Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 146 posts

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#101

Post by dylan604 »

pyuser583 wrote: post #97
dylan604 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

in most families doing this kind of support, then it is typical for numChildren > numParents. So while this may not be the technical definition of Ponzi, the fact that the next generation needs to be larger to sustain the system just sounds like an unsustainable system.

I’m not just talking about families, but societies. My parents who are retired are not adding value to the economy. I am. I’m not caring for them directly, but they are dependents. Their investments give them paper money that only has value because my generation works. I have one sister. So two children and two parents is perfectly sustainable.

Until you have kids

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#102

Post by pdntspa »

FireBeyond wrote: post #72
pdntspa wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The British government levying spurious taxes on its remaining colonies. I am absolutely sure that's going to go well.

> levying spurious taxes "The British Virgin Islands were ranked as the “greatest enabler of corporate tax abuse”" Ahh yes, leveling the playing field is now "spurious taxes" on wealthy individuals and corps...

The joke is that the US was founded because of it

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#104

Post by whack »

jarym wrote: post #15

Funny, central bankers advocating for wage price restraints are in effect calling for price controls (on labour). Except when anyone calls for price controls in any other context (goods, commodities, services) they are generally shot down by mainstream economists because they create market distortions which eventually leads to unwanted side effects. Odd little disparity there.

> Pill’s words were more blunt in suggesting that workers must shoulder more of the burden. That puts the BOE in conflict with thousands of public sector workers angry at the government over its decision to restrain pay.

When economists talk about market distortions, they are talking about free markets. One where there are many competing producers/consumers all of whom are trying to maximize profits, minimize costs, and compete against one another if someone is underpaying/overpaying. Pill's comments here seem to be directed at government workers, many of whom are also unionized. Wages for such workers are driven as much by politics as by free markets

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#105

Post by theGnuMe »

tonfreed wrote: post #95
gghhzzgghhzz wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue isn't about Brexit making the country materially poorer, the conditions existed long before Brexit, it's the main reason for the Brexit vote in the first place. Sure we can trade a bit more, but when the whole economy is financialised to a massive degree, then any benefits of that trade (if that trade outweighs the negative effects) are funnelled through a long standing system of extracting profit and conce…

From what I've read, Scotland is pretty much insolvent and still has generous social programs because England keeps them afloat.

North Sea oil is Scottish oil.

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#106

Post by pyuser583 »

dylan604 wrote: post #101
pyuser583 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m not just talking about families, but societies. My parents who are retired are not adding value to the economy. I am. I’m not caring for them directly, but they are dependents. Their investments give them paper money that only has value because my generation works. I have one sister. So two children and two parents is perfectly sustainable.

Until you have kids

That’s played itself out, and there’s only going to be one between my sister and myself.

So 2 grandparents, two kids, and one grandchild.

Definitely not a Ponzi scheme. Not a good one anyway.

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#107

Post by theGnuMe »

gghhzzgghhzz wrote: post #70
acd wrote: post #20

We should welcome back Brittain to the European Union. To lessen inflation.

People are happy to ignore the reasons why the Brexit vote happened in the first place, or why similar anti-establishment votes keep happening throughout the western world. There are systemic issues that no main stream political project seems capable of addressing, it's pointless to simply remove some trade barriers again to paper things over, and then pat ourselves on the back and pretend they are being solved. Brex…

You say there’s fundamental reasons but don’t state the actual reasons. What are they?

I’m gonna go with nationalists who don’t want foreigners moving to the uk to take our jobs.

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#108

Post by dylan604 »

pyuser583 wrote: post #106
dylan604 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Until you have kids

That’s played itself out, and there’s only going to be one between my sister and myself. So 2 grandparents, two kids, and one grandchild. Definitely not a Ponzi scheme. Not a good one anyway.

right, that's why the system is failing

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#109

Post by bagacrap »

theGnuMe wrote: post #107
gghhzzgghhzz wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are happy to ignore the reasons why the Brexit vote happened in the first place, or why similar anti-establishment votes keep happening throughout the western world. There are systemic issues that no main stream political project seems capable of addressing, it's pointless to simply remove some trade barriers again to paper things over, and then pat ourselves on the back and pretend they are being solved. Brex…

You say there’s fundamental reasons but don’t state the actual reasons. What are they? I’m gonna go with nationalists who don’t want foreigners moving to the uk to take our jobs.

Well, no one wants to lose a job. Can't fault them for that.

Globalization, technology, loose monetary policy all affect different socioeconomic strata differently.

I think the fundamental issue is that not everyone in society is making the same progress.

Re: BOE Chief Economist Says Britons ‘Need to Accept’ They’re Worse Off

#110

Post by sdwr »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #43
legitster wrote: post #18

A lot of commenters are obsessed with just finding money. You can't eat money. You can't build a house out of it (advisably). Money is only as valuable as the amount of stuff in an economy. More money with the same amount of stuff is just inflation. The Pound does not need more inflation. Money and trade are only valuable in so much as they aid exchange and efficiency. On a real, practical-level Brexit made England m…

"Money is only as valuable as the amount of stuff in an economy. More money with same amount of stuff is just inflation." What if the number of people in the country's economy significantly changes, up or down? Nothing? Can one simply ignore this variable or should it be part of the analysis? Perhaps there is a hidden assumption here that it is held (more or less) constant. NB. "stuff" can be natural resources, or ot…

Not to go 0 to 100 on this, but a certain someone had a similar idea back in 1939.
Post reply on HN