Skip to content

As neat a demolition of the Murphmeister as you’ll see.


33 thoughts on “As neat a demolition of the Murphmeister as you’ll see.”

  1. Agreed: the Corbyn / Murphmeister “print money and spend it on infrastructure” idea is hopeless as it stands. Moreover the 35 economists in their letter did not specifically agree with C&B. They said, to quote, that “Corbyn’s proposals should be welcomed even by his opponents for stimulating serious discussion of crucial issues”. That’s about right. I.e. by the time those 35 have trashed the C&B “print money” idea and re-assembled it, we might get something worthwhile.

  2. Murphy was on the Today programme this morning (business section at about 7:20). Normally he tries to sound reasonable but the attention is puffing him up. His arrogance was clearly irritating his interviewer as he trashed the independence of the BoE, MPC and OBR. He wants to order them all around (BoE Governers who won’t do as they are told should be on the first plane out of London). Hubris is making him drop his mask. It ain’t pretty what’s underneath.

  3. I see the Murph claims on his blog that China is “neo-liberal” – which surely evacuates the term of any meaning.

  4. Have to admit, I was unlucky enough to catch RM on the Today programme this morning. Whilst clearly mad as a box of frogs, he sounds much more sane and reasonable talking than you’d ever guess from his blog.

  5. “I see the Murph claims on his blog that China is “neo-liberal” – which surely evacuates the term of any meaning.”

    When China is showing double digit growth it’s a miracle of socialism. When the stock market crashes 9% in the morning it’s a neoliberal failure. A bit like Andy Murray at tennis to be honest.

  6. Theo

    Hence why I often term him ‘the most dangerous man in Britain’ – enough people swallow this crap if presented in a reasonable manner (and I presume his spoken manner MUST be better than his written manner) – However, as to the blog itself – masterful. In order to get this nonsense through they have to dress it up, as they know if people who aren’t active on blogs or Twitter are offered it they will not vote for it…..

  7. Van Patten: He’s on his blog this morning stating that “if I had the power [to change the independence of the OBR/BOE] I’d use it for good”.

    Which is how Adolph started out, thinking about it- removal of power from established organs of the state doing a tricksy job in a manner the usurper didn’t like nor understand.

    I’m starting to think you have a point about him being dangerous…

  8. John Square

    These are tumultuous times – the collapse of the markets, which has been coming offers opportunities for the unscrupulous and the power hungry – Murphy is a man entirely without scruple and willing to lie and exaggerate and bully and bluster anyone who happens to have thought through these issues more carefully than he might have. I noticed the post on the Bank of England and it really exposes the true thug beneath the veneer.

    I cannot have been alone in thinking back to historical pictures of the likes of Ernst Roehm and Hermann Goering – GlenDorran’s post on the parallel thread on the Daily Mail’s ‘what if Corbyn won’ where he talks of ‘the Security state’ show their quite chilling vision of the future. It’s a vision of democracy you can see in action in the history books ‘The German DEMOCRATIC people’s republic’ or indeed in one country today – The DEMOCRATIC people’ Republic of Korea’ – the danger these people pose to established order and basically society itself cannot be overstated.

  9. In Tim’s absence

    Worth pointing out that Murphy is saying any governor of the Bank of England who doesn’t follow instructions to debase the currency will not only be dismissed but exiled.

    I wonder if Lawrence from Guernsey, whose primary claim to fame was as an unpaid extra in the German film ‘Das Leben der anderen’ (His background work for Murphy lent him a certain authenticity in the filmmakers eyes) has any comment on putting people ‘on the plane’?

  10. @John Square

    It is a fundamental deceit of the Left that they don’t credit Dolfie and co with having had good intentions as they saw them. Yet they credit their own side with the same, and condescend to themselves that their intentions are objectively good.

    Which is why identical or equivalent policies carried out by both of the totalitarian Socialist blocs with equally horrific results are viewed as somehow being polar opposites.

  11. So Murphy is now a spokesman for Corbyn?

    From the Friends Provident Foundation:

    “What we will NOT fund:

    …..Activities to promote a specific political party.”

    Seems to me that the £40k a year the Foundation will be chucking Murphy’s way is doing just that.

  12. He’s going to get trashed in the media once they get on his blog and can link all his fascist crap on there to Corbyn.

