http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/12/jeremy-corbyn-victory-guardian-panellists-verdict

With almost 60% of the party vote Jeremy Corbyn is the new British Labour Leader. It is reported that 6 back benchers will resign in protest. Jeremy has said QE for the people will be more effective than QE for the bankers.

Could this be Labour's way of gaining public confidence and then sack Corbyn after they win the next election or is there fundamental change happening in British Labour ?

If this extremist ever becomes Prime Minister, the UK will be finished. Corbyn would make the old Soviets and old Chairman Mao blush with his extremism and admiration of Hamas and Hezbollah. How could Labour go so far to the left!

ttbn what could be more extreme with the present system that have central bankers owning our Western Govts via the debt money creation system that is destroying our economies and living standards ?

The worry is that the socialists will throw the baby out with the bathwater and expect Govt to become producers and providers. That will be another disaster. The central bankers with their QE have destroyed all free markets and we are looking at a total market melt down.

I have never heard of this guy until today, so I looked him up on abc.com.au.

"Jeremy Corbyn's views on:
Economy
Opposed to austerity program, more aligned with Greece's radical Syriza party
Advocates redistributive policies such as rent controls and high taxes on businesses and wealthy individuals
Proposes "maximum wage" to curb excessive management pay
Hostile to free trade agreement being negotiated by the EU and US
Wary of EU's "market system" and its treatment of Greece
Defence
A staunch pacifist, anti-war and nuclear programs, a critic of the NATO alliance
Called for dialogue with the militant Palestinian Hamas movement and Lebanon's powerful Hezbollah as part of Middle East peace talks
Says he will apologise for Britain's role in the Iraq invasion
Immigration
Resisted calls to promise tighter border controls
Open to the idea of women-only carriages on public transport to reduce sexual harassment"

Nope, I can't see too much wrong with his views...

Arjay,

I'm not sure I get your drift about bankers. The developed world seems to be existing on debt - hence the bankers. Socialist's whole pysche operates on spending other people's money, so wouldn't there be more enslavement to the bankers with the likes of Corbyn In charge?

Most debts is still private debt. People no longer save for something they want: they get the bank to pay for it. I think politicians are actually following the plebs (in their own vote-greedy selfishness) because people living on the never-never system can see no reason why goverments can't do the same to provide them with welfare, health care, roads education and all the things governments are expected to provide. As the Tory government has slipped further to the left to get the votes (as here as well) the people are now convinced of their "rights", and it is too horrible to even think about this extreme sociaist taking over the country.

//Open to the idea of women-only carriages on public transport to reduce sexual harassment//

Women only carriages? Is he taking the piss? I can't wait until they introduce up blacks only carriages to reduce racial abuse. Alabama will love it even if nobody else does.

I also did not know anything about Jeremy
Corbyn, the newly elected Labor Leader in
the UK and had to do a bit or research.

We're told that Mr Corbyn has spent a total
of 32 years in politics. He faces a challenge
in having to unite the party. Not everyone
approves of what he has to offer - and his
election could present some serious problems
for the party.

He has struck a chord with some Labor supporters
by repudiating the pro-big business consensus of
former leader Tony Blair.

Instead Mr Corbyn offered wealth taxes and his policies
include spending more on public services - like schools
and hospitals, scrapping nuclear weapons, renationalising
industries like the railways and involving Islamist
groups like Hamas and Hexbollah in Middle-East peace talks.

Mr Corbyn has also asked that Mr Cameron show more
"compassion" in dealing with the Syrian refugee crisis.
Mr Corbyn is part of the wave of anti austerity measures
that are currently sweeping Europe.

Some Europeans see the election of Mr Corbyn as a
"Message of Hope."

Whether this proves to be accepted by his own party -
and within the UK - we shall have to wait and see.
It however clearly sends a message to Mr Cameron.
Which hopefully he will choose not to ignore.

Foxy
Having peace talks with Hezbollah and Hamas

That's been tried many times before, what is Jeremy Corbyn
Got to bring to the table that will make a difference.

I hope he talks to them in the protected environment of
The United Nations or he might find himself in shock when
He winds up dead.

