nor do we have any dollar debts.
This is not, in fact, true.
Sure, we’ve not much $ government debt but there is some out there.
Then there’s the usual mistake:
And secondly, the demand for government bonds is strong and continuing precisely because banks, life insurance companies, pension funds, and foreign governments, in particular, all want to own them.
…..
The Economist also failed to notice that around a quarter of all UK government debt is owned by the government.
Demand for gilts is so strong that the Bank of England has to own a quarter of all in issue given that demand for gilts is so strong.
The fact is that just about everything The Economist, which is a noted right-wing, neoliberal journal, said was untrue. They ignored vast quantities of information, which was highly relevant to their analysis, but which, for their own convenience, they decided to leave by the wayside.
I don’t really need to comment much further.The idea that the Economist is ‘a noted right -wing’ journal suggests he has never actually read the magazine. It’s certainly left of centre, albeit unlike Murphy within what I call ‘realistic’ frames of reference
I’m starting to think that when Murphy writes ‘neoliberal’ he means ‘jew’.
the economist used to be, in the 1980s.
assuming ‘right wing = free market / classical liberal”
Sadly it has very much lost its was since then.
I am also guessing his source of funds (presumably his wife’s pension/ salary) is running out
And it’s the same with the disability system. The Economist is claiming that the disability system in the UK is being gamed by people. It isn’t. What The Economist is ignoring is the fact that there are very good systemic reasons for rising disability in this country.
So he’s a victim because of a previously undiagnosed neural condition which brings him into the ranks of the disabled.
Not only are people alienated by the neoliberal economy, which is, of course, what The Economist promotes, but they’re also simply being alienated by a workplace; a workplace where AI is becoming predominant, where people who do not fit into the normal system are not recognised as being of worth, and people who have any form of health problem are thrown out of jobs as quickly as possible by employers who do not want to be responsible for the cost of engaging with such people.
Of course employers should just keep people on the payroll indefinitely for no output whatsoever – that’s a surefire way to make a productive enterprise
There is prejudice behind the increase in disability claims in the UK; prejudice against people who do, in any sense, either have mental ill health, or physical ill health or some form of neurodivergency.
That’s of course a very contentious statement which he is careful to keep general. I know my employer if he were to accuse them of discrimination against the disabled would certainly take legal action.
The fact is, the state is having to pick up a cost because the market – in the first sign that we’re seeing of this – is refusing to employ people who are anything but cogs in the machine. And it is cogs in the machine that The Economist wants and not real, live people with all their variety. The problem is that The Economist is itself demanding uniformity when people are anything but uniform.
I am guessing his son is getting a lot of job rejections….
a workplace where AI is becoming predominant
Where are these workplaces where AI is becoming predominant?
Builders and plumbers, obvs.
Digital content creation…. 😉
And how many people are doing that in how many workplaces?
bis, if by AI you mean Absolute Incompetence, I know a few companies that have fully embraced the concept.
“I’m a special flower!”
“You’re a special flower who needs to clean those toilets. Or else you’re the special flower who used to work here.”
Or they see the “special flower”-ness in the interview (his previous experience has told him to play it up instead, so it wouldn’t be hard) and say “Don’t call us; we’ll call you.”
And four adults working from the same residential address. Any leftist student of tax avoidance would say he should be paying business rates on that but the law allows you to swerve it. So all good.
But, isn’t a Mao Suit a kind of uniform?
maybe hes building his case for DLA and a Motability Beemer on the grounds of mental incapacity?
We just need politicians who stand up and talk about the truth, which is that it is the wealthy who are creating most of the problems in this country, and The Economist talks for them, and that’s why it is spreading deliberate misinformation.
If you change the ‘wealthy’ to ‘Jews’ and the Economist for a German liberal newspaper of the 1930s this is verbatim Nazi rhetoric – no difference whatsoever.
In his definition neo liberal now means any person or organisation that shows up my policies to be economically insane.
OT
I have a question for bis or anyone else with a good knowledge of French culture.
the supermarkets we use in Germany, Tesco/Sainsabury’s level, all have coffee shops usually attached to the in the bakery. Is there any reason why the French don’t go in for that sort of thing?
bear in mind we avoid big cities but may shop on the edge of large towns.
The germans have the Kaffee und Kuchen “female” culture that suits itself eminently to the in-house/attached Bakery setup you see in german supermarkets.
French female Klatsch culture traditionally is around the guillotine while knitting..Or snubbing any of the unlimited alliances depending on subject of Scorn moving from shop to shop, or isle to isle.
May work with a patisserie instead of a boulangerie. But a patisserie is generally not found anywhere *near* a supermarket… Quelle Horreur!!
There’s a decent living to be made from german housewives with that setup, none when it comes to french housewives.
So… As our Host always states… Incentives..
Both setups reflect local female
gossipsocial culture, and you ignore that at your own (economic) peril….Sounds plausible.
Just the French being French?
They claim to disapprove of supermarkets (despite all shopping there), so it wouldn’t surprise me if there was some regulation preventing it, as protectionism for the High Street shops and cafes.
You don’t see many cafés in the areas we go to, they’re so rare I commented on seeing one yesterday morning.
I’ve never heard the French disapproving of supermarkets. Although they’d no doubt disapprove of the scrawny Brit supermarkets as being too meager to be worth going to. They stock neither motor bikes nor boats nor trailers to tow them on.They’d also not understand why they have queues at the checkouts of more than one person.
You tried E-LeClerk? I don’t know any of them don’t have one. Although it’s usually a bit more ambitious than just a coffeeshop. Then there’s Carrefour. Always went there for salad nicoise. Generous portions & very cheap. SW France Toulouse, Montauban, Carcassonne, Narbonne. Eaten in all of them. They’re usually front of store. Nothing to do with the boulangerie/ patisserie sections..
We shopped in a large E.LeClerk yesterday but no café although a few other shops in the arcade entrance. Perhaps it’s only in larger towns and cities?
I’m trying to think of a hypermarket in France that does not exist in a parade that includes a café or bar…. Carcassonne, Narbonne, Béziers, Bédarieux, Roujan, Clermont-Ferrand, Strasbourg, Lille. All visited this year and coffee enjoyed before doing the shopping