Even if that was true, who would trust politicians to get it right?

They'd F it up.

Of course, they wouldn't be influenced by bribes, contributions, local elections? Would they? /sarcasm off.

Oh..oh..let create a bureaucracy
!

Naturally until everything gets up and running we'll have to have both systems going...

Even if that was true, who would trust politicians to get it right?

They'd F it up.

Of course, they wouldn't be influenced by bribes, contributions, local elections? Would they? /sarcasm off.

Oh..oh..let create a bureaucracy
!

Naturally until everything gets up and running we'll have to have both systems going...

First, stop exporting things that others can produce. Those things are needed in England!

To have a strong currency we have to have higher interest rates... This in turn will lead to inflation, which in turn will lead to higher wage-demands. Which in turn leads us back to the high interest rates that quell that inflation.

So high interest rates lead to inflation (and a couple other things), which leads to high interest rates to quell inflation?

So high interest rates lead to inflation (and a couple other things), which leads to high interest rates to quell inflation?

In the bizarre set-up today, sure. Makara's away with the fairies, but he's onto a half truth there. Some interest rates are included in CPI, because they're consumer expenses. If they go up, the CPI goes up, hence measured inflation. The standard response to more inflation is to raise interest rates. Tada!

It's not the runaway spiral he makes out as, but his insanity does have a tiny bit of reality to it. That's what will get the suckers in.

JJM

I have rarely seen so many egregious economic fallacies packed into so few words (not to mention the ghastly coercive moral implications of what he wants done). Quite an achievement. Is this really what passes for 'conservative' in this country? Ah... don't answer that.

I have rarely seen ... don't answer that.

Thank you Perry,

Your entire response sums the totality of my reaction with a succinctness I would not have achieved.

This posting is totalitarian advocacy and economic lunacy. A clearer demonstration of gibbering ignorance would be difficult to present.

Who is this moron? Is he a person of influence?

I have a friend who, back in the Enver Hoxha days, went to Albania for a holiday.

Yes, your eyes aren't lying, she went to communist Albania for a holiday.

anyway, when she came home the thing that most impressed her was that Albania was totally self sufficient. She could not shut up about how wonderful this was. It never crossed her mind that the poverty of the country could have been related to this lack of trade.

I didn't even bother talking to her about this, it would have been a waste of time.

On an individual basis, the dead are totally self-sufficient.

Everyone else either engages in trade or dies.

CountingCats

"Is he a person of influence?"

If the history of the Tories is anything to go by, he soon will be.

Damn,

Just been reading the comments there, and was about to post a devastating, witty and definitive riposte to his objections to Tim Worstall and Alex Singleton's arguments.

Bloody editor has closed off comments.

snarl.

In the comments, the guy claims to follow “radical economics”. That happens to be the name of a newsletter from the luddite new economics foundation. From academic references on that topic, “radical economics” appears to be a neo-Marxist approach to economics. His line of argument also sounds a lot like this:

“Globalisation, with its export of jobs to the Third World, is bringing ruin and unemployment to British industries and the communities that depend on them. Accordingly, the BNP calls for the selective exclusion of foreign-made goods from British markets and the reduction of foreign imports. We will ensure that our manufactured goods are, wherever possible, produced in British factories, employing British workers. When this is done, unemployment in this country will be brought to an end, and secure, well-paid employment will flourish, at last getting our people back to work and ending the waste and injustice of having more than 4 million people in a hidden army of the unemployed concealed by Labour’s statistical fiddles.”

Did I just read Conservative Home or a party political broadcast by Kier Hardy? This is conservatism of the BNP variety, ie. socialism, but it hates immigrants and foreigners so we'll let it pass. Just the sort of nonsense that strips the Conservative Party's credibility. It's about time these people went over to Labour where they belong so that the Conservative Party can actually have a vaguely unified philosophy and platform.

My first thought was that any person can write on this website - so the people in charge of it can not be blamed.

However, then I remembered that I tried to write comments at one time.

I wrote quite a mild comment during the last leadership election of the Conservative party - simply stating that a person, Mr Clarke, who wanted more power for the E.U. should not be the leader of a political party that (at least in theory) wanted less power to the E.U.

The response from those running the site was wild - even though they were not supporters of Mr Clarke.

I was told my comment was abusive (even though I had not used bad language and had stuck to bare facts) and that I was not welcome (although I have been a member of the Conservative party longer than many of the people involved in the site have been alive).

It seems they have found commentors they prefer.

As for the gentleman you quote.

If he wishes to strengthen British manufacturing industry he should support lower government spending, lower taxes (especially on business enterprises) and less regulations - which will mean taking power from the E.U.

Of course Mr Cameron has committed the Conservative party to the Labour government's "public sector" spending levels (so tax reductions are out of the question) and will not support taking any power at all back from the E.U.

So British manufacturing industry is not going to be restored - which is unfortunate.

I wonder if I should try writing the above on the Conservative Home blog.

After all it is all in polite language and I have written nothing but basic facts.

Still I suspect it would upset the young people there.

Sorry Paul, they've already closed the comments on this on ConservativeHome, no doubt because Makara was coming under a certain amount of well-informed criticism/abuse.

Personally I don't see the point of trying to regulate in aid of fostering an industrial base in Britain. Allowing lower-cost production overseas will serve us well unless and until we get into another war where we're cut off from our normal suppliers. And, in a nuclear age, that will never happen again.

I can't be sure where, but I've run across this Makara chap some time in the past. If memory serves (and it is very hazy) he was banging on about this sort of nonsense years ago and I took him to task, obviously to little effect.

They don't call the Conservatives the stupid party for no reason. This sort of idiotic mercantilism seems to be bred in the bone for some people (particularly egregious examples who made it to the top include Ken Clarke and Michael Heseltine). Except Makara goes further: he is actually advocating autarky, of which a better means of immiserating a population other than out-and-out central planning there has yet to be devised.

Of course Mr Cameron has committed the Conservative party to the Labour government's "public sector" spending levels (so tax reductions are out of the question) and will not support taking any power at all back from the E.U.

I'm curious. Has Mr. Cameron done anything to make himself actually look different from Brown? (Well, aside from looking a bit younger, anyway.)

Because from where I sit, Cameron looks like proof of the success of the UK's space program, or at least the part in which Labour got to launch orbital mind-control satellites. Maybe Tony B implanted a chip in his head?

Not as far as I know Sunfish.

And I have just noticed that the "Luncacy of the month" was not a comment at ConservativeHome it was (according to Alex S.) a post.

There is me thinking that at least the young people were in favour of free trade (even if they were against all other principles of liberty).

However, of course, even if the do not support this article (the Lunacy of the month) they are still ANTI free trade because the support remaining in the E.U. (a customs union not a free trade area and.......).

"But we want to be in the E.U. but not run by it" - they do not even say that anymore.

Even demanding the return of power over fishing was too radical for Cameron and his friends.