I saw him on the news half an hour ago.
He called for more wellfare for the citizens of Britain, and in the next
Breath, he wants to let millions of refugees in.
Won't that mean there will be less of the welfare cake to go around.

Socialism has failed miserably anywhere in the world where it
Exists. Not that I am saying that Capitalism doesn't have problems
But it works better in general than other systems.
This Jeremy Corbyn is the face of everything pulling Europe down.

CHERFUL like many others are bound up in tags like socialism or capitalism when in fact the elites are using fascism and socialism to enslave us under the illusion of having free elections and free markets. We have neither.

The all powerful central banking system controls just about everything so what's the difference between them or the old Soviet USSR ?

Nomi Prins is an Ex Goldman Sachs Banker and keynote speaker to the US Federal Reserve and IMF. Learn the truth from an insider. http://www.nomiprins.com/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/jeremy-corbyn-elected-britains-new-labour-party-leader/5475688

Stephen Lendman asks the pertinent question about Corbyn."Will he stand forthrightly and unequivocally against business as usual – or simply support cosmetic changes too insignificant to matter?"

This change of leadership has come from nowhere, so is Corbyn being to diffuse anger within Britain and lead the disaffected to a dead end ? Bernie Sanders is a similar leader in the USA but has little chance of leading the Democrats or so we think.

If only we had a "Jeremy Corbyn" waiting in the wings at the next election to take over from the ridiculous merry-go-round that we are on now.
There is I hope, every chance that Abbott will be replaced by a Labour government at the next election, assuming that he is still PM by then.
This will not be because Labour is the party of choice but it will be an election lost by default by the Liberals.
Then another round of playing politics and sounding like school children in parliament till the next election/auction.
In the meantime the country will be slipping still further into the abyss of inevitable destruction.
More of our resources will be bought by overseas interests.
More of our houses bought by the rich and overseas investors.
Unemployment will rise further while we wait for another mining boom to give us a the big increase in our standard of living we expect as our right..

I have bad news for you. Our standard of living is going to decline.
Why is this going to happen? Because of our leaders selling us out to the highest bidder.
They have been bought by the multi national corporations and will do what they are told to increase their profits.
The Liberals are the best at this and have to confidence of the big end of town to "do the right thing". Labour is in there with them but is held back by the millstone of the unions on their backs.
Looming over this scenario is the threat of multiple trade agreements that are kept secret from us and we are told that it "will be good for us".
Who is writing these trade agreements? The multinationals of course.
I cannot offer any hope to change this, there is no Jeremy Corbyn waiting to bring relief and a way forward for us.
We are going to be stuck with the same old "same old".
Think of Greece as it is now and this will give you some idea of what is in store.
Think of Iceland to see what could be done.

You are right for once Robert LePage, our living standards are going to decline. With the productive sector shrinking quickly, as the entitled brigade grow, there is going to be less wealth to share. This entitlement attitude is greatly encouraged by people like Jeremy Corbyn, who buy their votes by promising more.

However you are wrong if you actually believe the coalition does more for big business than does Labor. With the left we see continual deals done between unions, big business & left governments to feed taxpayer money to the large unionised employers to the detriment of the rest.

It was Labor governments that would continue to prop up an inefficient over paid unionised car industry, to the tune of hundreds of millions, & it is Labor governments removing controls on the construction industry unions, much to everyone's loss. Construction industries are allowed to prosper greatly if they toe the union line.

Mr thinks you have a problem with seeing wood/trees, perhaps due to a huge splinter of ideology in your eyes.

I reckon that the British conservatives must be breaking out the champagne. While Jeremy Corbyn is in charge of the Labour party, the Conservatives are guaranteed to stay in power.

If Labour is harking back to the pre Thatcher era of government control of production, near government bankruptcy and shocking living standards, then I'm sure that the conservatives will be happy to remind the people of the dangers of a Syriza like party.

I couldn't say it better:

"If the 1983 Labour manifesto was the longest suicide note in history, then Jeremy Corbyn’s acceptance speech was one of the shortest.

