young people in Britain don't know whether to spend or save

It is better for the economy if they spend, but if they spend, they can't save for a deposit on the beanstalk growing house market.

If they spend, where do they live, how do they start a family. Either way they cannot grow the economy. Unless there's radical change to the housing supply.

But blue #Labour doesn't know what to do. They don't seem to realise that there's a big and ballooning problem.

The solution is Council Housing. A lot of council housing, but not too much. The aim is to stop house price inflation, perhaps even bring it down slightly and this is done by giving young people a real choice. Permanent rent where they can be settled, secure and bring up their children OR take out a mortgage if they prefer this option.

The 'market' can take care of the mortgage option. But the overall housing market needs government input to stabilise it, and this comes in the form of building council housing...

Real #Labour taking Keynes to the market.

(note when I mention the term 'blue Labour', I am not referring to some form of blue collar Labour, I am referring to Starmer's Tory Labour. Blue labour that, like the Tories it slavishly follows, is failing at every move.

consumers grow an economy

Consumers grow an economy by spending on goods and services. Especially spending on 'goods' because these have to be made. Even better if the goods are made in the economy where consumers are spending.

The peak age range for consumer spending on goods is between the early 20s  to early 40s.

The more people an economy has in the age group the better it will grow, even allowing for other factors - like the loss of British manufacturing to China for example.

Take Keynes to the market for the many as well as the few

 I argue an updated form of Keynesian economics is the way to democratic socialism. Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) adds a workable dimension to Keynesian economics. 

This is where I come from and it's on the right of Labour. With a strapline 'take Keynes to market for the many as well as the few'.

https://www.investopedia.com/modern-monetary-theory-mmt-4588060

Any further to the right of me is not in Labour. 

Starmer and Reeves have moved out of Labour into the grasp-and-grab economics of Friedman and Hayek.

Starmer and Reeves will bring the Labour party to an end over the next four years. I don't want this to happen.

But Starmer got himself elected and consolidated his position, he won't go until the British economy collapses or when he loses the next election so badly that he has to go. (like Sunak)

During this time I would like to work to build a decent broad church Labour party like the one I used to know. To continue when the Starmer disaster era ends.

I did a brief study of the backgrounds of Labour MPs before the election. 

Most Labour MPS are middle class graduates. The parliamentary Labour party does not represent working class people like me. I would like to see Labour MPs more representative of the demographic make up of Britain. So Labour MPs ought to be mainly from working class roots. 

Private school and Oxbridge ought to be a hindrance to becoming a Labour MP.

I want to persuade Labour to be a world peacemaker instead of a warmonger. This doesn't mean an end to the arms industry because as a Keynesian I see the economic value of this sector. Somehow the arms industry has to exist without war and it can.

The arms industry can build ships to keep the oceans safe from piracy for example. The Americans occupied this role from the end of WW2 to the end of the Soviet Union.

I want an end to the Ukraine war and a removal of sanctions against Russia because these are hurting Europe far more than Russia. This means NATO must stop prodding Russia.

At the moment I am working as an individual Labour party member and Trade Unionist.

I would be happy to be part of a group working within the Trade Union movement and Labour party to 'reinvigorate' Labour.

I am building skills in using X (Twitter) as a campaigning tool and this is my main campaigning channel.

Corbyn's few are a global elite, no government can beat them, especially a British Labour government. But could the elite be educated to understand that Keynesian type economics that boosts demand also boosts the few? Harod McMillon said in the 1950s/60s we never had it so good. And we didn't because Western governments operated a system that was based on increasing consumer demand. Economies are built on consumer demand and individual consumers like you and me are the building blocks of an economy. Look after consumers and the few benefit too just like they did in the 50s and 60s.

Things went wrong when Thatcher took up the grasp and grab, dog eat dog ideology of Friedman and Hayek. This needs to be consigned to the past.

for the many as well as the few

I don't care how many billionaires there are, the more the merrier.

I just want a decent life - nothing special. If 'the few' 

run things for me as a consumer they'll benefit even more.

If they run things so that consumers like me can't afford to live, the current few will be the 

first to die out but the many (consumers) will survive for a 'new few' to emerge and thrive.

The fringe economists, Friedman and Hayek should have known this. 

