Webbo Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 5 minutes ago, Rogstanley said: Can you explain in detail what stage of the “economic cycle” the uk is at, what stage the eurozone is at, how each has come to be at that stage and why that has impacted upon growth rates? Also please explain how the fact that Germany’s growth post recession was much, much stronger than ours doesn’t show that absolutely everything you have said on this subject today is completely fabricated, hopeless bollocks? In detail no, if I could you wouldn't be able to understand it anyway. Why do you keep going on about Germany? I've repeatedly said Europe or the Eurozone which as I've already shown was in recession in 2012 and part of 2013 when we weren't so they were at a different stage of the economic cycle. Is that clear?
Webbo Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 2 hours ago, toddybad said: Because that isn't true. He oversaw spending cuts until his final year in office. Quote President Barack Obama outlined the economic stimulus package during his 2008 campaign. Congress approved the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in February 2009. The economic stimulus package ended the Great Recession by spurring consumer spending. It's goal was to save between 900,000 to 2.3 million jobs. Most important, it instilled the confidence needed to boost economic growth. It also aimed to restore trust in the finance industry by limiting bonuses for senior executives in companies that received TARP funds. (Sources: "Letter to Senator Grassley," Congressional Budget Office, March 2, 2009. Recovery.gov) How It Worked ARRA had three spending categories. It cut taxes by $288 billion. It spent $224 billion in extended unemployment benefits, education and health care. It created jobs by allocating $275 billion in federal contracts, grants, and loans. Congress designed the Act to spend $720 billion, or 91.5 percent, in its first three fiscal years. It allocated $185 billion in FY 2009, $400 billion in FY 2010 and $135 billion in FY 2011. The Obama administration did better than planned. By the end of FY 2009, it spent $241.9 billion. Of that, it spent $92.8 billion in tax relief, $86.5 billion in unemployment and other benefits and $62.6 billion in job creation grants. In the FY 2012 budget, the Congress allocated additional funding to raise the total to $840 billion. By December 31, 2013, the administration spent $816.3 billion. Of that, it spent $290.7 billion in tax relief, $264.4 billion in benefits, and $261.2 billion in contracts, grants and loans. (Source: Recovery.gov.) https://www.thebalance.com/what-was-obama-s-stimulus-package-3305625
Guest Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 13 minutes ago, Webbo said: https://www.thebalance.com/what-was-obama-s-stimulus-package-3305625 Ok.
Webbo Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 Just now, toddybad said: Ok. I'm right? Is that an apology?
Strokes Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 28 minutes ago, toddybad said: Bless him, he tries. I don't know why. But he tries. 21 minutes ago, Webbo said: https://www.thebalance.com/what-was-obama-s-stimulus-package-3305625 7 minutes ago, toddybad said: Ok. Classic Toddy. 1
Guest Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 3 minutes ago, Webbo said: I'm right? Is that an apology? It is hard to tell tbh. Looking things up, as I do, he certainly did spend a lot on some stimulus programmes, many of which were enacted by Bush and he had no choice but to continue with a Republican Congress and Senate (as an aside I always thought it hugely unfortunate that he didn't get a Democrate house to enact his programme properly). But then I've also found information talking about stimulus spending as discretionary spend and showing domestic spending reducing. http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/27/news/economy/spending-obama/index.html Look, I doubt either of us are experts on us economic decisions. In terms of growth rate, let's remember that 1% of growth for them requires something like $150bil of growth vs ££18bil for us. Assuming that neither of us really are likely to understand their economy over the last 15 years, I can't really answer comparisons between economies. They're complex.
Webbo Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 Just now, toddybad said: It is hard to tell tbh. Looking things up, as I do, he certainly did spend a lot on some stimulus programmes, many of which were enacted by Bush and he had no choice but to continue with a Republican Congress and Senate (as an aside I always thought it hugely unfortunate that he didn't get a Democrate house to enact his programme properly). But then I've also found information talking about stimulus spending as discretionary spend and showing domestic spending reducing. http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/27/news/economy/spending-obama/index.html Look, I doubt either of us are experts on us economic decisions. In terms of growth rate, let's remember that 1% of growth for them requires something like $150bil of growth vs ££18bil for us. Assuming that neither of us really are likely to understand their economy over the last 15 years, I can't really answer comparisons between economies. They're complex. Bless.
