Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jacob :))
    Not the Socialist though. Sorry. I just hate communists so much...
    As I am from LSE and our glorious institution being the HQ of the leftist intelligence of the UK, we have nothing to talk about.

    I do suggest you keep an open mind, though
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dapperatchik)
    I was genuinely interested as to how you define the 'post-war settlement,' why it was so relevant to the global economy even into the 1970s, and why its end was so destructive?
    Oh, I see. Sorry I misinterpreted your question then. I'll come back to this when I'm more alert and can give you the answer you're seeking.

    France and the USA had much worse Depressions than we did (and of course France and Germany had much worse WWIIs than we did). That doesn't explain why we were very substantially poorer than all three in 1980.
    Well, yes they did, but in none of those countries was their heavy industry found so completely wanting after the war, as was the case in Britain. Unlike in Germany, for instance, the coal mines of Britain's most productive districts - Durham and South Wales - were not readily adaptable to modern mining methods. They were very deep and pretty old by that point. It's not surprising that the NCB were obsessed with German efficiency and methodology (coal owners had been similarly obsessed even before the war) but couldn't really see how to adapt Britain's nineteenth-century inheritance to the demands of the post-war world.

    Of course, when we say Britain's depression-era experience was milder than that of France or the United States, what we actually mean is the experience of London and the South East (along with Birmingham) was milder. If you lived in Brynmawr or Jarrow and 8 in every 10 people living in the town was out of work, you might have a different sense of history. Statistics, as E P Thompson once wrote, often depart from lived experience.

    I agree that, to some extent, the banking boom was not 'real' GDP. But at the same time there is some value in financial services - they aren't economically useless just because you don't like them. Even our new post-crisis potential GDP (per capita) is much bigger relative to France's or America's than it was in 1980. And much of the current downturn - as I'm sure you'd agree - is down to abysmal short-term macro policy.

    It's an interesting stylised fact that the more neoliberal reforms your country did post-1980, the higher its relative growth rate.
    There is benefit in financial services, yes, but it's folly to suggest that Britain's deep underlying problems (which have been there since the General Strike in 1926) were solved by Thatcher. Stated baldly: they weren't, she disguised them with banks.

    Just on the stylised fact. Interesting choice of word since it's quite stylised to point out that a brick is a terracotta cuboid. Neoliberal reforms were intended to maximise growth at the expense of everything else. One would expect to see precisely the trend you point out. Yet growth is not everything; some of it is necessary, of course, but to have growth without the attendant development of a stable and happy society? There were have a problem.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EvilOfficer)
    As I am from LSE and our glorious institution being the HQ of the leftist intelligence of the UK, we have nothing to talk about.

    I do suggest you keep an open mind, though
    An LSE student?

    *cocks rifle*
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Thunder and Jazz)
    An LSE student?

    *cocks rifle*
    If I view this from a certain angle, is this a joke from Plebs?
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    Well, it basically signaled that the United States was withdrawing from the post-war settlement. I'm sure you don't need me to state in rather obvious fashion exactly why that would cause no amount of chaos in the world.

    In a nutshell? The UK never really recovered from the mauling it experienced in the Depression, a mauling that exponentially thrived on the country being bankrupted by the Second World War.

    Has it, though? If you strip out banking and finance which is essentially the economy of a bubble in London, the British performance overall since 1979 has been quite bad in comparison to those economies that remained "planned" (to the extent that such things exist" through the period - i.e. France, the Netherlands, and Germany. Britain is a bit like Italy - dysfunctional and riven by regional interests and problems - but, unlike Italy, has benefited from the cloak of the banking sector boom. London is the ideal place to have a banking boom, really, since it is situated pretty much in the middle of the Asian markets and American markets, but that is about it. Thatcher created the neo-liberal equivalent of the Emperor's New Clothes. For naked read the City.
    (Original post by Dapperatchik)
    I was genuinely interested as to how you define the 'post-war settlement,' why it was so relevant to the global economy even into the 1970s, and why its end was so destructive?

    France and the USA had much worse Depressions than we did (and of course France and Germany had much worse WWIIs than we did). That doesn't explain why we were very substantially poorer than all three in 1980.

    I agree that, to some extent, the banking boom was not 'real' GDP. But at the same time there is some value in financial services - they aren't economically useless just because you don't like them. Even our new post-crisis potential GDP (per capita) is much bigger relative to France's or America's than it was in 1980. And much of the current downturn - as I'm sure you'd agree - is down to abysmal short-term macro policy.

    It's an interesting stylised fact that the more neoliberal reforms your country did post-1980, the higher its relative growth rate.
    Given you later points i'd be interested to know your thoughts regarding this article which suggests that growth was not for lack of a better word "false".

    http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/17297
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by obi_adorno_kenobi)
    If I view this from a certain angle, is this a joke from Plebs?
    As in that new ITV show? I wouldn't know, I lack both a TV and the mental ability to watch ITV without my brain liquefying. Haven't seen it, any good?

    And no. As a KCL student I'm supposed to shoot them all on sight (even though their library is much much better than ours). Although given that I'm a postgrad living an hour out it's not like I really care.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.