The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
My understanding of the report is that taxes are too high but I stand to be corrected
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
It just feels like there's not enough behind her to be a genuine prospect. Granted, absent a vacancy it is not always apparent who will be a genuine prospect, but whilst I have no issue with her and she has a handful of decent clips, I don't get the shift behind her, even at these levels. Still, if we'd all got on at the odds OGH did that hardly matters.
Not yet.
She needs to write some op eds and deliver some speeches.
Agreed. At the moment she is just a blank canvas onto which people can paint their aspriations.
On Topic. How “decisive win for Boris” Penny’s campaign manager Leadsome has been since Monday makes me think if many candidates are positioning for a post general election contest now - not interest in owning fag end, recession and defeat as a LOTO?
Anyone agree? Putting yourselves in their shoes, once Boris loses the general election is time for Fresh face to take over, Penny and many others may now be thinking. Last Monday’s VONC was a key moment in deciding the Tory leader igoing into next general election, leaving likes of Penny now preparing for a probable post election contest?
Not sure I agree. I think the rebels probably picked the latest possible moment they could for their VOC. If they had won then great. If they lost then under the current rules the next VOC can't be until June 2023. That is, to my mind, about as late as they would possibly want to leave it ahead of a 2024 GE. This way they get a second bite of the cherry next summer and still time to get a leader in place who has some chance of them winning the next GE.
So I think there will be another challenge - at least one more - next summer.
Yes I note your arguments for, but my two arguments against remain in place, firstly it’s getting further into general election territory in a years time, closer to the need to rally round rather than being divided; and would the right sort of candidates, like Penny in it for the long haul, want it then if it looks like owning defeat, or tell their supporters to hold off till after the coming general election?
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Thing that strikes me from this very interesting map, is the geographical diversity of all the groupings, at least in terms of being spread across the landscape and NOT clumped in just one section. More cohesion in terms of demography including urban & suburban, exurban & rural.
That's an intriguing map - I had no idea that the caucuses covered representatives that comprehensively. Though the most left-wing Democrats are clearly not just socialists, they seem to be inner-city in the largest few cities plus places with universities? Whereas the other coalition is suburbanites plus southern African-Americans? Whereas on the Republican side there are only patterns that suggest themselves.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
Well, they all claim that! If growth were so easily at the direction of governments we wouldn't be in such a pickle.
The reality is that this government's policy is trade barriers and threats of trade war with our biggest and nearest trading partner, to raise taxes on the young workers, to tax higher education, and to subsidise the retired and homeowners. To skim off government contracts for their mates and to allow the super-rich to dodge paying taxes.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Not true.
At 130p the govt took 22p VAT + 58p Fuel Duty = 80p After the 5p cut in Fuel Duty at 190p the govt takes 32p VAT + 53p Fuel Duty = 85p
The biggest distortion on the price of fuel is our taxes on it, rightly so generally for environmental reasons, but they can come right down for a bit for a few months.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
That's the general impression of things, but I don't believe it's even close to accurate picture. Is there more we can to increase our own domestic oil supply? Of course. Is there more we can do to store gas for the future, when its wholesale price is low? Yep. Is there more that Government could do to disrupt the industry and bring gas bills down? Almost certainly.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
BBC NEWS called it both a coming stagflation, and blamed Brexit. They also brushed off the current best of breed growth by saying it’s only because ours dropped worse in first place.
Is Nadine still editing the BBC?
Paging St Bart, it’s all mainstream media from FT to BBC call it stagflation on account of stagnant growth and 9% inflation, without any mention of unemployment. Is this shoddy standards in journalism?
It's n=1 isn't it? Stagflation, as coined by McLeod, was slow growth high inflation. But because the only experience we've had of that was rising and high unemployment, that became part of the definition. I detect this fallacy in another area. Experience of Labour replacing the Tories in government, if you are under 65? n=1. Therefore. Labour needs to be 20 points ahead to win. Folk say "This is nothing like 1997!" Thatcher wasn't. Cameron wasn't. But Blair was, and often more. But Blair is a huge outlier. Nobody has ever had leads of such magnitude over a sustained period. Folk make the mistake of thinking the next time will be exactly like their only other experience of something. It rarely is. Don't believe me? Have a second child.
Stagnation meaning unemployment and inflation has a serious meaning though, drop it and the word becomes meaningless.
The issue with stagnation is that traditional methods to help problems with unemployment worsen inflation, methods to help problems with inflation worsen unemployment. So if you have both crises simultaneously then you are in a very compromised situation where any action you take to help one crisis will worsen the crisis. You're caught between a rock and a hard place, between the devil and the deep blue sea, you have to jump into the frying pan, or the fire.
Tackling inflation by making unemployment worse when you have millions unemployed is brave, in the Yes, Minister sense.
Without unemployment, on its own inflation and stagnation is pretty meaningless. It means you're not experiencing growth, sure, but if people have full employment and stagnation at that level then its unpleasant but not a crisis, its not ideal but you can tackle the inflation without worrying about worsening the millions unemployed.
