IndHome
44p78 comments posted · 0 followers · following 0
13 years ago @ Independence Home - There's no irony Mr Duff · 0 replies · +1 points
13 years ago @ Independence Home - Should UKIP be a liber... · 0 replies · +1 points
13 years ago @ Independence Home - Should UKIP be a liber... · 2 replies · +2 points
13 years ago @ Independence Home - UKIP Leader: decrimina... · 0 replies · +3 points
As far as responsibility goes, libertarians believe people are responsible for their actions, not that they always act responsibly. Taking drugs is not really responsible, nor is getting drunk. However if people choose to screw up their lives then it is no role of the state to protect people from themselves. This is, of course, complicated by the current funding model for the NHS which socialises costs such as drug abuse, but that is another debate.
What makes you think Telegraph readers aren't liberal? Ok, you can generalise to a certain degree. But the interview was about finding out who Nigel is. Being honest and truthful is a good thing; saying what you think the audience want to hear is hypocritical.
13 years ago @ Independence Home - I though I had heard i... · 0 replies · +1 points
13 years ago @ Independence Home - Centralising a failed ... · 0 replies · +1 points
Any specific comments or suggestion please let us know - editor@indhome.com
13 years ago @ John Redwood MP - The issue of sovereignty · 0 replies · +2 points
14 years ago @ The Conservative Blog - School in 1950 Compare... · 0 replies · +1 points
14 years ago @ Independence Home - Robin Hood Tax?...Ugh! · 0 replies · +1 points
The problem we are in globally is fundamentally about credit being too cheap for too long. Why? Well I would say because we were getting the 'one-off' and sudden benefit of China - i.e. globalisation. This freed up £s and $s to be spent on other things. Inflation in consuer goods was kept low by offshoring, thus keeping central bank rates low and reducing the cost of debt. Money supply growth shot through the roof and decoupled from nominal GDP. There was too much money chasing too few goods, and ultimately it showe ditself in asset prices rather than consumer prices which were being kept artificially low.
The Tobin tax would reduce volatility in markets which is a good thing, but it also reduces liquidity which is a abd thing. It is a trade-off. That is all economics is. One has to make a choice about whether the trade off is worth it. I don't think so. A tobin tax would effect market interest rates, and thus business expansion, etc. To what extent I cannot say, but there is empirical evidence for it.
As for Caroline Lucas not understanding economics I stand by my statement. She has been saying we should have a "green new deal" and switch to green energy because it "will create 1m green-collar jobs". What she doesn't also relaise is taxing the private sector to pay for these jobs will cost jobs elsewhere. And also that jobs are a cost of delivering a service, and habing job intensive energy is not great. Having energy prioduced with zero jobs would be great - then we could all have free energy, and people could be employed elsewhere in the economy, business would have lower operatings costs, wages and investment returns would be higher, etc, etc.
14 years ago @ Independence Home - An Iron Fist Has Come ... · 0 replies · +1 points