Guest Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 I'm tired and a few pints down. I'll be back to vanquish you later Webster of Leicester.
leicsmac Posted 14 January 2018 Posted 14 January 2018 Everyone in this thread does realise that if you asked five different leading economists about the best economic policy for a state to pursue now or at any other time you'd get ten different answers and a punch-up, right? I know it's a FT speciality to pursue a circular argument with no one giving ground but the economic policy arguments that crop up in this thread seem even more absurd than most because there is zero real appeal to authority and zero real right answers that can be predicted with any kind of certainty. 1
Guest Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 Medical students urged to volunteer as NHS winter crisis worsens https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/14/inexperienced-medical-students-urged-volunteer-nhs-winter-crisis-worsens?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Jesus Chris
Guest Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 I couldn't not Let’s wrench power back from the billionaires https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/14/power-billionaires-bernie-sanders-poverty-life-expectancy-climate-change?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Bellend Sebastian Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 Some light relief: Stewart Lee on Toby Young. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/14/how-toby-young-got-where-he-isnt-today-universities-regulator-resignation 1
Buce Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 7 hours ago, toddybad said: Medical students urged to volunteer as NHS winter crisis worsens https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/14/inexperienced-medical-students-urged-volunteer-nhs-winter-crisis-worsens?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Jesus Chris Trust me - I'm almost a Dr...
Bryn Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 8 hours ago, toddybad said: Medical students urged to volunteer as NHS winter crisis worsens https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/14/inexperienced-medical-students-urged-volunteer-nhs-winter-crisis-worsens?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard Jesus Chris Good idea for the wrong reasons. Medical students seem to spend less and less time on the wards and more time in simulated settings, This isn't entirely inappropriate as teaching delivered on the ward is incredibly variable for obvious reasons and there are minimum standards that need to be delivered. I don't think returning to the days in which a medical student was basically an unpaid house officer is a good thing but I think they should spend more time attached to a ward team as their named student who mucks in with jobs and learns what it's like to be part of the team. There are a lot of things medical students could safely help with to help maintain patient flow, with supervision. There's no reason they can't write first drafts of clinical letters for example; they have been vetted to access clinical information and trained to write clinical documentation, which is an important skill for them. Frequently a discharge summary that goes to the GP (a monumentally important and frequently neglected bit of paperwork) is either rushed, done late or done by a clinician who doesn't really know the patient but has read the notes and I suspect a medical student with no other pressures on them would actually write a clearer and more thorough summary which a doctor could then review, amend and authorise. They can also place IV lines and take bloods and other basic clinical skills and being proficient in doing so before they even started as a first year doctor would be a huge boon to them. They are also spending more and more time clerking in new patients as this is a critical skill. I spend a lot of my time working in the acute medical admissions unit, which is where patients with conditions like heart attack and pulmonary embolism go after being resuscitated in A+E. There are a lot of patients there who are very stable who just need to continue their treatment or await test results. One of the more time consuming aspects of running that unit is that unlike the emergency department, which rightly focuses on emergency treatment, we have to be more holistic and ensure we have complete medication records and social histories so that discharge planning can commence as soon as it is appropriate, we have to have a very clear idea of what treatment the patient has received from specialists in the past and generally need much more detail than the ED. This is time consuming to assemble and again in the more stable patients there is no reason a medical student could not take this more detailed history and present it to a trained doctor who could then take a focused history and examination from the patient and ensure appropriate treatment is underway. I would propose issuing small bursaries to medical students who undertake this kind of work in their final year at medical student and believe the enormous time saving for trained doctors would save money and improve patient care overall, it actually mystifies me that we're not already using these already highly trained students to ease the burden. 2
Bryn Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 That article makes it sound like we'd chuck them into A&E resus and let them crack on with critical unwell patients which clearly isn't the case. The hospital doesn't end in A&E, I would use to them help clear backlogs further down the system so that the A&E can focus on what it's good at.
