Corbynomics: A Dystopia

antrobus

Graham_Devon wrote: »

...Do you disagree that importing coal involves price fluctuations? ....

The price of coal will fluctuate irrespective of whether it's imported or not.

Graham_Devon wrote: »

..
Do you disagree that opening up coal mines will provide employment?

Do you disagree that employed people pay tax?

Do you disagree that the fewer unemployed there are, the lower the welfare bill is?

You could say the same about anything. You could compile a long list of closed British factories and state that reopening them would 'create employment' and reduce the 'welfare bill'.

antrobus

Graham_Devon wrote: »

... So why should the coal industry be an induistry that shouldn't get a subsidy when other industries do?

Because there are no positive externalities.

Thrugelmir

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Secondly, mining coal creates jobs and therefore tax revenue and therefore reduces expenditure on welfare.

Coal mining ceased in this country as it couldn't compete in a global marketplace and demand was falling. Deep pit mining cannot compete with digging a hole in the ground.

Coal mining added huge costs to the welfare state. Due to the fact it's not a healthy occupation.

Graham_Devon

antrobus wrote: »

You could say the same about anything. You could compile a long list of closed British factories and state that reopening them would 'create employment' and reduce the 'welfare bill'.

You could say the same thing about any factory which produces goods which we import.

No point saying it about factories which manufacture stuff we no longer use.

Secondly, some factories will need to import raw materials to create the finished product. In these cases, it may be that simply importing the finished product is far beneficial.

However, coal and gas I'm not too sure about.

The key is the analysis of the overall benefit. Not JUST The cost of the imported material. But how much extra tax income will it create. Will it reduce the welfare bill? how dependant are we on the other countries? Certainly an be turned off which would cause a huge problem in the UK.

If after all of those things, importing is still cheaper, then fine. But until we have reached that conclusion, it's worth looking at - is it not?

antrobus

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You could say the same thing about any factory which produces goods which we import.

Exactly. So what makes digging up coal any different?

Graham_Devon wrote: »

...If after all of those things, importing is still cheaper, then fine. But until we have reached that conclusion, it's worth looking at - is it not?

Well go and look at it then. If you are seriously proposing that reopening coal mines would be economically beneficial to the country, go and do the research, and prove it.

Stop being so darned lazy.

cells

Graham_Devon wrote: »

You can claim your £5 after you've told me what's so bad about what I said.

Until that point, you are simply replying with what could be construed an insult with absolutely nothing to tell me what was wrong with what was said. Which is funny really, as that's the majority of the stuff I see being directed at Corbyn.

Do you disagree that importing coal involves price fluctuations?

Do you disagree that opening up coal mines will provide employment?

Do you disagree that employed people pay tax?

Do you disagree that the fewer unemployed there are, the lower the welfare bill is?

The problem with D-I-Y is that it reduces specialization

You can also apply it to all levels all the way down to the individual.

Why should Yorkshire buy hats made in Hertfordshire, would it not be better for Yorkshire to open up its own har factories and keep jobs there etc

cells

antrobus wrote: »

Exactly. So what makes digging up coal any different?

Well go and look at it then. If you are seriously proposing that reopening coal mines would be economically beneficial to the country, go and do the research, and prove it.

Stop being so darned lazy.

well wind mills and PV panels are subsidized for many of the same reasons, local jobs local taxes less imports blah blah blah

why not offer a local subsidy for new coal mining. Maybe £20 a ton.

Its not likely to be that costly. 30 million tons x £20 a ton = £600 million in subsidy or less than 50p a week for each household


also there is a huge huge quantity of coal in the UK and much more than that again in the north sea. The private sector if given subsidy might be able to develop ways to unlock that, eg underground coal gassification.

cells

antrobus wrote: »

Because there are no positive externalities.

there are plenty, one being that it makes an ice age less likely.

wotsthat

cells wrote: »

why not offer a local subsidy for new coal mining. Maybe £20 a ton.

Is that on top of the £22/ tonne difference between UK coal and delivered Russian coal?

UK coal needs to be c£55/ tonne to be profitable. Russian coal is about £33/ tonne delivered.

Graham_Devon

antrobus wrote: »

Well go and look at it then. If you are seriously proposing that reopening coal mines would be economically beneficial to the country, go and do the research, and prove it.

Stop being so darned lazy.

You miss the point.

It's not for me to come up with all the figures. The point is that people are deriding him for this sort of stuff without coming up with the figures.

All I have said is that you cannot look at the cost of import alone. I haven't said that coal mining would or wouldn't be beneficial. I've just asked that all the factors are looked at instead of just how much it costs to import.

You HAVE said it wouldn't be beneficial. So you are making a statement. I'm not making such a statement (please point out where I have). You should be providing figures as you are coming to an absolute conclusion.