Besides nominally the country is growing, the issue is the inflation is eating away that growth. That's not stagflation, that's inflation, you need to address the inflation problem.
It just feels like there's not enough behind her to be a genuine prospect. Granted, absent a vacancy it is not always apparent who will be a genuine prospect, but whilst I have no issue with her and she has a handful of decent clips, I don't get the shift behind her, even at these levels. Still, if we'd all got on at the odds OGH did that hardly matters.
Not yet.
She needs to write some op eds and deliver some speeches.
Agreed. At the moment she is just a blank canvas onto which people can paint their aspriations.
Well, that worked for Barack Obama.
But Obama had other gifts. His homage to the Queen at jubilee was the most elegant and eloquent I heard from anyone. It reminded you that we used to have leaders who could speak like that.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Can you put a timeline on when we will get fair and reasonable petrol prices again?
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
Well, they all claim that! If growth were so easily at the direction of governments we wouldn't be in such a pickle.
The reality is that this government's policy is trade barriers and threats of trade war with our biggest and nearest trading partner, to raise taxes on the young workers, to tax higher education, and to subsidise the retired and homeowners. To skim off government contracts for their mates and to allow the super-rich to dodge paying taxes.
It is pretty much the antidote to growth.
The £400 energy bung for each house you own whilst providing £0 for renters on pre payment meters says exactly where their priorities lie.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Leaving the Russian issue aside, rising fuel costs are a massive financial bonus for the Government. Giving 5p back is not much by comparison. It should be governed by a stabiliser mechanism that reduces it when prices are high and increases it when they're low. But then I suppose Chancellors couldn't claim they were being generous by reducing it.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Can you put a timeline on when we will get fair and reasonable petrol prices again?
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
I think fuel prices will be down by the middle of next year. And the Russians provide most of our white fish because they invested in industrial trawlers that cleaned out the oceans without any regard to renewable fish stocks. Fish we were happy to buy until recently.
But I do find why anyone would choose cod and chips over haddock completely bewildering. Inexplicable.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
Umm no. The Economic Outlook contains both forecasts and recommendations for policies.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Can you put a timeline on when we will get fair and reasonable petrol prices again?
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Not true.
At 130p the govt took 22p VAT + 58p Fuel Duty = 80p After the 5p cut in Fuel Duty at 190p the govt takes 32p VAT + 53p Fuel Duty = 85p
The biggest distortion on the price of fuel is our taxes on it, rightly so generally for environmental reasons, but they can come right down for a bit for a few months.
I agree that it should, but don't forget though that commercial vehicles can reclaim VAT. So not only has it gone down in percentage terms from 62% to 45% but its come down in cash terms too for commercial vehicles.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
That's the general impression of things, but I don't believe it's even close to accurate picture. Is there more we can to increase our own domestic oil supply? Of course. Is there more we can do to store gas for the future, when its wholesale price is low? Yep. Is there more that Government could do to disrupt the industry and bring gas bills down? Almost certainly.
Both of those are medium rather than short term aspirations. But those, like the Scottish government, who resisted the idea of exploiting our own resources in the North Sea have been made to look almost as foolish as those who thought we did not need more storage because supplies of gas were plentiful.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
My understanding of the report is that taxes are too high but I stand to be corrected
The relevant quote may be this "the UK was being hit hard by a combination of factors, including higher interest rates, higher taxes, reduced trade and more expensive energy and food." So. A statement of fact rather than a recommendation of action. Although. Taxes are too high. Especially at this point of the economic cycle.
Question for PBers - PB generally has alot of arguments from all sides of the political spectrum, but does anyone think that one side of the political wings has a dominant presence here?
There was a poll a few years ago of PB. It was the LDs that were over represented. Most political areas were covered though apart from SLAB curiously.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
So a complete reverse on Rishi's budget then?
Yes and if he won't get someone who will
My understanding of economics is raise tax early to fight inflation. Borrow money for spending and cut taxes particularly vat to fight slump in growth.
Borrow money for investment not spending on wages
Borrow money for “investment spending” that keep people in work?
When people think of recession, inflation, stagflation, low unemployment, they tend it think it’s as evenly spread across all economy, like a uniform swing in opinion poll seat calc - but all those bad things could hurt more sectorally? So government intervention would be to stop skilled or semi skilled from losing jobs and having to take unskilled ones?
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Not true.
At 130p the govt took 22p VAT + 58p Fuel Duty = 80p After the 5p cut in Fuel Duty at 190p the govt takes 32p VAT + 53p Fuel Duty = 85p
The biggest distortion on the price of fuel is our taxes on it, rightly so generally for environmental reasons, but they can come right down for a bit for a few months.
I agree that it should, but don't forget though that commercial vehicles can reclaim VAT. So not only has it gone down in percentage terms from 62% to 45% but its come down in cash terms too for commercial vehicles.
