Skip to content

This is, objectively, fascist

It is fascist economic policy of course, not the wider thing. But still:

People are wise enough to know that most private sector investment undermines our chances of actual survival now. That type of investment is most likely to bring forward catastrophic climate events by encouraging yet more unsustainable consumption. So, we need to invest in the transition to sustainability, which only government can lead. Give them a chance to do so and to see the results in their community and you would most definitely change the savings market for the better.

Nominally private sector but government directed all the same. That is the economics of fascism.

It’s amazing how poor Portugal was in 1974 after 50 years of this sort of stuff.

21 thoughts on “This is, objectively, fascist”

  1. Dennis, Noting The Bright Light Emanating From Ely

    These days Murphy isn’t even bothering to pretend to be other than a totalitarian.

    As hard-hearted as I am, watching his descent into madness is proving difficult to watch.

  2. Lies, damn lies and socialist propaganda. It is all three of them.
    Private investment is the only way that achieving more with less use of resources is being financed (or even thought about).
    Communist China produces over 31% of the world’s CO2 emissions, which means it is producing more than twice the amount per million population than the average for the rest of the world (the UK is just under 1%

  3. Who is this “most people”? As far as I can tell, the ESG people and the guys waffling about climate change are only doing it because it is mandated by government and reinforced by “professional” institutions, such as the LSE, various accounting Institutes, pension funds etc, who stand to get terminated by the Green Religion if they don’t. In real life Thungela exists and oilcos are really only paying lip service to the Great God Green. They know we can’t do without plastics, paints and all the other stuff that comes from oil

  4. John – Communist China produces over 31% of the world’s CO2 emissions

    *Manmade CO2 emissions.

    I reckon we’ll find that human influence over the long term global climate is ~ 0.

    We’re microscopic fleas, on the back of a great big shaggy dog.

    But we think we’re driving the dog.

  5. As I have long suggested, require that the £70 billion a year that goes into ISAs goes into green bonds using a strict taxonomy that requires evidence of new investment activity resulting in net zero outcomes and you would transform the savings market. much would have to re state led.

    Extend this to 25% of pension markets and let people choose if they want to invest locally and in things like housing, energy, transport and so in and the funds to transform our society would be available.

    Steal £70 billion per year – even the ESG fanatics aren’t quite that brazen?

    What returns are people likely to get from these ‘local investments’ precisely or is he suggesting that merely ‘feeling good about things’ pays bills. I constantly marvel at his ability to contradict himself within hours.

    Second, most savers want security for their savings. They do not want equity investment, whether that is rational or not. So forcing more equity onto them does not solve issues in the savings market.

    Which is why I’m advocating cuts in interest rates at a time inflation is in double figures?

    I am thinking someone has to be paying him by the word as the output gets more and more incoherent. Unfortunately, despite his being the embodiment of pure evil, seeing the public mental collapse of his faculties is not easy viewing, as Dennis suggests

  6. 1. Leave him alone, he’s the City University’s National Treasure.

    2. What experience of government, any government, makes him think it should get more responsibilities?

    Thirdly, imagine the mindset at the management level of any educational outfit when the news comes in: ‘Hooray, we’ve finally managed to acquire the services of Richard Murphy!!!’

  7. Is anyone else starting to think that the thoughts of Chairman Spud are coming from Chat GPT?


    “In January, a nine-month investigation by the Guardian, the German weekly Die Zeit and the investigative group SourceMaterial found Verra rainforest credits used by Disney, Shell, Gucci and other big corporations were largely worthless, often based on stopping the destruction of rainforests that were not threatened, according to independent studies. It also found evidence of forced evictions at a flagship scheme co-operated by Conservation International in Peru.”

  9. Dennis, Asking The Tough Questions So You Don't Have To

    Is anyone else starting to think that the thoughts of Chairman Spud are coming from Chat GPT?

    Can you dumb AI down that far?

  10. Government leadership leading to sustainability? Wot, like the Aral Sea, you mean…?

  11. “If you invest in an ISA you must invest in this bond with a minus 5% return”
    Ok then, I’ll not invest in ISAs.

  12. ‘It’s amazing how poor Portugal was in 1974 after 50 years of this sort of stuff.’

    Sounds like it’ll do what the Greens want then, Tim.

  13. @ Steve
    Over the long term, human impact on global heating can only be positive but until recently it was indistinguishable from zero as it was swamped by natural variations. However the scores of *billions* of tons of coal that China has burnt since Mao’s communists, helped by Stalin, conquered the country must have had an impact that does*not* approximate to zero – even if you refuse to believe in the “greenhouse gas” effect.
    In any case my first paragraph stands whether or not *you* are unable to observe that the UK is noticeably warmer than it was in my childhood.

  14. @John77. England has warmed since your childhood, but it was probably a bit cooler then than when your father was young, but warmer than when your great grandfather was. This, in turn was warmer than it was in 1690. Can you find a unique structural break in the long term temperature record to councide with Mao & Stalin?

  15. @ HoblinMango
    Not from the 1949 invasion when Mao was focussed on the Chinese peasant, but from “The Great Leap forward” when he switched to focussing on industry in order to have a proletariat: YES. The chart that *you* reference shows a rise of over 3 degrees from 1960 to the current day. There is no date for which the chart shows a deviation of 3 degrees from the mean,
    FYI that chart also shows that England is warmer than at any time when my father was young; I think you mean 1696 or 1741: 1690 was warmer than some of my childhood

  16. @John77. ?? Are you picking spikes when talking about climate not weather? The smoothed trend (black dotted line) goes from about zero from 1960 to 1980 to somewhat over 1 degree today. The running mean was a bit higher than 1960-80 in the 1940s but lower in the 1890s. It was much lower around 1690 and rose by close to 2 degrees by 1730.

  17. But we think we’re driving the dog.

    We think our collective farts are going to set the dog’s fur on fire.

  18. @ hoblinmango , after all the fiddling that’s gone on with the statistics for temperature such as ignoring spikes in temperature that have been inconvenient to the climate change lobby i tend to take any statistical evidence coming from the likes of the met office with a pinch of salt. i struggle to see how on organisation that can’t forecast the weather within much accuracy can state the average temperature in 1690 especially as their own website says “The Met Office has routinely provided summaries of the monthly average of the maximum, minimum and mean temperature for the weather stations located throughout the UK since 1884” yes, they do hold records going much further back , but how reliable are they and how was the monitoring spread throughout the uk? In fact their oldest weather stations are Armagh and oxford opened in 1853, southampton in 1855.

  19. @ HoblinMango
    I was looking at the chart that YOU referenced which claims to be mean annual temperatures, which therefore excludes individual day or night extremes.
    Using a lagged five-year average blatantly understates the extent and steepness of a rising trend “as any fule noes”.
    Even if one looks at the lagged five-year average there is a very significant rise of 1.5 degrees from “The Great Leap Forward” (a steeper rise of 1.4 degrees from Deng’s “to be rich is glorious”) which is unmatched by any period of recorded data (which starts in 1772).
    You have decided that you know when my ancestors were born: you are wrong and your claims are consequently wrong. I *do* know and commented correctly.

Leave a Reply

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