tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post2481400368947974656..comments2024-03-05T10:52:24.691+00:00Comments on Mark Wadsworth: Am I going mad or is this nonsense...Mark Wadsworthhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-33084719173295835262013-07-14T14:49:31.322+01:002013-07-14T14:49:31.322+01:00paulc,
The Opera may indeed be a good tourist dra...paulc,<br /><br /><i>The Opera may indeed be a good tourist draw and since London is clearly chock full of over-subsidised rentiers who provide a ready audience it may indeed be justifiable on the grounds of net benefits rendered to London's tourist trade.</i><br /><br />It's doubtful. If you asked most opera fans where they would go for opera if travelling abroad, it would be either La Scala in Milan or the Verona Festival. And the Verona Festival demonstrably shows the effect of opera to them as hotel prices double.<br /><br />That's not to say that someone coming to London might not consider it as part of their overall visit that they can go to the opera while they are here, but it's doubful that it's a deal breaker.<br /><br /><i>That said, as commented above, if Opera is really so cool, let's make it more accessible. [though I do wonder if in doing so one simultaneously makes it less appealing to the original audiences?]</i><br /><br />That's the last thing you want to do.<br /><br />The survival of musicals and pop music is that showmen run them. The people running opera and ballet have no idea about commerce, about maximising revenue. You pick up a programme for an opera (that itself costs almost nothing), there's nothing in there about the fact that the opera company has also made a CD or DVD recording of the opera you're watching.Tim Almondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13369256383976094670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-70210573792170738852013-07-14T13:22:15.364+01:002013-07-14T13:22:15.364+01:00PaulC: oh, sorry, I thought you said that it's...PaulC: oh, sorry, I thought you said that it's better to take money from people like TS, that would just spend it on frivolous consumption like opera and dining, and spend it on something for the masses instead. Granted, you didn't go as far as DBC as to imply that any such consumption would be something that would not be tolerated after the proletariat is in charge though.Kjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13530243002915410700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-56585207024821212712013-07-14T12:52:21.111+01:002013-07-14T12:52:21.111+01:00paulc,
"Ok, but what about spending the Olym...paulc,<br /><br />"Ok, but what about spending the Olympic money on HS broadband or some other such efficiency enhancing measures that private capital won't do because the return is too little or simply too far down the road?"<br /><br />I don't disagree with the principle of spending on public goods. But HS broadband is a very good example of something that people cry out for as a public good that really isn't.<br /><br />I have no problem with dial-up, or even slow-speed broadband (500mb) being classed as a public good, but most of this isn't. It's people wanting speeds more like 5mbps or fibre speeds, so they can stream movies, which is really just entertainment. But they want someone else to pay for it because of their lifestyle choices.Tim Almondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13369256383976094670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-47255182090523046182013-07-14T12:19:32.459+01:002013-07-14T12:19:32.459+01:00@Kj. I was merely responding to Stigler's asse...@Kj. I was merely responding to Stigler's assertion that: "it's about what they produce. Some crappy Olympic non-sport gets put on at ludicrous expense, instead of some Verdi and as a result, that makes me "poorer""<br /><br />'If' the state is to spend money on anything other than law enforcement, health and welfare or defence it might be argued that spending on productivity enhancing infrastructure [for example] would have longer lasting net benefits for many more people than a bit of conspicuous consumption [;)] by a handful of privileged elites. If however the merits of Opera are truly enriching to a 'wide' audience then perhaps subsidy to the Opera is in order. <br /><br />@MW.The Opera may indeed be a good tourist draw and since London is clearly chock full of over-subsidised rentiers who provide a ready audience it may indeed be justifiable on the grounds of net benefits rendered to London's tourist trade. My own preference would be for 'spending' on measures that benefit a wider 'audience', in both the geographical and class sense. That said, as commented above, if Opera is really so cool, let's make it more accessible. [though I do wonder if in doing so one simultaneously makes it less appealing to the original audiences?] Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-49965907774750956342013-07-14T11:42:44.799+01:002013-07-14T11:42:44.799+01:00@DBC Reed. I too have difficulty on here with link...@DBC Reed. I too have difficulty on here with linkys. So you can see info on wage and profit share for the last half century here:<br /> <br />http://uneconomical.wordpress.com/2012/04/23/uk-gdp-by-income/<br /><br />Specifically regarding changes since the recession the following ONS infographic is useful in comparing the top 20% to the bottom 20% both with and without benefits and taxes:<br /><br />http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/household-income/the-effects-of-taxes-and-benefits-on-household-income/2011-2012/info-taxes-and-benefits-on-household-income.html <br /><br />Re national minimum wages. It is true that these are deemed necessary as a result of the denuding of unions. With strong unions one would expect local bargaining to take better care of wages and as a bonus to reduce the need for much regulation. A win win.