Guest Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 9 minutes ago, Bryn said: Good idea for the wrong reasons. Medical students seem to spend less and less time on the wards and more time in simulated settings, This isn't entirely inappropriate as teaching delivered on the ward is incredibly variable for obvious reasons and there are minimum standards that need to be delivered. I don't think returning to the days in which a medical student was basically an unpaid house officer is a good thing but I think they should spend more time attached to a ward team as their named student who mucks in with jobs and learns what it's like to be part of the team. There are a lot of things medical students could safely help with to help maintain patient flow, with supervision. There's no reason they can't write first drafts of clinical letters for example; they have been vetted to access clinical information and trained to write clinical documentation, which is an important skill for them. Frequently a discharge summary that goes to the GP (a monumentally important and frequently neglected bit of paperwork) is either rushed, done late or done by a clinician who doesn't really know the patient but has read the notes and I suspect a medical student with no other pressures on them would actually write a clearer and more thorough summary which a doctor could then review, amend and authorise. They can also place IV lines and take bloods and other basic clinical skills and being proficient in doing so before they even started as a first year doctor would be a huge boon to them. They are also spending more and more time clerking in new patients as this is a critical skill. I spend a lot of my time working in the acute medical admissions unit, which is where patients with conditions like heart attack and pulmonary embolism go after being resuscitated in A+E. There are a lot of patients there who are very stable who just need to continue their treatment or await test results. One of the more time consuming aspects of running that unit is that unlike the emergency department, which rightly focuses on emergency treatment, we have to be more holistic and ensure we have complete medication records and social histories so that discharge planning can commence as soon as it is appropriate, we have to have a very clear idea of what treatment the patient has received from specialists in the past and generally need much more detail than the ED. This is time consuming to assemble and again in the more stable patients there is no reason a medical student could not take this more detailed history and present it to a trained doctor who could then take a focused history and examination from the patient and ensure appropriate treatment is underway. I would propose issuing small bursaries to medical students who undertake this kind of work in their final year at medical student and believe the enormous time saving for trained doctors would save money and improve patient care overall, it actually mystifies me that we're not already using these already highly trained students to ease the burden. Fair enough. It makes a change for somebody on here to know what they're talking about! A warning though: some of our number have had enough of experts
Rogstanley Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 10 hours ago, Webbo said: In detail no, if I could you wouldn't be able to understand it anyway. Why do you keep going on about Germany? I've repeatedly said Europe or the Eurozone which as I've already shown was in recession in 2012 and part of 2013 when we weren't so they were at a different stage of the economic cycle. Is that clear? Point made then. Why do you keep going on about the eurozone? Is the eurozone comparable to the UK? Not really, but Germany is. You're picking and choosing examples that you think make your point. It's like me saying all Algerians are great dribblers because look, Riyad Mahrez.
Rogstanley Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 (edited) 9 hours ago, leicsmac said: Everyone in this thread does realise that if you asked five different leading economists about the best economic policy for a state to pursue now or at any other time you'd get ten different answers and a punch-up, right? I know it's a FT speciality to pursue a circular argument with no one giving ground but the economic policy arguments that crop up in this thread seem even more absurd than most because there is zero real appeal to authority and zero real right answers that can be predicted with any kind of certainty. The answer is never straight forward and that's part of the beauty of it. But I think you've overstated the case. We can look at examples of where certain policies have and haven't worked. For instance there are zero examples i'm aware of of austerity leading to good economic outcomes for most citizens. Meanwhile there are examples of countries that have in recent years reversed austerity with great success (Portugal), there are also examples of countries with higher tax that are ahead of us on a wide range of measures (Norway), and historical examples of countries with large debts bringing them down without austerity (Britain after WWII). Personally, for all the admitted complexity at play here, the fact that wage growth in the UK is the worst in the developed world over the last seven years, that productivity is the worst in the developed world, that our transport infrastructure is the worst in the developed world, that we are plummeting down the league tables in respect of education and health and so on, is all the evidence anyone should need to see that the current system administered by the Tories has been and is continuing to be a comprehensive, unmitigated failure in so far as it impacts upon the average citizen. Edited 15 January 2018 by Rogstanley
Bellend Sebastian Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 My thoughts are with Henry Bolton at this difficult time: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42686932 1
Strokes Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 22 minutes ago, Rogstanley said: Point made then. Why do you keep going on about the eurozone? Is the eurozone comparable to the UK? Not really, but Germany is. You're picking and choosing examples that you think make your point. It's like me saying all Algerians are great dribblers because look, Riyad Mahrez. He doesn’t keep going on about the eurozone, he made a point and had to reiterate it several times because people kept twisting it, in an attempt to undermine and belittle. A bit like you’re attempting again.
