Categories
It’s the economy stupid? – politicalbetting.com
It’s the economy stupid? – politicalbetting.com
The National Infrastructure Commission estimates poorer households are likely to see a £6.66 per month increase in living costs. This is something that at least 25% of the lowest-earning Britons say they can't afford https://t.co/MIkGuhuRwm pic.twitter.com/A8BAxbB9Hk
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
- increased competition in labour and product markets
- deregulation and simplification of the tax code
- encouragement of enterprise generally, not favoured government projects
- lower taxes
- improved infrastructure.
Unfortunately, Johnson and Sunak are doing the exact opposite, with the possible partial exception of the last. And their only defence, true enough in fairness, is that the opposition would be even worse.
I think it’s reasonably likely that the economy will deny the Tories a majority at the next election. The combination of the massive increase in government debt, and the UK’s ageing demographics (with Brexit disruption thrown into the mix) are likely to make the next decade a struggle for whoever is in government.
- the third runway at Heathrow
- HS2
- rural broadband
- HS3
- Crossrail 2
Hahahahahahahaha...
My guess, is that for those betting on no Tory majority, a moderately bad economy in 2024 is better than a really bad economy in 2024.
https://thebulletin.org/2021/10/the-untold-story-of-the-worlds-biggest-nuclear-bomb/
And a reminder of what a nutter Edward Teller was…
… At a secret meeting of the General Advisory Committee of the Atomic Energy Commission, Teller broached, as he put it, “the possibility of much bigger bangs.” At his Livermore laboratory, he reported, they were working on two new weapon designs, dubbed Gnomon and Sundial. Gnomon would be 1,000 megatons and would be used like a “primary” to set off Sundial, which would be 10,000 megatons. Most of Teller’s testimony remains classified to this day, but other scientists at the meeting recorded, after Teller had left, that they were “shocked” by his proposal. “It would contaminate the Earth,” one suggested. Physicist I. I. Rabi, by then an experienced Teller skeptic, suggested it was probably just an “advertising stunt.”[4] But he was wrong; Livermore would for several years continue working on Gnomon, at least, and had even planned to test a prototype for the device in Operation Redwing in 1956 (but the test never took place).[5]…
If that is the case, the equation is much easier as the other parties only have to abstain.
However, the difficulty for the SNP would be if Starmer refused a second Sindy vote. Would they then still put him into power, and attract the fury of their diehard supporters? Or fail to do so and attract the fury of their left wing voters for whom Sindy is a means of getting rid of the Tories?
It would be a nasty mess for them and therefore incredibly funny to watch.
JCB signs green hydrogen deal worth billions
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59107805
The global race to produce hydrogen offshore
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-55763356
Significant production is still a decade off at least, but the Australian project is an interesting start.
Your position fails on two levels:
1) Until 2007-8 Labour were far more trusted on the economy than the Tories. So these things can and do change very quickly;
2) The Tories are not in fact much more trusted than Labour at this moment. It is striking that every poll says Starmer is doing a bad job, yet the gap on ‘Best PM’ remains very narrow.
Not surprised give the wind outside my window!
An unstable government will almost certainly result, with (as in 1974) another election following soon after.
The alternative is that the Tories install a charismatic and optimistic LotO, who can make quick headway and win some marginals back.
We could be in for a repeat of the ‘17-‘19 Parliament, where it’s almost impossible to do anything.
Brave, or stupid?
Interesting the BBC don’t seem to be covering it. They went big on the original allegations, I’d have thought they owe it to Andrew to at least cover his defence.
This is a very fragile policy agenda, and the blinkered mess of current government policy were all too obvious in the budget, which was pretty incoherrrent, and as far as serious improvements in the tax code were concerned, dead on arrival.
So, given the serious global risks that UK PLC is now facing, the government is clearly adding to the problems through its own incompetence and a ruthless denial of serious alternatives. Much of the world is facing similar problems, but the unique conditions caused by the Johnson government will take the UK back to being the weakest of the G7 economies and one of the worst performers in the OECD.
Many Conservatives are fully aware of the crisis that this government is causing, and in the Tory heartlands there is considerable and growing disquiet- Chesham and Amersham was a rebellion of Conservative voters against their own government. The mutterings about the budget mess are also not going away. We saw in the last Parliament a large number of Tories walking out from the party, and the loyal party organisers have been replaced by paid-for professionals. This is a wholesale hollowing out of the fundamental party organisation, and is the deliberate agenda of the very hard faced people who now control the party. Yet it is now quite possible that a backlash begins and the populist Johnsonites end up locked in a struggle with the old guard, but this time the old guard is better organised and just as ruthless as the Johnsonites themselves.
In any event, the brittle nature of the Tory hegemony could break down in a variety of ways, and for the sake of the country I hope that it does.
Mr. Ping, given he chose to scuttle himself with that interview, I'm going to guess his action is stupid.
