|
||||||||
Carney: Get real, there are losers from free trade |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 353
|
Carney: Get real, there are losers from free trade
Nice to see a major 'establishment' figure stating the obvious.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-38214729 |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Darn Sarf
Posts: 28,728
|
Watched his TV interview the other day, excellent. Carney for PM!
Well I don't see why if a Canadian can be BoE Governor he can't be PM! |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GL51 0EX
Posts: 14,090
|
Quote:
Well I don't see why if a Canadian can be BoE Governor he can't be PM!
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...n-election-win |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 577
|
The game is up, a banker with an inkling of social conscious, sounds to me he is getting his excuses in early.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: East Angular
Posts: 12,903
|
I like Mr Carney
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Devon
Posts: 47,995
|
I'm not sure what he is getting at as everyone should be aware barriers to trade are nearly always there to protect the economy(ies) of those erecting the barriers. Is he suggesting we are better off out of the EU's trade protection zone and trading under WTO rules with tariffs.
His denial that low interest rates have robbed savers to pay borrowers is overstating that issue but it is ridiculous to claim it doesn't favour the latter over the former and he reduced the base rate recently. The redistribution of wealth is much better done through what people earn and how you tax them than through the benefits system. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 40,288
|
The irony.
Carney complains about the impact of policies that he and other central bankers were responsible for which have enriched the wealthy few and impoverished much of the rest. The growing disparity is down to the sort of policies he has followed here and in Canada for the last decade - artificially low rates, money printing, destruction of pension funds and annuity values impoverishing those retiring, and very loose lending and money supply driving up prices The 1 per cent have done very well - asset prices up, stock markets up. The poor without those have done badly. Goldman Sachs have done very well from the work of their protege. Carney get real - it's your fault! |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Leafy London
Posts: 20,380
|
Quote:
The irony.
Carney complains about the impact of policies that he and other central bankers were responsible for which have enriched the wealthy few and impoverished much of the rest. The growing disparity is down to the sort of policies he has followed here and in Canada for the last decade - artificially low rates, money printing, destruction of pension funds and annuity values impoverishing those retiring, and very loose lending and money supply driving up prices The 1 per cent have done very well - asset prices up, stock markets up. The poor without those have done badly. Goldman Sachs have done very well from the work of their protege. Either your tears for the poor are of the crocodile type, or you are truly clueless about the impact of what you champion so loudly, |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,312
|
Get real, there are losers from protectionism.
The trick is whatever you do is ensuring there are as many winners as possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 4,806
|
Quote:
“The fundamental challenge is that, alongside its great benefits, every technological revolution mercilessly destroys jobs and livelihoods – and therefore identities – well before new ones emerge,” he said. https://www.theguardian.com/business...ank-of-englandHe noted the rise in living standards around the world in recent decades and said technological progress had lifted more than 1 billion people out of poverty. But he recognised those advances had not been felt equally. “Despite such immense progress many citizens in advanced economies are facing heightened uncertainty, lamenting a loss of control and losing trust in the system. To them, measures of aggregate progress bear little relation to their own experience. Rather than a new golden era, globalisation is associated with low wages, insecure employment, stateless corporations and striking inequalities,” he said. Is he not admitting globalisation lifts billions out of poverty and those in developed countries pay for it. It's a global redistribution of wealth scheme but i thought growth was the driver lifting people out of poverty, not re-distribution - teach them how to fish rather than give them our fish to eat. Growth vs Re-disribution, hmm, perhaps growth is dying. |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 20:06.