In theory at least those reclaiming VAT are charging it back to someone else on the other side so the government should be seeing increased VAT as firms pass on the higher fuel prices to customers.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Not true.
At 130p the govt took 22p VAT + 58p Fuel Duty = 80p After the 5p cut in Fuel Duty at 190p the govt takes 32p VAT + 53p Fuel Duty = 85p
The biggest distortion on the price of fuel is our taxes on it, rightly so generally for environmental reasons, but they can come right down for a bit for a few months.
I agree that it should, but don't forget though that commercial vehicles can reclaim VAT. So not only has it gone down in percentage terms from 62% to 45% but its come down in cash terms too for commercial vehicles.
And not just commercial vehicles. I recover an element of my VAT on my fuel too as do several million other self employed people.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Second largest, surely?
I may be wrong but I think it is Saudi, the US and then Russia.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Not true.
At 130p the govt took 22p VAT + 58p Fuel Duty = 80p After the 5p cut in Fuel Duty at 190p the govt takes 32p VAT + 53p Fuel Duty = 85p
The biggest distortion on the price of fuel is our taxes on it, rightly so generally for environmental reasons, but they can come right down for a bit for a few months.
I agree that it should, but don't forget though that commercial vehicles can reclaim VAT. So not only has it gone down in percentage terms from 62% to 45% but its come down in cash terms too for commercial vehicles.
In theory at least those reclaiming VAT are charging it back to someone else on the other side so the government should be seeing increased VAT as firms pass on the higher fuel prices to customers.
Only if the price is fully passed on, which is inflationary. If the cost is absorbed at all, then no the business has lost revenue and so has the Exchequer.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
BBC NEWS called it both a coming stagflation, and blamed Brexit. They also brushed off the current best of breed growth by saying it’s only because ours dropped worse in first place.
Is Nadine still editing the BBC?
Paging St Bart, it’s all mainstream media from FT to BBC call it stagflation on account of stagnant growth and 9% inflation, without any mention of unemployment. Is this shoddy standards in journalism?
It's n=1 isn't it? Stagflation, as coined by McLeod, was slow growth high inflation. But because the only experience we've had of that was rising and high unemployment, that became part of the definition. I detect this fallacy in another area. Experience of Labour replacing the Tories in government, if you are under 65? n=1. Therefore. Labour needs to be 20 points ahead to win. Folk say "This is nothing like 1997!" Thatcher wasn't. Cameron wasn't. But Blair was, and often more. But Blair is a huge outlier. Nobody has ever had leads of such magnitude over a sustained period. Folk make the mistake of thinking the next time will be exactly like their only other experience of something. It rarely is. Don't believe me? Have a second child.
Stagnation meaning unemployment and inflation has a serious meaning though, drop it and the word becomes meaningless.
The issue with stagnation is that traditional methods to help problems with unemployment worsen inflation, methods to help problems with inflation worsen unemployment. So if you have both crises simultaneously then you are in a very compromised situation where any action you take to help one crisis will worsen the crisis. You're caught between a rock and a hard place, between the devil and the deep blue sea, you have to jump into the frying pan, or the fire.
Tackling inflation by making unemployment worse when you have millions unemployed is brave, in the Yes, Minister sense.
Without unemployment, on its own inflation and stagnation is pretty meaningless. It means you're not experiencing growth, sure, but if people have full employment and stagnation at that level then its unpleasant but not a crisis, its not ideal but you can tackle the inflation without worrying about worsening the millions unemployed.
Besides nominally the country is growing, the issue is the inflation is eating away that growth. That's not stagflation, that's inflation, you need to address the inflation problem.
I don't disagree. We were talking about the OECD figures for next year though. Which show no growth and inflation.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
Personally, I would be staggered if Japan and Italy were not the two worst performing (GDP-growth-wise) countries in the G7 in the second half of this year.
Both of them import nearly all their energy - and both are highly levered to the price of oil.
Energy imports were around 3% of GDP in both those countries last year. With prices having roughly doubled, that's a reduction in GDP of 3% just from the net imports number alone, let alone what it means in terms of reduced domestic economic activity.
FWIW, I would say:
Canada - small positive from high energy prices US - no net impact (although obviously there are winners and losers) from high energy prices
Germany, France, UK - medium negative, probably pushes us all into recession, but mild
Italy, Japan - big negative, as are such large energy importers
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Can you put a timeline on when we will get fair and reasonable petrol prices again?
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
I think fuel prices will be down by the middle of next year. And the Russians provide most of our white fish because they invested in industrial trawlers that cleaned out the oceans without any regard to renewable fish stocks. Fish we were happy to buy until recently.
But I do find why anyone would choose cod and chips over haddock completely bewildering. Inexplicable.
It's a regional thing. Haddock simply wasn't even available in Lancashire when I was growing up.
Question for PBers - PB generally has alot of arguments from all sides of the political spectrum, but does anyone think that one side of the political wings has a dominant presence here?