It’s not unreasonable for him to point out, that his accuser has already received one financial settlement related to the events in question.
https://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/news/2021/10/15/itm-power-to-raise-250m-for-new-uk-factory/
A local company to me, Haskel, is investing heavily in Hydrogen too and domestic boiler makers are already trialling fully hydrogen enabled boilers.
There are issues to resolve but it is attracting lots of interest and money,
The Feb 74 election resulted in, effectively, a hung Parliament. However had Heath been prepared to concede some form of PR the (then Liberals might have co-operated, although there was a widespread view that who ever had or hadn't 'won' Heath and the Tories had lost.
Wilson was a more experienced politician than Starmer, so knew what to do to survive, and, crucially had some 'big beasts' behind him.
It will be fascinating to watch how the politicians handle rising interest rates. The loose monetary policy of the last 12 years has screwed over so many people. But Labour have never criticised it. I wonder if they’ll encourage the government to change the BoE’s remit? Sunak said he’d written to the governor to restate that their remit was controlling inflation.
She thought he would settle rather than risk damaging his brand
I can see how hydrogen is feasible for road, rail and marine transport. Indeed, for a country like us it would be ideal given we’re surrounded by it.
But wouldn’t water vapour in the upper atmosphere actually be worse in terms of warming effect than CO2? Which would rule it out for jet aircraft.
If I’m wrong, please tell me.
I suspect there is also a group who suspect Starmer might make a better PM but don’t believe Labour is ready
What is that first question about, exactly? If government popularity is determined by real increases or decreases in the cost of living we are going to see an increase in the Tory lead.
Is it any wonder management/professionals were so blasé about FOM? They lived in a different world
“ We find that immigration has a small negative impact on average British wages. Our results also reveal that the biggest impact of immigration on wages is within the semi/unskilled services occupational group, which have seen a large inflow of migration from the EU.”
https://izajodm.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40176-017-0096-0
Although I personally think them a poisonous irrelevance - and I don't see McDonnell or Lavery being around beyond the next election, while the younger generation are basically quite thick and will surely never return to the front rank - I can see why others might be spooked.
Subtle difference between criminal and civil cases.
Surely that would be a big mistake?
In her case, magic money trees, like North Sea Oil. Now, modern monetary theory.
https://twitter.com/thesundaytimes/status/1454504036359606290?s=21
I pointed out that people don't need to hear policy ideas at this stage of the parliament, its the direction of travel thats most important. And despite Starmer making a decent speech with one mega critical part to it, it was drowned out completely by hard left wazzocks heckling. That became the story, not the brilliant "get brexit done". Same with Rayner getting huge chears for attacking "Tory Scum".
Labour won't make progress without the kind of cut through policy in soundbite form (and "make Brexit work" absolutely could be) where the entire party relentlessly drills it. As the party remains at war with itself and even sensible heads are still attacking "stupid" voters, they have no chance.
Thats not to say the Tories have a cakewalk - you can't make the mess they are making and walk re-election. I expect a hung parliament, the Tories the largest party but the combined opposition agreeing to work together for the love of sanity.
1) Giuffre was procuring "slutty girls" for his friend Epstein.
2) Epstein has already settled out court, with a non disclosure agreement.
Indeed even less so than his non-sweating Pizza interview.
The fact that she was paid off by Epstein for allegations of being trafficked is not obviously helpful to Andrew's position.
1. The job is "demeaning"
2. The jobs are miles and miles from where the available labour is
3. The job results is a net loss vs not taking it (via UC taper plus cost of getting to the job)
4. The job is shiftwork and the potential worker has kids.
etc etc etc
The hard right element of the Tories always pile in with "make people work for their benefits". I remember IDS in the Valleys suggesting to unemployed mums that there were jobs aplenty in Cardiff. Yeah. Minimum wage bar jobs, in the evening. With no childcare or public transport available even if they could be afforded on minimum wage.
The stuctural labour issue of the last decade or two is that we both have people wanting work and jobs needing filling. But the two are geographically and financially incompatible. The move to flexible working must be allowed to help spread job locations about, and we need things like wrap-around childcare that doesn't cost a 2nd mortgage.
Andrew and the accuser met at a party in New York, when she was 17 and he was in his 30s.
Now, 17 is of legal age in New York, so he didn’t commit any obvious sexual offence against the woman, and she is not arguing that any activity between them wasn’t consensual.
However, there is a federal law that prohibits moving someone under 18 across state lines for the purpose of prostitution, which apparently does cover this woman, she didn’t live in NY and was hired for the party. The criminal case question was did Andrew, who can reasonably say he didn’t know where exactly all the girls at the party came from, know that she was 17 and had been moved across a state line?
The talk of a ‘rape’ case refers to the US offence of ‘statutory rape’, which in the UK would be described as ‘unlawful sex’ rather than rape. The New York prosecutor gave up on trying to get Andrew for that one after he refused to be interviewed by the prosecutor.