Unlike Tom Watson’s thoughtful remarks, this was the angry, garbled bellow of a protester, an activist and a rebel – not a leader of the opposition who must win hundreds of thousands of votes that conspicuously eluded Ed Miliband in May.

The funny thing is this. I was ready to warn the Tories not to be too smug about the veteran leftwinger’s victory, not to assume anything about its significance. I had watched with guarded respect as he transformed himself during the campaign from a laundry bag with a beard into a cuddly tribune of the people. He was evidently tapping into more than a weariness with austerity: a yearning for authenticity, a desire for Labour to reclaim its moral sinew, perhaps even the germ of a British Syriza.

So when senior Tories guffawed at their prospective good fortune, I had wondered privately if they were making a big mistake. Their analysis was that Corbyn would deter precisely the voters he needed to attract with his deference to the unions, with his street-fighting tone, with his insistence that Islamic State terrorists and US soldiers were morally equivalent. What, they asked, did he have to say to those who believed that wanting to get on in life was no crime?

Yet Corbyn seemed determined to hurl himself into precisely the bear-trap dug by his enemies. His first act as leader, he declared, would be to go to a demonstration. He railed against the media. He bowed to the might of the unions. By the end he seemed to be planning a global revolution, as if he had been wheeled that very morning on a trolley from Speakers’ Corner.

Has nobody told him how brief is the period in which the electorate will be remotely interested in him? They will form an impression extraordinarily fast and, in most cases, stick with it to the general election of 2020. This was an almost comically bad start."

I hope Robert is wrong about Labor government returning next year - or ever again - but I have to agree with that it will be Abbott, Hockey and Turnbull's fault if it does happen. There haven't been such idiots in the Coalition since Harold Holt and Billy McMahon. Come to think of it, they have had only one decent leader since Menzies - John Howard. John Gorton might have come up trumps if the idiots hadn't stabbed him in the back because he was too honest. The Liberals have to get their act together, change their ridiculous name, and provide a decent conservative to the commo opposition.

I have read Corbyn's policy on energy and it is immutable left no holds
barred shut down asap all coal and oil and no nuclear, shut them down
as well, and no mention of what will be used on a dark cold still night.

As far as our future is concerned it does not really matter who wins
the election. Neither party has a clue as to what is really happening
around those redundant economics practitioners.

What Corbyn and our parliamentary wafflers do not understand is that
almost no one understands what is happening. Those that do are simply
not believed by those in power.

Germany, which has just undertaken a major economic burden of perhaps
a couple of million "refugees" is about to enter a recession.
If Germany's economy crashes the whole of Europe will be in trouble.

As we now might have a change in prime minister it will be just a
change in deck chairs.

The coming recession will hit us really hard. Our houses are way over valued,our servant jobs are not vital to survival and we have no manufacturing. The lucky country no more.

From an article in "The Spectator" it seems that Corbyn comes courtesy of the Labour party's decision to call for anyone at all in the UK to "join" the party, free, online. Apparently over 42,000 nutjobs took the opportunity, which also allowed them to vote in in-house elections for candidates, leaders etc. Hence, the nutjob of all nutjobs, Jeremy Corbyn is now chief nut of the seriously nutty Labour Party.

Jeremy Corbyn is doing good things also. He wants bring back Govt owned banks and the Glass Steagall Act that separates the bank's gambling activities from your deposits and shares.

Our Banks on the surface look in good shape but their assets are our over inflated houses and they have derivative exposure of at least 6 times their assets. The Commonwealth Bank stopped reporting their exposure to derivatives 2 yrs ago. Why?

See the story behind 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz' which explains our financial enslavement.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=secret+of+oz&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=04310695EF508536889A04310695EF508536889A

Something is happening out there!

I think it’s great that Jeremy Corbyn has won the leadership of the UK’s labour party.

Let’s not forget Bernie Sanders is the rising star in next year’s USA presidential election. The nation’s only socialist member of Congress tells high school students to argue with their parents and teachers and is an ardent anti-war activist who fought for military veterans. He has been a popular mayor, a Senate committee chairman, an early social media and filibuster phenomenon and he once recorded a folk album in the style of William Shatner.

