demonstrating against rising fuel prices

ubiquitous said:

This goes against the conventional wisdom of the economics fraternity in relation to the experience of inflation during the oil price shock era of the 1970s. In that case, high oil prices were widely blamed for rampant general price inflation in goods & services.

Click to expand...

I said high taxes were disinflationary not high prices. High prices are a symptom of high inflation not a cause. If at the time workers had not been able to lobby successfully for higher wages to counteract the higher prices, then the effect would have been rather more short-lived.

room305 said:

I said high taxes were disinflationary not high prices. High prices are a symptom of high inflation not a cause. If at the time workers had not been able to lobby successfully for higher wages to counteract the higher prices, then the effect would have been rather more short-lived.

Click to expand...

But there surely is no doubt that high taxes can also be inflationary - I would argue that they usually are. The anti-smoking group ASH have been campaigning for many years for serious tax hikes on tobacco and cigarettes. One of the main reasons cited by many commentators for the government's failure to take such a measure has been the effect such a tax hike would have on inflation statistics.

ubiquitous said:

But there surely is no doubt that high taxes can also be inflationary - I would argue that they usually are. The anti-smoking group ASH have been campaigning for many years for serious tax hikes on tobacco and cigarettes. One of the main reasons cited by many commentators for the government's failure to take such a measure has been the effect such a tax hike would have on inflation statistics.

Click to expand...

Yes, it would have an effect on inflation statistics not inflation. Money doesn't become less valuable when the government confiscates more of it, it becomes more valuable (disinflation/deflation) because there's less of it around.

It possible to envision a number of ways in which the government could make changes that would affect unemployment statistics without necessarily making a difference to the number of people actually employed.

Anyway, I'm dragging the thread OT so I apologise.

The fundamental problem with fishing and haulage is that they are small operators and primary producers, they have little pricing power, they sell to the big supermarkets and processors who have big pricing power, therefore they dont allow these operators pass on to them their legitimate costs or if they do they take some of the increased price themselves, this area is crying out for regulation in that supermarkets should not be allowed to bully small operators because of their huge size and power, this is an area where the market does not operate properly, legitimate costs should be borne by everybody equally, primary producer, processor, retailer and consumer. Currently the small primary producer bears the brunt of increasing costs

joe sod said:

Currently the small primary producer bears the brunt of increasing costs

Click to expand...

That's the same with any openly traded good or service and rightly so.