There was a poll a few years ago of PB. It was the LDs that were over represented. Most political areas were covered though apart from SLAB curiously.
Of the Lib Dems, and from the support during the various LD leadership contests, I'd say it was the Right of the LD's that has been most clearly represented on PB for many years. That may be gradually changing though, over time.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
So a complete reverse on Rishi's budget then?
Yes and if he won't get someone who will
My understanding of economics is raise tax early to fight inflation. Borrow money for spending and cut taxes particularly vat to fight slump in growth.
Borrow money for investment not spending on wages
Borrow money for “investment spending” that keep people in work?
When people think of recession, inflation, stagflation, low unemployment, they tend it think it’s as evenly spread across all economy, like a uniform swing in opinion poll seat calc - but all those bad things could hurt more sectorally? So government intervention would be to stop skilled or semi skilled from losing jobs and having to take unskilled ones?
Either a wage price spiral is driving inflation, in which case higher interest rates and disregard of unemployment are the Thatcherite solution as per the early Eighties.
If it is external pressures (Sanctions on Russia forcing up fuel and food prices) in which case domestic spending is not the issue, and a bigger deficit and after tax wage rises are needed to keep economic wheels and domestic demand going.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
BBC NEWS called it both a coming stagflation, and blamed Brexit. They also brushed off the current best of breed growth by saying it’s only because ours dropped worse in first place.
Is Nadine still editing the BBC?
Paging St Bart, it’s all mainstream media from FT to BBC call it stagflation on account of stagnant growth and 9% inflation, without any mention of unemployment. Is this shoddy standards in journalism?
It's n=1 isn't it? Stagflation, as coined by McLeod, was slow growth high inflation. But because the only experience we've had of that was rising and high unemployment, that became part of the definition. I detect this fallacy in another area. Experience of Labour replacing the Tories in government, if you are under 65? n=1. Therefore. Labour needs to be 20 points ahead to win. Folk say "This is nothing like 1997!" Thatcher wasn't. Cameron wasn't. But Blair was, and often more. But Blair is a huge outlier. Nobody has ever had leads of such magnitude over a sustained period. Folk make the mistake of thinking the next time will be exactly like their only other experience of something. It rarely is. Don't believe me? Have a second child.
Stagnation meaning unemployment and inflation has a serious meaning though, drop it and the word becomes meaningless.
The issue with stagnation is that traditional methods to help problems with unemployment worsen inflation, methods to help problems with inflation worsen unemployment. So if you have both crises simultaneously then you are in a very compromised situation where any action you take to help one crisis will worsen the crisis. You're caught between a rock and a hard place, between the devil and the deep blue sea, you have to jump into the frying pan, or the fire.
Tackling inflation by making unemployment worse when you have millions unemployed is brave, in the Yes, Minister sense.
Without unemployment, on its own inflation and stagnation is pretty meaningless. It means you're not experiencing growth, sure, but if people have full employment and stagnation at that level then its unpleasant but not a crisis, its not ideal but you can tackle the inflation without worrying about worsening the millions unemployed.
Besides nominally the country is growing, the issue is the inflation is eating away that growth. That's not stagflation, that's inflation, you need to address the inflation problem.
I don't disagree. We were talking about the OECD figures for next year though. Which show no growth and inflation.
It shows no real terms growth, because the nominal growth is destroyed by inflation. That is a problem with inflation.
If you grow by 7% nominally, but have 7% inflation, then you've not grown in real terms but if you have not got millions unemployed then you just need to deal with the problem of inflation, you aren't caught between the two crises with opposing solutions.
If you take away the very reason why stagflation is a problem and apply it to all inflation, you utterly devalue the term and make it meaningless. What we have now is inflation, if we get to a position where we still have inflation but millions unemployed too (and its certainly possible) then that would be stagflation and it would be millions times worse than what we have now.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Second largest, surely?
I may be wrong but I think it is Saudi, the US and then Russia.
You are wrong: the US is comfortably the largest oil producer in the world, at about 11.2m b/d (2021 numbers). Russia is number two (10.1m), and Saudi third (9.3m).
Edit to add: I think you were thinking of oil exporters, where Saudi is clearly the largest exporter of oil
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
My understanding of the report is that taxes are too high but I stand to be corrected
The relevant quote may be this "the UK was being hit hard by a combination of factors, including higher interest rates, higher taxes, reduced trade and more expensive energy and food." So. A statement of fact rather than a recommendation of action. Although. Taxes are too high. Especially at this point of the economic cycle.
And Especially at this point of the political cycle. Almost like no thought was given to it.
I wonder if they thought up the new Health tax May 21, buoyant in the polls, would not have gone though with it looking at May 22 polling.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Second largest, surely?
I may be wrong but I think it is Saudi, the US and then Russia.
You are wrong: the US is comfortably the largest oil producer in the world, at about 11.2m b/d (2021 numbers). Russia is number two (10.1m), and Saudi third (9.3m).