Staying true to his ideological convictions, Sanders's platform focuses on issues of equality in the United States. Economically, he favours tax reform that increases rates for the wealthy, greater governmental oversight of Wall Street and balancing the disparity between wages for men and women. He also believes in a state-administered health care system, more-affordable higher education and an expansion of the Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid systems. A social liberal, he also supports same-sex marriage and is pro-choice.

Both these chaps represent a bottom up power shift. They are both pacifist’s, anti-war, and a corner stone of their policies each have held for decades, is social and monetary equity.

We here in Australia do not have a Bernie or a Jeremy, but we sure do need one. Abbott wasn’t, Turnbull isn’t and Shorten will never be.

Producer,

Sounds as though you would be comfortable in China or Burma. If you tried the UK if and when Corbyn becomes PM, you would b OK. Even now they taken anyone. With Corbyn, it should be open slather. You should hang on here for a while though for, as of today, we have two Left wing parties, making it much easier for the crankiest of cranks.

ttbn,

I care not for the blue, red, green, yellow or any other team and the mindless rhetoric that they and their toadies engage in. Most individuals would define a crank as someone that does not share a common philosophy, which makes us all cranks to someone.

I much prefer individuality, equity, sustainability, peace and proportionality over money, manifestoes and ideologies. If we continue down the current path we may have to be comfortable with China and Burma over here!

Producer said;
Something is happening out there!

You are right, there is something happening "out there".
In the US the "middle class" is finding things more difficult.
Those in the next strata down are finding endemic unemployment.
What we have seen in the 7/11s and United petrol shows that we are
seeing the same trends.

This is forcing people to realise that their prosperity as it was is
now declining. This is bringing a change in their political allegiance.

Because the public has been shielded from an understanding of the
real cause of the economic decline they believe that politics is
the solution.
It is not, it is must more fundamental than that, and is as a result
of the cost of finding more resources and the unaffordability of energy.
Now that the affordable price of energy is lower than cost of
production of new resources there is only one possible result.

Find a new source of energy, change our lifestyle significantly or
turn your backyard into a veggie garden.

The politicians do not understand the problem so changing your vote
is just thrashing about in confusion.

In catching up with Labour-supporting friends and relatives in the UK over the weekend, they were evenly split between those who were delighted that Labour was returning to its ideological roots, and those who despaired because they think Labour won’t win another election for years. Personally, I think the pessimists are right, but time will tell.

But … having seen Turnbull win his spill last night, I can understand where the true believers were coming from. I hope that Turnbull will fulfil his promise and return the Liberals to a more authentic "liberal" platform.

So while I don’t agree with what the Corbyn supports think, I understand how they feel.

Bazz, you are right when you say the “public has been shielded from an understanding of the real cause of the economic decline”.

When Bill Clinton modified James Carville’s phrase and said “It’s the Economy Stupid” he distilled the issue into a phrase. Why do CEO’s, Politicians, Bankers, lawyers etc. do what they do? I say “It’s the Money Stupid”.

It is the driver of unsustainable development, poverty, climate change and wealth. It is nothing, but it is everything and commands more faith than any religion on the planet. This concept we call money is the virtual representation of productivity, because without productivity it would have no value. If the oil sheiks of the Middle East had to trade their oil for produce there would have been a natural limit as to the amount of produce no matter how ostentatious, that they could physically use or consume. Money made it possible to acquire a disproportionate share of the planets productive wealth and then engage bankers to manage that acquisition to further compound that disproportionality. Money is not made, you don’t make money, and money only represents production.

The fundamental issue is the disproportionate distribution of productive wealth. Until we evolve to, not just a local, but a global society where everyone has enough and no one has too much; sadly the economic issues will continue to exist.

Now we have a banker running the country I fear as you say the public will continue to be shielded from the real cause of the economic decline.

If only we had a Jeremy or a Bernie.

Ahhh producer I hope you did not miss my point ?

It is the Energy Stupid !

Encontré Bazz, while the non-productive class can take a disproportional share of productive wealth which money represents, they will continue maintaining unsustainable energy sources and there will be resistance to the development of cheaper alternatives.