<br />I just don't buy into the notion that increasing wage share solves the problems of recurring economic crisis, although it will likely benefit the recipients of the higher wages. For one thing wages have not really fallen very much between the Major and Gordon Brown govs when looked at with increased benefits [tax credits/housing benefits etc]and even with increased wage share we have seen severe recessions in the 70's and 80's, so we can't presume tinkering with wages will solve this. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-74650519564252115632013-07-14T11:36:36.626+01:002013-07-14T11:36:36.626+01:00Paul, you went a bit too far with that comment @ T...Paul, you went a bit too far with that comment @ The Stigler. Do you realise that "musicals" have done far more for London's tourist industry over the decades than the Olympics, at zero cost to the public purse?<br /><br />Musicals are not my thing, and neither is opera but the tickets seem to cost much the same. So would you shut down all the musicals in London as well and thereby decimate the tourist industry?<br /><br />However, your comment @ DBC is spot on. There's nothing like dragging facts into a debate, is there?<br />Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-31621053855076379472013-07-14T11:19:17.421+01:002013-07-14T11:19:17.421+01:00Wow, paul and DBC, making judgements about what so...Wow, paul and DBC, making judgements about what sort of consumption is acceptable and what's just Veblen consumption eh? True soviet colours coming out now.Kjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13530243002915410700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-61442452707771093202013-07-14T10:15:00.455+01:002013-07-14T10:15:00.455+01:00@Lola Being a very old dog,I am not up to the tric...@Lola Being a very old dog,I am not up to the trick of providing a link.<br />But the editorial can be Googled as The Observer 7.7.13 Why we need unions but not as Labour's bankersDBC Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891849727783879145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-76123525051402859602013-07-14T09:42:51.477+01:002013-07-14T09:42:51.477+01:00DBCR - " its surprisingly coherent.. Is it? ...DBCR - "<i> its surprisingly coherent.</i>. Is it? Crikey! I bet it's coherent in a lefty way, which makes it self evidently incoherent. Do you want to email a copy to MW, or paste a link?Lolahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04586735342675041312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-17819475662359019862013-07-14T07:26:59.471+01:002013-07-14T07:26:59.471+01:00@KJ Right I do believe in demand stimulus (so what...@KJ Right I do believe in demand stimulus (so what's the better/ opposite option demand suppression?Well that's what we've got.) As I've said over and over, Keynes, in plagiarising Silvio Gesell's monetary stimulus theory (which does work , its been revived round the Chiemsee) disparaged his work on land values for being inspired by Henry George.<br />All I am proposing is Keynes plus the land value back-up that Keynes discarded.<br />@Stigler .I agree with Paul C.Also you appear to insist that the public sector cannot spend money on bringing pleasure to millions with the Olympics if it means curtailing your Veblen conspicuous consumption, although you are quite happy to drive down the publicly provided roads to the snob restaurant and enjoy expensive meals, safe in the knowledge that public health inspectors can ensure it's cleanliness. There is nothing worse than well-off anarchists, in my view.<br />@ paul c I don't know where you are getting your figures from(you don't cite sources).But I don't think the Labour Government would have intro'd the minimum wage in 1999 and the working tax credit to supplement low wages in 2003 , if there had n't been urgent need.<br />@Lola Take it from a lefty: the Observer/Guardian aint lefty. The Guardian told readers to vote Liberal last election! Read the article, instead of talking from prejudice: its surprisingly coherent.DBC Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891849727783879145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-83641138655178593382013-07-13T23:32:47.048+01:002013-07-13T23:32:47.048+01:00DBC: look, you are a demand stimulus guy. Fine. Bu...DBC: look, you are a demand stimulus guy. Fine. But all this wages has to go up stuff, and I assume you mean all wages has to go up, is basically just demand stimulus, right? If you believe in DS, fair enough, but the case for universal DS through general injections, is far more convincing than this wager-upper thing (not to me, but for the sake of argument). Most costs are wage-costs, and an increasing average wage means increasing average costs, and is a zero-sum game. If done unilaterally, it damages the domestic economy. Wages are just variations around an average, that tends toward an equillibrium. Some get more, some get less, depending on the demand for their labour. Increased real wages are ultimately the result of productivity increases.<br />You can't just view the economy as a result of the measurement value, money. Behind are real resources and labour that is allocated according to a measurement value. The idea that we can just increase the measurement value, or the measurement value as awarded to one factor (in your case, labour) to instill "confidence" in the real economy is alchemy to me, and far worse, it's pretty reckless when we know how little we know, and how little we can know (as per Hayek).Kjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13530243002915410700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-11466770561718114252013-07-13T22:23:16.863+01:002013-07-13T22:23:16.863+01:00@DBC Reed
