Please note that the post below was published more than ten year ago on 21st November 2009 Nick Herbert MP, shadow cabinet member for the Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, was in Cumbria this morning to see the areas affected by the flooding. He writes on Conservative Home about his visit. Here is an extract. I’ve been in Cumbria today to see the areas affected by the floods. I arrived early in Keswick where I met officials from the Environment Agency. Although the river levels had fallen considerably and homes were no longer flooded, the damage to homes had been done. And the water which had got into houses wasn’t just from the river – it was foul water which had risen from the drains. I talked to fire crews who were pumping flood water back into the river, and discovered that they were from Tyne & Wear and Lancashire. They had been called in at an hours’ notice and had been working on the scene ever since, staying at a local hotel. You cannot fail to be impressed by the
Comments
Take one of my favourite examples, fiat currency or debasement of actual money (same difference)
we learned thousands of years ago it did not work, and ends in tears.
so the common sense says that was a bad idea, lets not do that again.
then after a good term, low and behold we get debasement first of all hoping no one will notice, but of course, it ends in tears.
so the common sense says that was a bad idea, lets not do that again.
then after a good term, again we get debasement, but its for the common good to fund some war or other, it ends in tears. so the common sense says that was a bad idea, lets not do that again
Then after a good term, we introduce paper currency, which is ok, but soon its removed from its standard to fund a war, where its chronically debassed, then it floats around on other ideas, then it falls to a fiat currency and is so debased its not worth mentioning, and it will end in tears, I wonder what the common sense response will be. let me think.
a certain person whom shall not be named, decided it would be a good idea to spend a fortune bailing out the very idiots who triggered the problem, then figured it was a great plan to spend a whole load of money in the hope this would fix things.
it did not quite go to plan, down to the fact the plan was rubbish.
so the next lot come in and try to fix things, but dont, because they wont cut expenditure, though in all fairness they are doing better than the last lot (though that honor hardly entitles them to so much as a blue peter badge).
so now the new leader of the old worse lot thinks it would be a great idea to spend a whole load of money to see if that fixes the debt this time.
I mean, its great isnt it.
The point you make is the economic equivalent of George Bernard Shaw's line,
"Must then Christ perish in torment in every age to save those that have no imagination?"