I still maintain "Its the money stupid"

I for one would like to see, in addition to renewables, thorium reactors developed. If you are not up to speed and you have a bit of time this video is quite interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7sG9_OplUK8&feature=youtu.b

Producer,

I think that the happiest people are the Tories who see JC dragging labour back to a failed 1950s ideology. The only modern analogue to JC is the Syriza party who managed to drag Greece to the point of collapse in a failed attempt to use brinkmanship to get better terms, but ended up accepting stricter terms than they had earlier refused.

Producer, the economists are arguing about why neither austerity or
Quantity Easing, ie money printing, is no longer working.
They are totally money orientated and do not realise that EVERYTHING
is dependent on energy.

Re thorium reactors, I know nothing about them except that I did read
that India is building one now.
We will need something new, as we cannot now afford a fleet of nuclear
power stations.

Yes the “public has been shielded from an understanding of the real cause of the economic decline”. They also have no idea of how deep it is going to be, or how long any recovery will take.

The UK was saved from a similar fate by Maggie & pools of oil under the north sea. We have been saved by mountains of iron ore, & some coal. So what did we all do, we rewarded ourselves hugely, had a big party, & held our hands out for more.

The middle income folk, say a couple of teachers, 40 years ago were quite happy with a nice 3 bed fibro cottage, a 6 year old car, & perhaps a tinny or a caravan for some fun.

Today it has to be a 5 bedroom McMansion with ducted climate control air conditioning, 2 new cars out front, [they can't fit in the 2 car garage, it's full of toys], a luxury boat, or an overseas trip every year.

The workshy bunch down the road expect public housing to the same standard, & welfare for all the toys.

We'll have to be lucky if we are to only go back to that cottage, rather than a tent in the park. We have pissed so much wealth & opportunity up against the wall, that we really do deserve everything we don't get, or don't get actually.

People like Corbyn & Shorten, promise the world, but are really bring a local Greek catastrophe to our door more quickly, with every wasted dollar.

Eat drink & be merry today folks, then hope you'll member it when the cupboard is empty.

Corbyn and sanders are a return to the hard left
This is the left which strikes the fear of God into our plutocracy
Whether he wins or not is not important what is critical is that after 40 years of soft left appeasement to plutocracy the collective zeitgeist appears to be finally waking up

Hard left is about equality, power distribution and limitation. the soft left which obtained power from the plutocrats fought the symptoms of inequality for 40 years and has achieved nothing but the empowerment of plutocrats.

The message we need to etch into our consciousness: the only cause of racism, war, terror, sexism, bullying , crime... Is inequality
The only cure is equality and redistribution of power

Maybe just maybe we are waking up to the pantomime of tricks designed to divert us from the only thing that has ever mattere

YEBIGA, I think you are pretty spot on accept where you say “The only cure is equality and redistribution of power “. You are one level to high; money is power, as it enables a disproportionate distribution of productive wealth from the productive sector to the non-productive sector.

I think you would appreciate this article that says;

“Over 80 per cent of the wealthiest Australians have made their fortunes in property, mining, banking, superannuation and finance generally - all heavily regulated industries in which fortunes can be made by getting favourable property rezoning’s, planning law exemptions, mining concessions, labour law exemptions, money creation powers and mandated markets of many stripes.”

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-08-26/frijters-foster-battlers-and-plutocrats/6725118

Hasbeen, it’s been a while but I see you are still functioning. I agree with most of your utterings with the following exceptions.

Corbyn & Shorten might be members of the same club but I would call Corbyn a true believer which Shorten can never be.

The Greek catastrophe is that the SYRIZA party did not walk; they should have done an Iceland. Shadow Minister quite rightly states it was a “failed attempt to use brinkmanship”

Shadow Minister also states; “the public has been shielded from an understanding of the real cause of the economic decline” without defining the real cause.

I say it is a combination of the non-productive Political, Finance and Legal sectors pillaging a disproportionate share of productive wealth and destroying our productive capacity at the same time.

Sorry Bazz, you need to spend some time looking into Thorium Reactors if energy is your thing. Click the link on the previous post and watch the movie, I guarantee it will be a couple of hours well spent.