Ok, fair enough. Saudi must have quite a bit of potential additional production available to it then. But then the current position suits them rather well.
Edit, and yes, I was thinking of exporters who might supply us. The point you make about the impact is well made but we still get enough out of the North Sea to mitigate the impact that France and Germany will suffer. Won't help our exports though.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
So a complete reverse on Rishi's budget then?
Yes and if he won't get someone who will
My understanding of economics is raise tax early to fight inflation. Borrow money for spending and cut taxes particularly vat to fight slump in growth.
Borrow money for investment not spending on wages
Borrow money for “investment spending” that keep people in work?
When people think of recession, inflation, stagflation, low unemployment, they tend it think it’s as evenly spread across all economy, like a uniform swing in opinion poll seat calc - but all those bad things could hurt more sectorally? So government intervention would be to stop skilled or semi skilled from losing jobs and having to take unskilled ones?
Either a wage price spiral is driving inflation, in which case higher interest rates and disregard of unemployment are the Thatcherite solution as per the early Eighties.
If it is external pressures (Sanctions on Russia forcing up fuel and food prices) in which case domestic spending is not the issue, and a bigger deficit and after tax wage rises are needed to keep economic wheels and domestic demand going.
It is both. You start with an external shock (Ukraine, energy prices) and that is propagated through the economy by domestic factors (wage-price spiral, monetary accomodation etc). Economic policy comes down to the extent to which the feedback process is allowed to continue.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
So a complete reverse on Rishi's budget then?
Yes and if he won't get someone who will
My understanding of economics is raise tax early to fight inflation. Borrow money for spending and cut taxes particularly vat to fight slump in growth.
Borrow money for investment not spending on wages
Borrow money for “investment spending” that keep people in work?
When people think of recession, inflation, stagflation, low unemployment, they tend it think it’s as evenly spread across all economy, like a uniform swing in opinion poll seat calc - but all those bad things could hurt more sectorally? So government intervention would be to stop skilled or semi skilled from losing jobs and having to take unskilled ones?
Either a wage price spiral is driving inflation, in which case higher interest rates and disregard of unemployment are the Thatcherite solution as per the early Eighties.
If it is external pressures (Sanctions on Russia forcing up fuel and food prices) in which case domestic spending is not the issue, and a bigger deficit and after tax wage rises are needed to keep economic wheels and domestic demand going.
But external drivers could spark off those domestic drivers? If you don’t now keep a rein on 9% pay demands from everybody?
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
Umm no. The Economic Outlook contains both forecasts and recommendations for policies.
Indeed. But it stops well short of saying "taxes are too high, a tax cutting budget is needed." It is in the language of "could" and "should consider" Nor should it. As that's a political decision.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Can you put a timeline on when we will get fair and reasonable petrol prices again?
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
I think fuel prices will be down by the middle of next year. And the Russians provide most of our white fish because they invested in industrial trawlers that cleaned out the oceans without any regard to renewable fish stocks. Fish we were happy to buy until recently.
But I do find why anyone would choose cod and chips over haddock completely bewildering. Inexplicable.
All fish taste completely different David! I like both ,but cod is nicer with curry sauce.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
Umm no. The Economic Outlook contains both forecasts and recommendations for policies.
Indeed. But it stops well short of saying "taxes are too high, a tax cutting budget is needed." It is in the language of "could" and "should consider" Nor should it. As that's a political decision.
Agreed, it is couched in what may appear to be vague language or generalities, but the country policy-makers can read the runes and interpret them appropriately. Indeed they had a hand in writing them. The Economic Outlook is only published after a to-and-fro between the OECD economists and the senior officials in the country concerned. It was many years ago (mid-70s) that I was engaged in this process on the OECD side, but that is still how it happens.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
So difficult that nobody can get it right. So we end up with tax cuts for the already well off, fuelling asset price inflation, which benefits the already well off yet further. Meanwhile, tax cuts fail to compensate for the falling living standards of the already struggling, and do naff all for the very poor who already pay very little tax.
Oh, and the tax take won't magically increase, it will go down, and there will be cuts, and austerity, and they'll be heaped on the heads of those who can least afford them - mainly through yet more benefit freezes for the poor (working or otherwise) and yet more pay freezes for public sector workers.
We all know how the Conservative solution to hardship works - or, more accurately, doesn't. We've been there before and that's where they want to go again. Singing the same old tired songs, over and over again.
Question for PBers - PB generally has alot of arguments from all sides of the political spectrum, but does anyone think that one side of the political wings has a dominant presence here?
There’s more republicans on here than at a Republican rally. Only Very few of us speak up for the CoE and faith. PB bizarrely unrepresentative in people who don’t say their prayers each night. I can’t explain why but that’s how it is.
Do most people outside PB? I'm not criticising it, but I've never met any adult who said they did. I know quite a few regular church-goers, but that's where they generally pray.