    Popcorn shares the only things up today 🙂

  13. Government doesn’t invest – it spends.

    What it spends on is determined by political decisions. You bundle campaign contributions for Obama, he spends on your Solyndra project.

    Politicians don’t run on giving money to their friends; they run on “doing good.” Which works perfectly well on many voters.

  14. And there was me thinking that the BoE being given independence meant less political interference from power crazed numpty’s.

  15. Spending authority is with Parliament.

    Keep it that way.

    This is a scheme to create a slush fund for Corbyn to spend outside of Parliament’s control.

    Parliament surely isn’t stupid enough to give up their control. BUT . . . the US Congress in 2009 gave Obama $1,000,000,000,000 to spend any way he chose, giving spending authority to the president, diminishing their own power. Obama gave it to his friends, shored up union pension funds, etc. The “Stimulus” stimulated nothing.

    Like the Reichstag voting to give its power to Hitler, Murphy/Corbyn propose Enabling Acts.

  16. bloke (not) in spain

    With reference to abacab etc; so far the Corbyn/Murphy axis don’t seem to be military expansionist. Is this a phase to come? Wonder which bit of leibensraum Richie’ll have his eyes on? Armoured attack on the Gnomes of Zurich or just a Seelowe across the beaches of the Isle Of Man.

  17. mmm.

    “Mark Carney has said that People’s Quantitatiev Easing is possible.”

    Did he?

    I think Murphaloon is lying as per…

  18. Heh.

    First time the phrase “a fairly standard hegemonic view” has appeared on Today?

    Should rename himself Richard Sole.

  19. bloke (not) in spain

    The Murph phenomenon should really be instructive of something. He’s entirely a product of this here interweb. Without it, he’d be a total unknown. None of his ravings would of got past his converted garage door. I’m sure Mrs M wouldn’t have allowed them in the house. Not with the carpets an’ that.

  20. ““Mark Carney has said that People’s Quantitatiev Easing is possible.”

    Did he?”

    If he did, he probably said “It’s possible, but it is a sh1tty idea that always leads to Weimar” or words to that effect.

  21. Here’s Mark carney, apparently agreeing that PQE is possible (well, that’s how Murphy appears to interpret the following).

    “Carney: No is the short answer. I can’t envision any circumstance where I think an advanced economy central bank, should pursue helicopter money – a cancellation in effect of government debt, because that’s what it ultimately means – the inability to then bring back the reserves that had been put out into the banking system. If you think about the hundreds and hundreds of billions of additional central bank reserves that we have put into the banking system in order to fund the Asset Purchase Facility, well ultimately we want to be able to take those back. And we need an asset to sell in order to do that. If we cancel that asset on top of that, which is what you need to do for this, how are we going to pay the interest on those reserves? Are we just going to issue more reserves to pay the interest on the reserves and compound and compound and compound? I mean, you can very quickly see how this doesn’t hold together. Of course on top of all that, the reason why one doesn’t even start on this conversation is the removal of any discipline on fiscal policy that comes from that, or would almost certainly arrive from it. And so, no, I can’t see any circumstances where I would advocate, including in the eurozone – forget about it being absolutely prohibited under the Maastricht Treaty – just from as a sense of sound policy, to undertake that in order to achieve.”

  22. Bloke not in Cymru

    On my recent brief visit to Murphy’s blog I noticed his tendency to pick part of statements to support his view and ignore context.
    So QE is possible, there’s no technical reason it couldn’t be done (ignoring those pesky EU rules at this point). So agreeing it’s possible doesn’t actually mean anything, but it can be spun that way as he has done.

  23. It is technically possible to swallow a cyanide capsule, but it will kill you very quickly.

    MURPHY: aha! So you admit swallowing cyanide is possible! Your argument is refuted!

  24. AndrewC

    So where does Richard get in effect his “it’s all fine and dandy” confirmation?

    I mean, there is nothing in that statement there whatsoever that any reasonable person could interpret as meaning “it’s OK”, therefore Richard must surely have some other reference for this?

  25. PF – because his simple mind is so riddled with confirmation bias that he sees general approval of his ideas everywhere? (If so, this might be an early sign of a psychosis…)

  26. Governor of the BoE (and BoC before that) or a retired provincial accountant. Now who is likely to have most knowledge and experience about monetary policy out of those two?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *