• Post count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

338 Good

About KingGTF

  • Rank
    Reserve Team
  • Birthday 12/04/96

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

5,867 profile views
  1. I love this new way of politics that Jeremy Corbyn supposedly represents, sit there for 15 minutes and not answer a single question.....
  2. I'm not sure 80 quid will make up for the complete shambles that will ensue
  3. I hope and would expect all campaigning to be suspended for today at least
  4. I just hope people can reunite as quick as possible, there must be some very frightened teenagers and some very worried parents out there. Absolutely horrible what has happened, it takes a disgusting bastard to do this. It's somewhat uplifting at the response of people as individuals and as a collective though. This attack concerns me far more than the Westminster Bridge attack. This has, realistically, got to have been a real failing by the security services. Obviously they do a very difficult job and a man picking up a knife from the kitchen, renting a car and driving it into people is near impossible to stop. But it is completely different to organising a nail bomb attack takes a decent amount of planning where there must be opportunities for it to be snuffed out.
  5. May's problem stems from the fact she insists on having a small and closed group of confidents, so whilst this may give her a feeling of security and trust, it has distanced her from cabinet and her party. It's shown in her desire to make this presidential which doesn't necessarily work in a system so heavily entrenched in party politics. Changing her mind after sending ministers out to defend it is only going to make the matter worse. The social care policy was apparently a late entry and it shows, because whilst on the face of it its actually not a shabby policy (in my opinion), it doesn't seem to have been well thought through or sold. They thought that this election was going to be about Brexit, a misguided thought given that they were going to have to release a manifesto to be scrutinised on a range of things and once manifestos were launched, the path was always going to change slightly. I still believe in the last few days it will come down to Brexit but even then, they haven't done themselves any favours. It's difficult to trust her on Brexit when she relies so heavily on a closed circle which has shown clear deficiencies in the last week, whilst also having a record of backing down easily (the budget, the calling of an election, this social care plan). I'm not at all a fan of the manifesto, I've never particularly like May and I don't like the vision she has for the Conservative Party or the next five years, but there really is nowhere else for my vote to go. My vote will make no difference in either seat I can vote in so I could spoil my ballot with a message for the Conservative Party but I don't really care for the party enough to make my feelings heard. Now, whilst I'm not entirely in agreement with the Libertarian Party, they probably would get my vote but I think they're only standing in 4 or 5 seats.
  6. You must say it's rather bizarre that, in order to help officials, a decision to regulate pitch patterns was taken before a decision to introduce video technology
  7. So what you've done is found a staunch Keynesian economist, looked at his titles and decided that makes him right, particularly as he agrees with you? Well Hayek won a nobel prize and was professor at LSE for a bit, he would have approved of 'austerity' and was professor at LSE for a bit. Friedman won a nobel prize and most likely would have approved of 'austerity. There are holes in his argument, he is not an infallible economist, but instead has become a one-issue campaigner whom tries to appeal to the populist and thus has begun to neglect economic thinking. What Krugman is very good at is presenting a misleading argument using the IS-LM model and assuming that this simple two-dimensional beast explains everything. He even disagrees with you. "An economy where interest rates cannot go any lower is an economy awash in desired saving with no place to go, and deficit spending that expands the economy is, if anything, likely to lead to higher private investment than would otherwise materialise". Time and time again you have said that growth is being fuelled by private debt, well Krugman seems to suggest that there's too much saving in the UK given the interest rate is so low. Also he uses Germany and the US as examples to compare to the UK. The US reduced it deficit between 2010 and 2014 but still saw reasonable growth, whilst Germany's deficit was less than a third of the UK's so the situation is quite different. But then if Krugman believes Germany to have fared better than the UK, maybe he's just made the argument for cutting the deficit. It's strange how he doesn't really look at the situation of Japan either, but then why would he when it doesn't fit what he is saying. How about the fact that he's pretty much been shown to be wrong in saying that monetary policy is ineffective at the zero lower bound. How about the fact that UK employment has been strong and the reason for low growth is low productivity. His theory doesn't give a reason for why productivity is low but employment is high, nor will deficit spending mean higher productivity. (Of course government can use spending to boost productivity but that isn't the point that Krugman makes, probably because it wouldn't make for such populist reading) I would retort further to the Guardian piece or offer times when Krugman has been wrong but I'm off to Newmarket in half an hour. Ricardo Reis is a new keynesian who isn't much of a fan of Krugman, we had a whole lecture on it ish. Fair play to Krugman, he's put out some decent pieces and was definitely a big player. Then he won his Nobel prize and decided to go and make money instead of carrying on. America got bored of listening to him so he came and gave it a go here. And then he decided to become Clinton's biggest fan. He does indeed know more than me, I'm sure, but what a silly thing to say or maybe you believe in Plato's idea of the philosopher king and we should therefore bow down to Krugman with his Nobel prize and his place at CUNY.
  8. Bank of England admits 'Michael Fish' moment with dire Brexit predictions
  9. Labour will probably pay for the plane ticket to ship these very very bad people away
  10. Of course a significant credit rating change might signal debt will get more expensive but any credit rating downgrade itself won't make much different, investors won't need a credit rating change to alter their behaviour. Immediately after the Brexit vote, indexed bonds were giving the government its cheapest ever borrowing which is interesting. That's interesting actually, I didn't know that happened and is certainly a benefit from the central bank holding government debt. Not quite £35bn off a debt because Merv also said it would have to be paid back, maybe with more interest added on but admittedly that could be just discourse to avoid inflationary effects and loss of confidence, and the bank will never ask for it back. But still, it raises a question about confidence in the central bank and in the case of BoE, its independence. How much further is it willing to go, is it willing to cancel the debt and if markets were to think that then it's bad for the economy. I very much doubt they did but I'm trying make a point that it's not necessarily completely beneficial for the BoE to hold the debt. Of course there's also the problem of the BoE's exit strategy, given the Bank of Japan's influence in the financial crisis. The fact that the central bank holds government debt must be causing worry that they only just about have control which, whilst isn't a problem for government directly, but it is problematic. These are now hypotheses from my own head, which I haven't properly thought about and I may be barking up the wrong tree. Anyway, this is now more of a discussion of QE rather than just a central bank holding sovereign debt. This is very much the realm of a Ricardo Reis whom lectured us for 10 weeks over the spring, he's at the forefront of the academic discussion of central bank's right now. I'm a learner, I'm not an academic and uni feels stifling to me. Maybe it's a failure of me but I don't want to be learning material for an exam, I want to be asking my own questions and delving deeper and really getting stuck into things. I quite simply couldn't invest myself into preparing for exams. I have been considering this for a few months now so it's not due to, what I agree would be the wrong reasons. I have already deferred this years exams so I have a year out now but I also have very little intention of going back and completing them next year. I'm hoping in this time, I am able to sell myself to someone who can give ME the chance rather than giving it to the bit of paper I hold. Maybe I'm living in fantasy land but I'm giving myself the opportunity to make my own way with LSE as an insurance. I just want to learn, I have my ideas I just need to learn how to develop and implement them. The fact is, uni makes me miserable and the whole graduate train that I'd already fallen into was going to carry that on, whether this break works or not I don't know.
  11. - The interest is so extortionate that is makes it a little unfair so I would agree there, maybe there should be some interest though - The point is that some of it gets repaid (I don't think the rate of repayment is too bad) and those whom their earnings potential is benefitted significantly, pay for the opportunity that led to that - That would benefit middle class students even more than scrapping would. If parents are paying in for their kid, the money can't be used again to benefit underprivileged kids. There is a shortage of places at uni anyway, it's not like med schools aren't able to fill their places so the cost isn't the issue
  12. Interesting suggestion. Most don't train to become a teacher until they do a PGCE so I'm not sure you could scrap it for them, I guess you could offer to wipe it but it would also have to carry a minimum number of years of service to prevent people teaching for 2 years and just leaving. Doctors/Dentists I feel should pay because they are well paid
  13. Fed up of the tuition fee debate. The current system is pretty decent and they shouldn't be scrapped. It's a vanity project
  14. Angela Rayner is actually awful. Idk how she got selected to run to be MP, what a state the shadow cabinet is
  15. Fair play to Spurs, missing players and nothing to play for but turned in a class performance and thoroughly deserved it