Interesting assertion

There it is: confirmation if it were needed that the debt is borrowing that must be repaid at cost to future generations even though £435 billion of quantitative easing proves otherwise and we have never repaid public debt, or attempted to do so, because the truth is that this would destroy the money supply.

I think I’m right that G. Brown paid down a bit of the debt in his first couple of years. Lawson was proud of his public sector debt repayment. And didn’t Attlee run a budget surplus to help pay down the war debt?

Hmm, perhaps the Senior Lecturer isn’t right in his assertion then?

19 thoughts on “Interesting assertion”

  1. The Meissen Bison

    Hmm, perhaps the Senior Lecturer isn’t right in his assertion head then?

    That about covers it, no?

  2. “we have never repaid public debt, or attempted to do so,”

    Jesus, what stupidity. Much of the 19th century was a long campaign to pay off the debts from the Napoleonic Wars.

  3. During the time of Attlee and therefore rationing and control of supply of consumer goods there was extensive barter, especially among the lower orders. One form of currency in a town with a number of engineering works was cigarette lighters. I recall carrying a small case full of them to another town where they commanded a higher exchange value.

  4. May spend the next hundred years paying the debt off but quite likely it will be paid down considerably in my lifetime. Debt is paid down among other things to make it easier to later take on debt when needed.
    Imagine if we still had all the debt from the 20th century to repay?

  5. Sorry for being dumb

    But wouldn’t paying down debt just increase the wealth the nation by increasing the value of currency. I.E. slight deflation.

  6. Notice please Tim how much more life there is on this blog –when there is anything new to comment about-and how many commenters are not going over to Contins.

    I know you have to make a living but Contins is draining the life out of the blog.

    Can you at least parallel post the threads ( without the ADD photos over here thanks) on both blogs. So we can have the real debate over here as always. And if any poster likes his comment I’m sure we will all agree to also post it over at Contins to keep that going. And your revenues up.

    The blog is dying Tim. It can’t keep going on one piece in a blue moon plus the Murphy stuff. As for Contins there are an average of a few comments plus Twatty’s C&P. The cunt is very nearly the most prolific commenter. There has only been one good donnybrook in all the postings so far — the ghastly Fuller-Shit piece.

    Revive the blog Tim and your comments/traffic at Contins will likely increase.

  7. We’ve one specific event that needs to happen to properly establish Contins. If, as and when that happens then life will return more to normal around here.

  8. Tim: I hate all the pictures on Contins which are stock and reduce the space for the tickler to tempt one to click on a thread. It makes it very busy and hard to find the thread that earlier piqued ones interest. I also hate the thin font: it may lend fake serious tone but that’s not why I read you; I’d rather read on my tablet without hunting for my reading specs. Good luck!

  9. “Benaud, wouldn’t taking money out of circulation add to inflation?”

    The same goods chasing less money = more goods chasing the same money.
    Either way, the pressure on prices is downward.

  10. However paying down debt owed internally is, in effect, a transfer of money from the state to the private sector. It generally tends to be “investment” money rather than money available for general spending. So increases the amount of money chasing investment opportunities in the private sector. Competition produces a downward pressure on interest rates compounded by the absence of support from that cancelled gov’t debt.
    All other things being equal, results in the currency becoming relatively weaker as there’s less return on investment for foreign investors.

  11. I got him in a classic about companies house.

    He says no one regulates the rules. I point out over 6000 prosecutions. He flaps about.

    One of his supplicunts invents some nonsense about a 5 year timeline of non-compliance. I point out that’s factually wrong. Murphy then flaps about and says my facts misrepresent the position.

    Then he starts redacting my posts so he can get the last word in.

  12. @andrew c. I see he’s reverted to his usual line of “a good many accountants agree with me” oh how very specific your evidence is

    Same as his oft repeated assertion that “I speak to the big 4 tax departments all the time”. He dosent, that’s a lie. I’m a partner in the biggest of the big 4 and he dosent talk to us, and nor do we have any interest in talking to him

  13. But wouldn’t paying down debt just increase the wealth the nation by increasing the value of currency. I.E. slight deflation

    Lol, just goes to show that when it comes to MMT your understanding of it falls FAR short of King Tuber’s.

  14. Anyway, who needs outdated concepts like facts or a knowledge of history when your entire worldview is like a cardboard box full of kittens fighting over a soft toy?

Leave a Reply

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