Laborare est orare Mostly prayer is done by doing.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Can you put a timeline on when we will get fair and reasonable petrol prices again?
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
I think fuel prices will be down by the middle of next year. And the Russians provide most of our white fish because they invested in industrial trawlers that cleaned out the oceans without any regard to renewable fish stocks. Fish we were happy to buy until recently.
But I do find why anyone would choose cod and chips over haddock completely bewildering. Inexplicable.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Second largest, surely?
I may be wrong but I think it is Saudi, the US and then Russia.
You are wrong: the US is comfortably the largest oil producer in the world, at about 11.2m b/d (2021 numbers). Russia is number two (10.1m), and Saudi third (9.3m).
Ok, fair enough. Saudi must have quite a bit of potential additional production available to it then. But then the current position suits them rather well.
Edit, and yes, I was thinking of exporters who might supply us. The point you make about the impact is well made but we still get enough out of the North Sea to mitigate the impact that France and Germany will suffer. Won't help our exports though.
France is cushioned on the electrical generation side by its enormous nuclear fleet, while we have to import gas. While Germany has some protection from both lignite and its solar/wind investment.
To put in context, UK/France/Germany are all in the 1.5-2.0% of GDP range for energy imports, while Italy and Japan are both north of 3%. (2021 numbers.)
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
The Laffer Curve also changes over time, as people adjust their behaviour, move production, etc.
It is clear to me, and must in reality be clear to you, that the Prime Minister is a cynical, self-regarding liar wholly unfit for any public office. There is no evading this very obvious fact by appeals to burden or standard of proof, rules of natural justice, etc. This is politics, not the law, and different rules apply.
In any case, when I initially wrote to you on this subject, you said that you proposed to await the publication of the Gray report. What is there in that report which in your view exonerates him from any of the charges against him?
Nor am I impressed by your claim that a narrow victory in the vote on Monday is itself evidence of his fitness to govern. I have no doubt that your salary as an MP looks a pittance to you, but you are paid it to exercise your own judgement on behalf of your constituents, not to toe party lines or to go with flows, nor to advance obviously circular and specious arguments.
In short, the only rational attitude to the Prime Minister is one of baffled disgust, and I regret to tell you that the same applies to his supporters. I have consistently voted Conservative since the General Election of 1979. Next time round I shall not do so. Nor shall I abstain: unless I particularly dislike the LibDem candidate, I shall positively campaign and vote in the increasingly realistic hope of repeating the result of 1997
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
Umm no. The Economic Outlook contains both forecasts and recommendations for policies.
Indeed. But it stops well short of saying "taxes are too high, a tax cutting budget is needed." It is in the language of "could" and "should consider" Nor should it. As that's a political decision.
Agreed, it is couched in what may appear to be vague language or generalities, but the country policy-makers can read the runes and interpret them appropriately. Indeed they had a hand in writing them. The Economic Outlook is only published after a to-and-fro between the OECD economists and the senior officials in the country concerned. It was many years ago (mid-70s) that I was engaged in this process on the OECD side, but that is still how it happens.
I did not know that. That must have been an interesting gig.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
Over half the price of petrol goes to the government, it is absurd to suggest they cannot influence the price significantly.
But the government's portion is not going up, indeed it came down. The cost of petrol is being driven by a market distorted by Russian sanctions which has put the 3rd largest producer on the planet largely out of play.
Can you put a timeline on when we will get fair and reasonable petrol prices again?
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
I think fuel prices will be down by the middle of next year. And the Russians provide most of our white fish because they invested in industrial trawlers that cleaned out the oceans without any regard to renewable fish stocks. Fish we were happy to buy until recently.
But I do find why anyone would choose cod and chips over haddock completely bewildering. Inexplicable.
Quite right, too.
I think that this is something all Scots can agree on @Carnyx. Cod is a delicious fish but far too meaty and not nearly flaky enough for fish and chips.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
Well, they all claim that! If growth were so easily at the direction of governments we wouldn't be in such a pickle.
The reality is that this government's policy is trade barriers and threats of trade war with our biggest and nearest trading partner, to raise taxes on the young workers, to tax higher education, and to subsidise the retired and homeowners. To skim off government contracts for their mates and to allow the super-rich to dodge paying taxes.
It is pretty much the antidote to growth.
The £400 energy bung for each house you own whilst providing £0 for renters on pre payment meters says exactly where their priorities lie.
The bit about prepayment meters isn’t true.
“I am on a traditional pre-payment meter, will I get the £400?
Yes. Previous schemes have used vouchers to reach those on prepayment meters and we will ensure that households whose energy is managed in this way will receive the grant.”
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
If the Putin regime falls and Russia leaves the Ukraine, then things could normalise very quickly.
Otherwise, it's a long slog while the world - as it always does - replaces lost Russian energy sources with those from Israel*/Mozambique/etc. and renewables.
