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

How the U.K. broke its own economy

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 784 posts

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#51

Post by lurk2 »

smackeyacky wrote: post #35
robertlagrant wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that the same? You want to raise the price of energy to make wind etc competitive?

No, you just need fossil fuel energy to be relatively more expensive, not for energy to be more expensive overall. It's happened already but we're currently being held hostage by the coal burners while they scramble to extract the last bit of rent they can.

There is no way to make fossil fuel more expensive without making energy more expensive overall, because fossil fuel is included in the category of "energy overall." The effect of making fossil fuels more expensive is that energy prices will rise. The point of the GP ("Not really. We need polluting energy sources to be charged for their pollution, ie stop using the atmosphere and land as a free sewer, which in turn will put renewables on an equal footing.") is that the goal is not to raise the cost of energy as a whole (even though this is the inevitable outcome of higher fossil fuel prices), but instead to price in the negative externalities generated by fossil fuels.

Put another way, in a world where fossil fuels are no longer consumed, there isn't any reason to limit energy consumption for its sake, since the whole point was to encourage adoption of cleaner technologies. There is a case to be made that this isn't true, since even the "clean" technologies have an environmental impact, but that is tangential to the discussion.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#53

Post by ForTheKidz »

robertlagrant wrote: post #21
Aromasin wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turns out Thatcherism only works as long as the state still has assets to sell off. The delusion that assets would stay in the hands of the working and middle class, and not end up with the wealthy inheriting class, has to be one of the biggest political failures of our government on the modern era. It's lead to the possible death of the Conservative Party if they fail to fight off Reform and the Liberal Democrats.

You're surely joking. The IMF isn't bailing out the UK, and there aren't 3 day week debates because of the failing power supply. What's led to the death of the Conservative party is them doing exactly the opposite what a lot of Conservative voters want: bigger economy, and slower immigration.

The UK economy is already pretty small per-capita compared to other first-world countries. I'm certainly not one to argue for growth, but what is it about UK's conservatism that demands degrowth? It strikes me as antithetical to the liberalisation that I would think would form the right flank of the spectrum.

From my perspective, even economic concerns are driven by fear of immigration: it's just the same old "immigrants are taking my jobs but also somehow not growing the economy so I am now economically displaced" trope.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#54

Post by noneeeed »

lelandfe wrote: post #52
tester89 wrote: post #36

Very derivative of https://ukfoundations.co/ , which is mentioned.

Psst, scroll to the bottom and hit play. Then scroll back up.

Well that is delightful! Especially as I've always really like that song.

The world needs more of that.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#55

Post by bojan »

EndShell wrote: post #37
bojan wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't they get more independence with Brexit? Regarding the immigration, sure, the Conservative voters maybe want less of it, but rich and influential Tories actually like immigration as it allows their businesses to thrive (even more). The UK has more capital going around than her own people.

> Didn't they get more independence with Brexit? We didn't leave the EHCR. So there is an argument that we don't have full control of our laws. IANAL and won't pretend to know the specifics. > Regarding the immigration, sure, the Conservative voters maybe want less of it, but rich and influential Tories actually like immigration as it allows their businesses to thrive (even more). Not just Conservative voters. Almost…

> Not just Conservative voters.

That's also not what I said nor implied. The parent comment discussed Conservatives, so I replied to that.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#56

Post by necubi »

reverendsteveii wrote: post #4

Everyone who bought into neoliberalism in the 80s is now experiencing economies that are mysteriously failing to thrive. Correlation isn't cause, except when it is.

The article is about how bad land and energy policies (essentially central planning)—dating from the post-war period—are holding back the British economy. Is that neoliberalism?

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#57

Post by the_third_wave »

youngtaff wrote: post #42
EndShell wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Plus it was never about immigration, It was partly about immigration. According to these surveys 43% of people that voted leave think immigration should be reduced. https://public.tableau.com/views/Publicopinion2023/FIGURE9?:... > it was always - I think - a classic case of misinformation and greed from many places. Sadly many people fell for it. Why do many people assume that if someone thinks differently about a…

> It was partly about immigration My view is it’s actually about people being racist

My view is there needs to be a version of Godwin's law related to client of supposed 'racism', i.e. the one who claims ${issue} is caused by/related to 'racism' thereby loses the argument unless he comes with solid proof.

I see no proof, spurious claims of 'racism' do not count as such so it actually was about immigration.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#58

Post by EndShell »

bojan wrote: post #55
EndShell wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Didn't they get more independence with Brexit? We didn't leave the EHCR. So there is an argument that we don't have full control of our laws. IANAL and won't pretend to know the specifics. > Regarding the immigration, sure, the Conservative voters maybe want less of it, but rich and influential Tories actually like immigration as it allows their businesses to thrive (even more). Not just Conservative voters. Almost…

> Not just Conservative voters. That's also not what I said nor implied. The parent comment discussed Conservatives, so I replied to that.

I know. I felt like it needed to be pointed out that even on parties that are seen to be more centre-left/left that there is good portion of voters that are opposition to immigration.

This is because I don't think it is as much of a right/left issue like it is frequently framed.

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#59

Post by msm_ »

pipes wrote: post #9
reverendsteveii wrote: post #4

Everyone who bought into neoliberalism in the 80s is now experiencing economies that are mysteriously failing to thrive. Correlation isn't cause, except when it is.

So what was the alternative? Continue with the disaster of central planning. Which is the actual thing that destroyed British industry.

I have zero doubts everyone commenting has read the article. That makes me even more surprised, that some people seem to have conclusions that are in direct opposition to what the article says.

Since, as we all know, the article is about how central planning ruined the UK economy, and the later reforms were not enough to fully unblock it. Particularly, it postulates deregulating housing and making it harder for people to oppose new investments (especially related energy and infrastructure)..

Re: How the U.K. broke its own economy

#60

Post by lsllc »

I have some friends over there and they (or their employers) are cutting back on their business expenditures, staffing and overall outlook. The new payroll taxes (unemployment insurance?) are going to bite both employers and employees alike.

Taxes are too high, there's too much red tape for businesses and successive governments have failed to invest in anything outside of the "south" (e.g. Greater London). I was (half) joking with them that the "north" would be far better off if it seceded and joined Scotland!

Post reply on HN