Your still one level to high, as everything comes back to money. Why anyone would spend more time on anything that was not needed, unless the gain exceeded the effort. Only money can facilitate this imbalance, not energy.

Well Producer we have to disagree on the relative importance of energy & money.
Money is only a nominated calibration for energy.
ie so much money expresses the equivalence to a certain amount of energy.
Nothing happens without the expenditure of energy, even digging in
you own veggie garden, the energy for that comes from the diesel used
by the farmer and the truck that delivers your food to the supermarket.

As I said earlier it does not matter who wins the next election, unless
the crash occurs before then, as neither party is either unaware of
what is going on, or they don't want to us to know.
Likewise Corbyn also does not have a clue.

What worries me is that many financial commentators are now warning of
an imminent financial crash. It has a ring of being genuine and I
would have thought it would be a couple of years off.
Not long after Joe Hockey became Treasurer he gave a warning of a
very difficult time ahead. However it now seems to have become a non subject.

Producer,

You are misquoting me. I never claimed “the public has been shielded from an understanding of the real cause of the economic decline” without defining the real cause.

The problem for Greece was decades of Socialist governments that spent wildly funding its deficits from borrowing, and building an economy based on public service (50% of people employed) with generous benefits.

Greece could not do what Iceland did given that the foundations of its economy was stuffed.

PS I like the prospects of using Thorium, but I see the chances of implementing a largely untested new nuclear process as dismal.

Bazz, we may have to agree to disagree.

Granted whenever stuff happens, whether it be natural or manmade, energy in some form is required. I think perhaps our impasse may be you evoke this fact, whereas I say money drives the unnecessary and unsustainable use of energy.

If the planet was devoid of a monetary system we would by nature only do what we have to do and what we really like, therefore would only expend the minimal energy required. For example, Michael Symons observed in One Continuous Picnic about Australian Aboriginals:

“Even in drought, two or three hours' collecting could be sufficient. The women's work, in a sense, freed the men for their longer hours of more chancy hunting. As with the women, they collected small game but also hoped for a feast like a kangaroo or emu. It still left plenty of time for people to rest, gossip and make tools and artworks.”

This scenario existed for tens of thousands of years and used a minimum of energy.

Monetary systems have facilitated a form of slavery that produces a lot of stuff that we do not need and in the process unnecessary energy is consumed.

John Sterman said in Sustaining Sustainability:

“Endless economic growth is impossible, how- ever. Resource use and environmental impact per person cannot fall to zero—people need a minimum amount of food, living space, energy, and waste disposal capacity, among other resources. The only way total impact can stabilize is for both population and economic output per person to stabilize. Yet no nation on earth seeks to end the growth of its economy.”

The statement summarises the state of we as a species, and our precarious relationship to spaceship earth. The inevitable financial collapse will reduce our energy consumption or we will expend even more in the form of war.

I think both Corbyn and Sanders are philosophically heading in the right direction, although I also believe that one size does not fit all. I prefer a bottom up anarcho syndicalist model as opposed to a top down centrally controlled scenario.

Shadow Minister, I must apologise, it was Hasbeen that uttered that fact.

Greece’s problem is not a Greek problem; it is a consequence of decades of failed capitalist and communist systems. Both have been manipulated by the global Fractional Reserve Banking Ponzi scheme that has been to the detriment of the planet.

We can all do an Iceland and for that matter develop Thorium reactors.

Producer said;
whereas I say money drives the unnecessary and unsustainable use of energy.

This I think is the crux of the matter;
You "were" right, but you are no longer, the rules have changed.
Production of energy is declining. It has been living on the emergency
ration of tight shale oil since 2005. That is now declining.
Money can no longer drive the use of oil.

Any further finds are very unlikely to have more than a very temporary
effect on supply. Price no longer can affect supply and the higher
prices of previous years are unaffordable.

Goldilocks is dead!

Producer,

I was looking for more than slogans. How is the failure of one of the most socialist governments that borrowed itself in oblivion a failure of the capitalist system. Unless your argument is that the Greek socialists were too mentally retarded to understand the consequences of their uncontrolled expenditure, I struggle to see who else is to blame.