* The Russian invasion couldn't have come at a better time for Israel's Leviathan field; I seriously thought it might be massively scaled back to just domestic Israeli production, but the Russians have done the Israelis a huge favour
Off topic. Draft law on the abolition of Russia's recognition of Lithuania's independence has been submitted to the Duma. The Council of Soviet Union wasn't authorized to decide on recognition of Lithuania as an independent state in 1991, author of the law, Yevgeny Fedorov claimed.
The latter two are so close together that I am not surprised to see their positions reversed in some other sources. (However, it seems likely that sanctions have cut Russian production enough so they are clearly in third place now.)
The fourth, fifth, and sixth nations in that list surprised me.
FWIW, the United States is now self sufficient in oil, producing about as much as we consume: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/07/energy-independence-oil-gas-renewables/ "But even that quickly reverted back again. Since last October, we’ve been exporting more than we import each month, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, an independent government statistical agency. That is, we got back to “energy independence” under Biden, but Republicans forgot to update their talking points."
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
So difficult that nobody can get it right. So we end up with tax cuts for the already well off, fuelling asset price inflation, which benefits the already well off yet further. Meanwhile, tax cuts fail to compensate for the falling living standards of the already struggling, and do naff all for the very poor who already pay very little tax.
Oh, and the tax take won't magically increase, it will go down, and there will be cuts, and austerity, and they'll be heaped on the heads of those who can least afford them - mainly through yet more benefit freezes for the poor (working or otherwise) and yet more pay freezes for public sector workers.
We all know how the Conservative solution to hardship works - or, more accurately, doesn't. We've been there before and that's where they want to go again. Singing the same old tired songs, over and over again.
Except it has been got right in the past. Cutting taxes that were too high in the 80s led to serious economic growth that repaid the lower tax rates many times over.
The problem is that presently this Government is doing things all wrong. You need to cut taxes on the things you want to incentivise, like work, while taxing things you want to discourage, like smoking. This government is increasing taxes on working, while giving tax breaks to the retired. All that's going to do is give even more unearned money to the richest who aren't doing anything to work for it, while reducing the incentives to work for those who actually do something and generate for the economy and on who's backs the rest of society rests.
The taxes on those who work are far too high and need to be reduced. The taxes on those who aren't working and are just extracting rent from others without putting any effort in need to increase.
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
It is clear to me, and must in reality be clear to you, that the Prime Minister is a cynical, self-regarding liar wholly unfit for any public office. There is no evading this very obvious fact by appeals to burden or standard of proof, rules of natural justice, etc. This is politics, not the law, and different rules apply.
In any case, when I initially wrote to you on this subject, you said that you proposed to await the publication of the Gray report. What is there in that report which in your view exonerates him from any of the charges against him?
Nor am I impressed by your claim that a narrow victory in the vote on Monday is itself evidence of his fitness to govern. I have no doubt that your salary as an MP looks a pittance to you, but you are paid it to exercise your own judgement on behalf of your constituents, not to toe party lines or to go with flows, nor to advance obviously circular and specious arguments.
In short, the only rational attitude to the Prime Minister is one of baffled disgust, and I regret to tell you that the same applies to his supporters. I have consistently voted Conservative since the General Election of 1979. Next time round I shall not do so. Nor shall I abstain: unless I particularly dislike the LibDem candidate, I shall positively campaign and vote in the increasingly realistic hope of repeating the result of 1997
Love ❤ Ishmael x
Is that rude enough?
That isn't just rude. It's very English rude. Something we rule the waves at.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
So a complete reverse on Rishi's budget then?
Yes and if he won't get someone who will
My understanding of economics is raise tax early to fight inflation. Borrow money for spending and cut taxes particularly vat to fight slump in growth.
Borrow money for investment not spending on wages
Borrow money for “investment spending” that keep people in work?
When people think of recession, inflation, stagflation, low unemployment, they tend it think it’s as evenly spread across all economy, like a uniform swing in opinion poll seat calc - but all those bad things could hurt more sectorally? So government intervention would be to stop skilled or semi skilled from losing jobs and having to take unskilled ones?
Either a wage price spiral is driving inflation, in which case higher interest rates and disregard of unemployment are the Thatcherite solution as per the early Eighties.
If it is external pressures (Sanctions on Russia forcing up fuel and food prices) in which case domestic spending is not the issue, and a bigger deficit and after tax wage rises are needed to keep economic wheels and domestic demand going.
But external drivers could spark off those domestic drivers? If you don’t now keep a rein on 9% pay demands from everybody?
Businesses have no excuse for not paying decent wage increases unless they themselves are struggling - and there are plenty that are making a fortune. Crudely put, let them up pay and cut dividends for a change.
Government could also afford decent wage increases for its workers (and better social security for the poor) through increasing the taxation of residential property, capital gains and inheritances. The current one simply won't do it because it needs to stuff the mouths of its friends - elderly homeowners, their heirs, and the very rich - with gold. This will continue until it is replaced.