"Problem is : no investment. And sh...@DBC Reed<br />"Problem is : no investment. And should you invest in highly mechanised production you'd have to increase wages to keep up demand , as Ford did."<br /><br />There is surely a great disparity of wealth between the average individual and the corporate bosses/1%ers whatever, but the idea that underconsumption [as a result of low wages in recent times] is the cause of our malaise is not clear at all in my view. <br />For starters, if we factor in benefits then total after tax compensation plus benefits allow for a pretty steady picture at least since the early 90's.<br />Since the mid-90s, the wage share [employee compensation plus employer's NIC] has risen and profit share fallen.During the recession, there has actually been a shift in incomes from profits to wages.<br />So even if it's true that capitalists exploit labour, they haven't been doing so in aggregate any more recently [last couple of decades] than they did in the past.<br />That living standards are lower is more a function in the fall of productivity with the recession. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-21299949752406830042013-07-13T22:20:18.862+01:002013-07-13T22:20:18.862+01:00DBCR - It's no good quoting the lefty Observer...DBCR - It's no good quoting the lefty Observer at me, it, with its companion title The Gruniad are so unconscionably stuck in the past failure of the moral and economic bankruptcy that is socialism they are incapable of intellectually sound analysis.<br /><br />In any event, helicoptering money never works. Think of what the exchange economy actually is - a system of barter lubricated by money - and you can see that production must come before supply. Ford knew this well. He was able to pay higher wages because his factories were more productive man for man than his competitors because he had organised them better and invested.Lolahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04586735342675041312noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-54615701294729760602013-07-13T21:46:37.574+01:002013-07-13T21:46:37.574+01:00"Take money from me to build Olympic stadia, ..."Take money from me to build Olympic stadia, that's money I'm not going to spend on opera tickets, a new dress for my wife, or a dinner at Le Manoir."<br /><br />Ok, but what about spending the Olympic money on HS broadband or some other such efficiency enhancing measures that private capital won't do because the return is too little or simply too far down the road?<br /><br />Furthermore, what if we redistribute money from wealthy opera goers [;)]with a low propensity to spend and give it to low earners in the form of lower taxes/benefits/citizen income who have a greater capacity to spend?<br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-40158843955407857322013-07-13T19:13:39.345+01:002013-07-13T19:13:39.345+01:00The "invest in the state to improve the econo...The "invest in the state to improve the economy" has me spitting feathers. Bastiat pointed out the nonsense of "creating jobs" centuries ago.<br /><br />Take money from me to build Olympic stadia, that's money I'm not going to spend on opera tickets, a new dress for my wife, or a dinner at Le Manoir.<br /><br />Now, arguably, there's probably no net difference. Instead of a builder getting some money to build a stadium, someone who builds opera sets gets money.<br /><br />The problem isn't about jobs, it's about what they produce. Some crappy Olympic non-sport gets put on at ludicrous expense, instead of some Verdi and as a result, that makes me "poorer".<br /><br />(I'm absolutely not defending subsidised opera here, I'm talking about the likes of Garsington and Glyndebourne that manage to put on productions for about £100/ticket).Tim Almondhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13369256383976094670noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-24474253501457973782013-07-13T18:57:30.898+01:002013-07-13T18:57:30.898+01:00@kj & MW
No but he could start raising wages i...@kj & MW<br />No but he could start raising wages in an industry so that other producers would have to follow suit or be unable to recruit or retain staff. (Some parts of the United States were chronically short of labour so when,for instance, George was in California ,he spent a lot of time attacking the practice of hiring Chinese labour, which was indentured ie earning no current wages.Labour in the US typically drifted west to settle homesteads.)<br />As I thought was very clear ,especially if you had read the Observer leader ,I was talking about raising demand through unionisation across whole industries ,Observer: "We need stronger trade unions that can bargain for higher wages across whole industries. The phasing out of free collective bargaining has proved an economic and social mistake."<br />One employer cannot raise wages/demand over an entire industry: one union can. Which is why we need them. A full range of unions can raise demand nationally.<br />Billy Hayes of the GMB was on Newsnight a couple of evenings ago: members of his union receive 18% more in wages than other people in similar work. A general 18% increase would reverse much of the present decline ,as long as it does n't get frittered away in mere house price inflation, (which we all agree on, I think). DBC Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891849727783879145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-29655849607320766152013-07-13T17:58:17.250+01:002013-07-13T17:58:17.250+01:00Kj, damn, I've been meaning to say that for ye...Kj, damn, I've been meaning to say that for years.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-38859854305964210582013-07-13T17:22:39.759+01:002013-07-13T17:22:39.759+01:00Ford didn't, and couldn't, as a single emp...Ford didn't, and couldn't, as a single employer, raise wage-levels to maintain demand for it's own cars, this is nonsensical.Kjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13530243002915410700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-70767974832578044202013-07-13T16:42:10.199+01:002013-07-13T16:42:10.199+01:00@paul c