Iceland made a recovery on the back of meeting their IMF repayments, and negotiating with their creditors who include charities, pension funds of workers etc, and while on the way to recovery are far from out of the woods.

In the first instance any attempt of implementing "socialist" policies without containing the oligarchical local and international forces is an exercise in futility .

Not so long ago our utilities were government owned and no one thought we were a socialist regime. Ditto our railways. Today our government departments routinely hire private consultants, the waste is immeasurable but because they are private consultant we accept it as less wasteful

Nothing wrong with a bit government ownership
It acts as a good counter weight

Nothing wrong with disbanding big conglomerates into smaller companies
It spreads the wealth lowers risk and reduces the scope of. Corruption

Excess is the enemy
And boy have we bathed in excess

Break up th supermarkets
Break up Telstra
Break up the banks

Share the wealth

Smaller companies are great
Huge monoliths are a blight on the world
They exercise way too much power

No that long ago the USA broke up AT&T into the baby bells because of wide power abuse of AT&T - so we have precedent

YEBIGA and Producer are the few that understand the reality .We have to stop the left/right labelling of ideas and look at what is really fair.

There is no way we would tolerate any sport in this country being so unfair as in China whereby people in China get paid 20 times less than us and they have far less Govt regulation and no OH&S BS that stifles innovation.

This so called free trade has nothing to do with being fair or giving opportunity to innovation or hard work.

Unless we pay those who produce enough money to consume the products they make, our economies will shrink to oblivion.

Bazz, the problem at the moment is a shortage of money, not a shortage of energy. If there were a shortage of energy, energy prices would be much higher.

___________________________________________________________________________

Producer, fractional reserve banking isn't a ponzi scheme. The amount banks lend is limited by the Basel requirements and what they're able to lend profitably; totally unrelated to the amount of reserves they hold.

___________________________________________________________________________

Shadow, Greece's problem is that it can't get credit. Many were keen to lend to it before 2008, but afterwards the supply of willing lenders dried up. Iceland doesn't have that problem because it prints its own money.

Producer, this article may help to explain most of what I have been
saying.

http://tinyurl.com/qggtswm

Aiden, the economy can not afford the higher prices, that is why demand
has fallen and produced the glut.
However things are changing as tight shale oil production has now
started its decline. It is expected that US domestic production will
fall to 8mbd about the first half of next year.

As I said there is no just right price;
Goldilocks is dead !

Bazz, if there were a shortage of energy there would not be a glut.
The economy not being able to afford things is a sign of a shortage of money.

These discussions get so convoluted as they progress. As contributors introduce different arguments and philosophies I find that sub categories dominate and the big picture is lost, forgotten or buried.

Endless growth is not possible if there are finite resources. Bazz illustrates this when he discusses energy, but this is only one example. The big resource and only resource we have is spaceship earth itself.

It matters not what any individual’s anything, thoughts or philosophies are, if we destroy it, or change it in a way where we can’t live, we destroy ourselves.

If we have a desire or if those in power say we need more, bigger or growth and it involves a finite or non-renewable resource this is wrong.

If globally everyone had enough and nobody had too much, it wouldn’t be so bad would it? If the productive cake was divided up proportionally, and were income rose and fell with sustainable productivity. Where the productive elements, that are the wealth creators are rewarded more than the non-productive elements. Where there is a minimum income providing an individual participates in meaningful community enterprise designed and run by individual communities within broad parameters. No sit down money!

One could argue that this would stifle growth, eliminate, unemployment, poverty and wealth. It would establish equity and at the same time acknowledge that we are not equal, nor want or desire the same things. This wouldn’t be so bad would it?

(Continued)

I argue that money is the driver of inequity and disproportionality because it enables non-productive individuals to accrue a disproportionate share of productive wealth. A barter system which is based on productivity could not do this.

Susan George said in an article titled “Down the Financial Drain” published in the 2007 Society for International Development.

"One no longer needs to produce anything tangible in order to make huge amounts of money. It is, in fact, distinctly unadvisable to involve oneself in anything so crude as actual things. Serious wealth comes from financial manipulation and for the manipulators, nothing is ever enough."