Guest Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 I like Simon Jenkins' articles I’m not surprised by Carillion’s failure – companies like this shouldn’t exist https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/15/carillion-failure-contracts-government-whitehall?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard
Guest MattP Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/15/richard-branson-virgin-trains-lift-ban-daily-mail Bizarre, Branson now saying it wasn't him. Quote Sir Richard Branson has ordered Virgin Trains to restock the Daily Mail, saying the rail company’s sales ban amounted to censorship. Branson said the decision by Virgin Trains, which stopped selling the Daily Mail in November after deciding it was “not compatible” with its brand or beliefs, had been taken without his knowledge. “Freedom of speech, freedom of choice and tolerance for differing views are the core principles of any free and open society,” he said in a blogpost. “While Virgin Trains has always said that their passengers are free to read whatever newspaper they choose on board West Coast trains, it is clear that on this occasion the decision to no longer sell the Mail has not been seen to live up to these principles.”
Guest MattP Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 As expected, the moderates can't get close. (That said I'd rather vote for a hard-left candidate than someone like Eddie Izzard) https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jan/15/momentum-backed-candidates-elected-labour-national-executive-committee Quote Jeremy Corbyn’s support base on Labour’s key decision-making body has been strengthened with the election of three candidates backed by Momentum, the grassroots activist group behind his leadership. Jon Lansman, the founder of Momentum, Yasmine Dar and Rachel Garnham were all voted on to Labour’s national executive committee (NEC), seeing off another bid to join the body by the comedian Eddie Izzard. The election of the three Momentum candidates tips the once finely balanced body further in favour of those who support Corbyn’s leadership, and potentially paves the way for it to support a new method for reselecting MPs. Lansman broke the news of their decisive election, with the three Momentum candidates getting more than 62,000 votes each compared to Izzard’s 39,000.
leicsmac Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 5 hours ago, Rogstanley said: The answer is never straight forward and that's part of the beauty of it. But I think you've overstated the case. We can look at examples of where certain policies have and haven't worked. For instance there are zero examples i'm aware of of austerity leading to good economic outcomes for most citizens. Meanwhile there are examples of countries that have in recent years reversed austerity with great success (Portugal), there are also examples of countries with higher tax that are ahead of us on a wide range of measures (Norway), and historical examples of countries with large debts bringing them down without austerity (Britain after WWII). Personally, for all the admitted complexity at play here, the fact that wage growth in the UK is the worst in the developed world over the last seven years, that productivity is the worst in the developed world, that our transport infrastructure is the worst in the developed world, that we are plummeting down the league tables in respect of education and health and so on, is all the evidence anyone should need to see that the current system administered by the Tories has been and is continuing to be a comprehensive, unmitigated failure in so far as it impacts upon the average citizen. I'm sure those that disagree with you can find an authoritative source somewhere that would argue the opposite regarding austerity (regardless of your own position on the matter, whether or not it's truly austerity or whatever), and that's what I'm saying, and that's what's been going on practically ad infinitum in this thread whenever economics is brought up I'm sorry, this isn't a black and white issue, it's not even a shades of grey issue - it's a fvcking Jackson Pollock special where anyone can say what they like and have "expert" backing. And the bickering about it can go round and round while there are other issues far more clearly delineated and important that go unaddressed.
Rogstanley Posted 15 January 2018 Posted 15 January 2018 13 minutes ago, leicsmac said: I'm sure those that disagree with you can find an authoritative source somewhere that would argue the opposite regarding austerity (regardless of your own position on the matter, whether or not it's truly austerity or whatever), and that's what I'm saying, and that's what's been going on practically ad infinitum in this thread whenever economics is brought up I'm sorry, this isn't a black and white issue, it's not even a shades of grey issue - it's a fvcking Jackson Pollock special where anyone can say what they like and have "expert" backing. And the bickering about it can go round and round while there are other issues far more clearly delineated and important that go unaddressed. There are a number of credible theories and I'm more than happy to concede any of them may or may not be correct. What I tend to argue against in this thread are views that have no basis in any accepted theory whatsoever. I don't know what more important issues you are referring to but i suspect the reason they aren't being discussed as much is that there isn't as much to discuss. If an issue is cut and dried then what else is there to say?
Recommended Posts