" Investment creates output and outpu...@paul c<br />" Investment creates output and output creates demand" sounds like Say's Law to me. Problem is : no investment. And should you invest in highly mechanised production you'd have to increase wages to keep up demand , as Ford did.DBC Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891849727783879145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-43359645366650848692013-07-13T14:38:33.291+01:002013-07-13T14:38:33.291+01:00PC, OK, re containers, the TV programme I saw expl...PC, OK, re containers, the TV programme I saw explained it slightly differently, but when e.g. the ISO decided to have an official standard size (because private parties could not agree) then that is the sort of "government" action of which I approve, it's the sort of thing which can only be done "collectively".<br /><br />If of course private companies decide their own standard format (like cassette tapes) then that works just as well.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-23580994855647481252013-07-13T14:25:00.697+01:002013-07-13T14:25:00.697+01:00@adamcollyer "Investment creates output, and ...@adamcollyer "Investment creates output, and output itself generates the demand to purchase it". sounds like Keynesianism to me?<br /><br />Investment leads demand? Not clear that investment doesn't follow profits though. Plenty of interesting data support the latter view. Now that's definitely not Keynesian. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-6610664014821484172013-07-13T14:19:02.236+01:002013-07-13T14:19:02.236+01:00kj & AC
The problem with your argument about...kj & AC<br /> The problem with your argument about investment (requiring the magic dust of the Confidence Fairy no doubt)is best put by last week's Observer which I note nobody has read ,so I'll copy some out. Commenting on the thirty years' class war on the Unions and wages, by employers in league with right-wing governments of all hues,( and abetted by people calling themselves libertarians), the paper writes "We were told that that this would be the recipe for an investment boom. Instead ,companies are hoarding their profits and withholding their investment, while workers are having their wages squeezed. Britain ranks 159th in the international league table for investment as a share of GDP.....Britain is locked in a vicious circle of minimal investment and innovation because of uncertain demand, while ever more insecure workplaces are delivering falling real wages and even more uncertain demand".<br />I don't think you can argue with 159th.DBC Reedhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17891849727783879145noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-36143912461793626212013-07-13T14:17:02.278+01:002013-07-13T14:17:02.278+01:00MW. OK, I accept your point re governments extract...MW. OK, I accept your point re governments extracting correct [high] taxes for for generous patents etc. does indicate you are against rentiers cleaning up and so on. My bad if I misread your views. <br /><br />The containerization example I gave, I only had from a secondary source,[Chomsky] but looking in to that it would appear that the individual had a great idea about modularizing [sic] the containers which was invaluable but the driver as with so many things was the military. The Vietnam war turned the process into a viable mass production process and the ISO who with strong encouragement from the military standardized the containers, since even whilst modular they were different sizes across the globe. <br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-60869657424679420872013-07-13T13:07:28.302+01:002013-07-13T13:07:28.302+01:00Kj, yes as usual you make good points, in fact pro...Kj, yes as usual you make good points, in fact probably better ones than I made. <br /><br />But in your example, if the government charged private companies for using the patents, or collected the monopoly element of income back in tax, that would be even better. <br /><br />And the government can then spend that money on more research etc.<br /><br />It is claimed that the UK government spends far, far more on R&D than the whole private sector. I do not know if this is true.Mark Wadsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07733511175178098449noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1141932539860553199.post-42964962416732639782013-07-13T13:02:35.227+01:002013-07-13T13:02:35.227+01:00MW: Because it increases welfare, makes stuff chea...MW: Because it increases welfare, makes stuff cheaper etc. There <i>is</i> an advantage to having research done domestically without harvesting monopoly profits from it, you pay for having well-educated people, an environment for science and innovation and all that. Currently, when govt subsidises and "collaborates" with domestic businesses in R&D, what they do is give away the rights to the results to the private entity, that promptly starts production in China like everyone else, while harvesting monopoly profits from the patents. I fail to see that this is a bigger advantage to the domestic economy than making research available free of charge, and have the finished products be competed down in price quicker to everyone's benefit.Kjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13530243002915410700noreply@blogger.com