their nationalised equivalents.
  • surbiton said:

    Some of them were public sector companies.

    Yes, they were, and once they were free of that constraint they prospered, upped their game dramatically, and have expanded overseas by acquisition.
    So we are agreed. Foreign nationalised companies good; British nationalised companies bad. Remarkably, that does seem to have been the position of both main parties from Mrs Thatcher's government onwards. Why?
    Because the dead hand of the British state is bad.

    If foreign owned companies are nationalised they're only operating in the UK thanks to full and free competition and not because of being the civil servants pick as its state owned.
    Maybe HMG should wonder what foreign nationalised industries do right that ours did wrong. Not only do German and Dutch state-owned rail companies run railways here, for instance, but they do so in Germany and the Netherlands as well.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    Sean_F said:

    Not quite sure what the point of Don's article is. Be that as it may, on this bit:

    By contrast to Osborne and the Tories the Obama administration’s American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) which provided a near $800 billion stimulus package – equal to about 4% of America’s GDP.

    And the result?

    Since Q2 2009, the UK and US recoveries in GDP have been.... identical.

    See Chart 2 here:

    http://uk.businessinsider.com/britain-economic-recovery-v-the-united-states-2015-8


    The one that shows the recovery started under Labour and was flatlined for a bit by Osborne? You are Ed Balls AICMFP.
    It's heroic to describe a couple of quarters of growth, after a drop of 7% in GDP as a "recovery."
    The drop was due to the global financial crisis. If you look at Richard Nabavi's graph, you can see it affected America too. The recovery started under Labour: sorry but them's the facts. You may recall this is because Gordon Brown saved the world. :-)
    Mr L, You seem to be fixated on GDP. Might I suggest that if you want to look at the wealth of the people, and so their living standards, that is not a useful measure.

    If the UK opened its doors to 5 million new residents our economy would grow, if HMG printed 20 squillion pounds our economy would grow. The average person would be no better off, and in fact probably poorer, in both cases.

    It really is time this fixation with GDP stopped.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Would success have been an orphan too ;) ?

    They were saying it was a load of nonsense 5 weeks ago:

    Mark Textor @AGFchairman

    That's not a kangaroo. Apparently it's a moose. #canadaelectionsNOT.
    12:56 PM - 11 Sep 2015
Sign In or Register to comment.