I put it to you that the reason Jeremy Corbyn and Bernie Sanders are gaining popularity is that they are moving in the direction described above, and the mug punter is slowly waking up to what has been going on globally.

Ultimately this is not my problem as I have had the good fortune to be born over three score years ago in this country and have enjoyed its abundance. I will be shuffled off the planet well before the faeces hit the fan.

I still say “It’s the money stupid”

Producer,

Money was invented thousands of years ago to overcome the serious deficiencies of the barter system. Getting rid of money is simply the stupidest idea I have ever heard, and would reduce everyone to penury.

Producer,
The reason there is a glut of oil is because there is a shortage of cheap oil.
The highest price the economy can afford is lower than the well head
price price of the more expensive (tight shale) oil.

So demand has reduced to match the affordable mix for those who MUST
pay a little more. The rest economise.

As I said Goldilocks is dead !

Shadow Minister, you said:

“Money was invented thousands of years ago to overcome the serious deficiencies of the barter system. Getting rid of money is simply the stupidest idea I have ever heard, and would reduce everyone to penury.”

I said:

“I argue that money is the driver of inequity and disproportionality because it enables non-productive individuals to accrue a disproportionate share of productive wealth. A barter system which is based on productivity could not do this.”

Even with a very long bow one could not claim I said we should get rid of money and return to a system of barter, I agree this would be stupid. The barter system would not reduce everyone to penury as you claim, because the productive elements would do well, as they produce real things.

What I did say clearly was; “that money is the driver of inequity and disproportionality because it enables non-productive individuals to accrue a disproportionate share of productive wealth.” I then made the statement that this phenomenon could not occur within the barter system.

You would have to agree that the monetary system has in its current metamorphose, managed to reduce 80% of the global population to penury with less than 1% enjoying obese parasitic wealth.

I put to you that there is a strong case for a revaluation of the current monetary system in order to enable proportionate equity that favours the wealth makers, not the wealth takers.

Producer is one of the few who questions this system and seeks a better one.See the story behind 'The Wonderful Wizard of Oz'. Best doco on money ever.http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=secret%20of%20oz&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=04310695EF508536889A04310695EF508536889A

No Arjay, Producer thinks the economy is working under the old rules.
That is why he thinks the distribution between rich and poor has gone wrong. He is not on his own, most economists have not realised that it
all changed when expensive oil replaced declining cheap crude oil.

He is right in that the distribution has gone wrong but not for the
reasons he thinks.
The US, where these things usually start earlier than elsewhere, is
suffering the problem of the middle class becoming poor.
I believe we are now experiencing that here, with rising housing
costs and salaries staying fairly static.
We are a bit like the frog in the sausepan, we really
have not yet noticed the rising temperature.

It is failing because GDP is falling and energy costs are eating into
the residual funds.

Producer,

The reality is that in the 50s nearly 70% of the world lived on the poverty line, whereas today that is less than 30%.

This is due to scientific progress and the growth of democracy.

The phenomenon of unequal control of profit is just as easy or more so under the barter system and the feudal system it promotes.

Shadow minister no doubt you have been following the Hans Rosling statistics which clearly support your claim. But you forget there are damn lies and statistics. Absolute poverty has fallen and will no doubt continue to fall. However, relative poverty is increasing and continuing to increase. For Australia we can trace this back to the seventies - up to about 1974 the gap between rich and poor remained much the same - we all improved at much the same rate. Since 1974 the majority of Australians have relied on increasing their debt to maintain their lifestyle. So we get the illusion of being well off but it takes just a tiny hiccup and we discover how illusory our lifestyle is.

Baygon,

I have my reservations about using relative poverty. Firstly having travelled through Africa, I have seen first hand what real poverty is, and relatively, those living on Newstart here in Aus would be middle class.

I saw an article several years ago where someone was using a figure like the bottom 10% of society is in poverty, then complaining that the number of people in poverty wasn't improving. What an idiot.

Poverty of the mind and body comes from unemployment. The best that the country can do is to reduce the roadblocks to employing the least skilled or abled, even if it is at below award wages.