The woman came to an settlement with Epstein some years ago, and is under a non-disclosure agreement. The assumption is that she was paid a sum of money in exchange for her silence, which is not uncommon (although again we can argue the morality of these settlements)
It’s been suggested that she subsequently met Andrew in London, but I don’t know how old she was or how she got there. A similar law exists in the UK about controlling someone under 18 for the purposes of prostitution, but as far as I can see no UK prosecutor has picked up the case.
Of course, morally Andrew’s reputation has suffered immensely, for associating with someone (Epstein) convicted of sexual offences against minors, and well known for at best being careless as to how old were the girls at his parties.
I do feel sorry for the Queen, who has morally lost two members of her family in the last couple of years, both in very public circumstances, as well as losing her husband.
Will the voters see through Johnson's bumbling charm and general gorgeousness as the bailiffs repossess their home and lease car? I am not so sure. I suspect it might be someone else's fault.
There’s a reason why many public services will remain mediocre or worse even as taxes rise to their highest level in 70 years. The fundamental explanation is the sluggardly pace of economic growth. When the economy expands at 2.5% a year, the country can afford to buy itself decent public services with relatively modest levels of taxation. At growth of 1.5%, you end up with inferior public services for higher levels of taxation. For the past decade, growth has been much closer to 1.5% than it has been to 2.5%. “Rishi is crossing his fingers and saying we can have this extra spending and then some tax cuts before the election,” says one former cabinet minister on the One Nation wing of the Conservative party. “The gamble is on growth.”
The gamble on growth is one the chancellor will lose if the official forecasters have got it right about the economy. The Office for Budget Responsibility reckons the rebound from the pandemic will fizzle out and growth will become highly disappointing towards the end of this parliament. It has also confirmed that the government handicapped itself with a very hard version of Brexit. Mr Sunak might brag that departure from the EU has liberated him to reform taxes on booze, but he can’t claim any Brexit bonus for the economy. The reverse is the case. Brexit will permanently erase 4% from GDP, reckons the OBR, twice the damage inflicted by Covid.
Rising costs are already making many households feel pessimistic about their future living standards, an issue that affects nearly everyone, but one about which the chancellor said little and did less. Britons face soaring energy bills, higher prices in the shops and inflation threatening to rise to its worst level in three decades.
Rising inflation and borrowing costs combined with poor growth and heavier taxes is a recipe for near-frozen disposable incomes. Independent forecasters expect most people to experience little improvement to their living standards and some a squeeze over the next five years. The chancellor is desperately hoping that these forecasts will turn out to be wrong. Because, if they are right, the public will not be experiencing a vibrant Age of Optimism when they next elect a government. It will feel a lot more like a grinding Age of Stagnation.
What does he say as a matter of interest?
An amusing video of perhaps the only person in the world standing in between Trump and the nomination.
It's also the reason you never see any hydrogen fuelled cars in any FIM sanctioned motorsport.
It's a possible solution for heavy plant, aviation and other controlled environments.
The NI renegotiation provides them with cover in removing most of this red tape, spin it as "EU agree to our rules" and give people their Brexit bonus by hosing money at them and their community. That delivers the growth to pay for it. Or, we can have -4%, not get the required groth at best, or make it -6% (or worse) by blundering into a trade war.
Such a pragmatic Brexit solution will properly wind up the small number of sovvrinty or death merchants like Philip. But the vast majority won't know or care. A "win" and cash for them and theirs will be enough. Its there for the taking, and we know Boris is flexible with
the truthmoralityprinciple. Could happen.If it's 20% of your income and it goes up 50% something has to give.
“John Healey, the shadow defence secretary, has written to Ben Wallace, the defence secretary, branding the response inadequate and claiming that there was “evidence to suggest the case was actively suppressed”. The Conservative MP Johnny Mercer, a former veterans minister, said that the MoD’s inability to deal with serious incidents was “pathetic”.”
It's odd that two left-leaning people on here - der old Roger and Foxy - are willing to pour disdain on people they don't like, but are willing to defend the indefensible when people they do like do much worse sexual misdemeanours.
It completely confuses unrelated matters. Growth is the increase in the level of output in society. Good growth might allow you to increase funding of public services thus, hopefully, improving the quality of the service but it does not determine the level of funding. That depends on the actual GDP per head and the proportion of that GDP committed to the services.
And the level of funding does not, except in extreme scenarios, determine the level of services which can change one way or another as a result of a whole series of factors. It really is nonsense.
And for not going with 'Blue hydrogen', which may have allowed easier sourcing.
2. Epstein has already settled with the woman, therefore chasing Andrew for money amounts to double jeopardy, is Andrew’s argument.
But there are certainly parts of the country where the geographical issue is vital and I don't see how some places eg the South Wales Valleys will ever be economically strong. After all the population is only there as a legacy of mining and the pits aren't going to come back.
Its a pity we cannot remove the 'unemployables' from London and swap them for people who do want to work from the remote parts.