Both Karl Marx and Adam Smith did and both warned of it!

how to x connect with thought leaders and influencers

 

 How to x connect with influencers and thought leaders

X is a powerful tool to connect with thought leaders and influencers.

It allows you to influence influencers and in turn influence decision makers.

Follow your channel, segment or industry conversations and...

• Join in

• Connect

With thought leaders and influencers.

Show that you are up to date

Are an active participant in events

Contribute

Influence and change

Method

Identify thought leaders and influencers in your area of interest and follow them.

---

I like to keep the ratio of followers and following high on the followers side so I make an Excel file of the thought leaders and influencers I might follow if I had a bigger x following. Then use the x search function to track them. I also set Google alerts for the thought leaders and influencers I follow. In this way I follow them but not on x. It’s a bit long-winded, but it is my preferred method and it works.

---

• Don’t post about yourself

• Keep it professional

• Respond to their xtweets.

• Join in and share ideas

• Add something useful to the conversation

• Become part of your area of interest on x

• Build relationships

• Influence thought leaders and influencers

Is a good education sytem bad for an economy

 

The shadow education secretary Brigit Phillipson is going to try and give more opportunities for kids at school.

Can this work?

I frequently see workers plodding to a night shift. To a dead end low paid job. Dressed in orange, heads bowed and depressed. The shift only relieved by banter. Others trudging hopelessly to call centres. Low paid jobs, no real hope no real future. Low paid, dead end jobs are the norm. What is the point of an education that prepares them for opportunities when there are none for the majority of school leavers?

There are only a finite number of opportunities in the economy. Most jobs are relatively dead end. Most kids realise they have few if any opportunities and they are giving school a miss.

Most kids only need the basics from education.

Could an education that prepares and stimulates children to seek limited opportunities be counterproductive. Could such an education system cause social unrest as most school leaves don't find the finite number of opportunities?

Government Deficits

 "(government) Deficits can be used for good or evil.

They can enrich a small segment of the population, lifting the yachts of the rich and powerful to new heights, while leaving millions behind.

They can fund unjust wars that destabilise the world and cost millions their lives.

Or they can be used to sustain life and build a more just economy that works

for the many and not just the few."

The Deficit Myth Stephanie Kelton

and supported by Mariana Mazzucato the woman who gave Starmer his five missions.

What is modern monetary theory MMT

Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is a macroeconomic theory that argues that governments with sovereign currency have the ability to spend without limit, provided they are able to raise sufficient taxes or sell enough bonds to prevent inflation.

MMT economists believe that the government's ability to create money gives it a unique advantage in the economy. This advantage allows the government to spend money on public programs without having to worry about running out of money. In fact, MMT economists argue that the government should use its spending power to stimulate the economy and create jobs.

How does MMT work?

MMT is based on the idea that the government's currency is a public monopoly. This means that the government is the only entity that can create and issue currency. As a result, the government has complete control over the supply of money in the economy.

When the government spends money, it does not need to raise taxes or sell bonds to finance that spending. Instead, the government can simply create new money. This new money enters the economy and increases the amount of spending power available.

If the government's spending increases too much, it can lead to inflation. However, MMT economists argue that inflation can be prevented by raising taxes or selling bonds. These actions will remove money from the economy and prevent inflation from rising.

What are the implications of MMT?

MMT has a number of implications for government policy. First, it suggests that governments should not be constrained by their budget deficits. Instead, governments should focus on using their spending power to stimulate the economy and create jobs.

Second, MMT suggests that governments should not be afraid to run budget deficits. In fact, MMT economists argue that budget deficits can be a good thing, as they can help to stimulate the economy.

Third, MMT suggests that governments should not rely on interest rates to control the economy. Instead, governments should use their spending power and taxation policies to control inflation.

Criticisms of MMT

MMT is a controversial theory, and it has been criticized by many economists. Some critics argue that MMT is based on unrealistic assumptions about the way the economy works. Others argue that MMT would lead to inflation and financial instability.

However, MMT also has its supporters. Some supporters argue that MMT is a more realistic and effective way to manage the economy. They argue that MMT would allow governments to use their spending power to create jobs and stimulate the economy.

https://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2023/04/18/modern-monetary-theory-an-explanation/