UK economy has been fucked by rising energy prices and labour shortages, on a base of declining trade, low investment, and high taxation on the productive sector.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
So difficult that nobody can get it right. So we end up with tax cuts for the already well off, fuelling asset price inflation, which benefits the already well off yet further. Meanwhile, tax cuts fail to compensate for the falling living standards of the already struggling, and do naff all for the very poor who already pay very little tax.
Oh, and the tax take won't magically increase, it will go down, and there will be cuts, and austerity, and they'll be heaped on the heads of those who can least afford them - mainly through yet more benefit freezes for the poor (working or otherwise) and yet more pay freezes for public sector workers.
We all know how the Conservative solution to hardship works - or, more accurately, doesn't. We've been there before and that's where they want to go again. Singing the same old tired songs, over and over again.
Except it has been got right in the past. Cutting taxes that were too high in the 80s led to serious economic growth that repaid the lower tax rates many times over.
The problem is that presently this Government is doing things all wrong. You need to cut taxes on the things you want to incentivise, like work, while taxing things you want to discourage, like smoking. This government is increasing taxes on working, while giving tax breaks to the retired. All that's going to do is give even more unearned money to the richest who aren't doing anything to work for it, while reducing the incentives to work for those who actually do something and generate for the economy and on who's backs the rest of society rests.
The taxes on those who work are far too high and need to be reduced. The taxes on those who aren't working and are just extracting rent from others without putting any effort in need to increase.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
Well, they all claim that! If growth were so easily at the direction of governments we wouldn't be in such a pickle.
The reality is that this government's policy is trade barriers and threats of trade war with our biggest and nearest trading partner, to raise taxes on the young workers, to tax higher education, and to subsidise the retired and homeowners. To skim off government contracts for their mates and to allow the super-rich to dodge paying taxes.
It is pretty much the antidote to growth.
The £400 energy bung for each house you own whilst providing £0 for renters on pre payment meters says exactly where their priorities lie.
The bit about prepayment meters isn’t true.
“I am on a traditional pre-payment meter, will I get the £400?
Yes. Previous schemes have used vouchers to reach those on prepayment meters and we will ensure that households whose energy is managed in this way will receive the grant.”
The latter two are so close together that I am not surprised to see their positions reversed in some other sources. (However, it seems likely that sanctions have cut Russian production enough so they are clearly in third place now.)
The fourth, fifth, and sixth nations in that list surprised me.
FWIW, the United States is now self sufficient in oil, producing about as much as we consume: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/07/energy-independence-oil-gas-renewables/ "But even that quickly reverted back again. Since last October, we’ve been exporting more than we import each month, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, an independent government statistical agency. That is, we got back to “energy independence” under Biden, but Republicans forgot to update their talking points."
US tight oil production has very high decline rates, so if you stop drilling, your production rapidly falls. (On the other hand, the geological risk is small: you know where the oil is, you just need to drill.)
During Covid, drilling in the US collapse: from about 660-670 working rigs in March 2020 to a low of about 170.
People left to go find other jobs, and even with record oil and gas prices, getting trained rig workers is tough. Basically, we're still only at 574 rigs, although the numbers keep rising.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
If the Putin regime falls and Russia leaves the Ukraine, then things could normalise very quickly.
Otherwise, it's a long slog while the world - as it always does - replaces lost Russian energy sources with those from Israel*/Mozambique/etc. and renewables.
* The Russian invasion couldn't have come at a better time for Israel's Leviathan field; I seriously thought it might be massively scaled back to just domestic Israeli production, but the Russians have done the Israelis a huge favour
This depends on whether we are talking about economy or society. There is plenty more the government could do at the bottom without particularly adversely affecting the economy. Its most recent desperate splurge, for the cost of living, is also partly the result of failed, blunt and simplistically punitive welfare policies over a long period, that leave British society more vulnerable to social shocks than pretty much all its peer nations in Northern Europe, for instance.
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
Depends, the repeal of the FTPA means the ability to call a general election is now back to being the prerogative of the PM.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
So a complete reverse on Rishi's budget then?
Yes and if he won't get someone who will
My understanding of economics is raise tax early to fight inflation. Borrow money for spending and cut taxes particularly vat to fight slump in growth.
Borrow money for investment not spending on wages
Borrow money for “investment spending” that keep people in work?
When people think of recession, inflation, stagflation, low unemployment, they tend it think it’s as evenly spread across all economy, like a uniform swing in opinion poll seat calc - but all those bad things could hurt more sectorally? So government intervention would be to stop skilled or semi skilled from losing jobs and having to take unskilled ones?
Either a wage price spiral is driving inflation, in which case higher interest rates and disregard of unemployment are the Thatcherite solution as per the early Eighties.
If it is external pressures (Sanctions on Russia forcing up fuel and food prices) in which case domestic spending is not the issue, and a bigger deficit and after tax wage rises are needed to keep economic wheels and domestic demand going.
But external drivers could spark off those domestic drivers? If you don’t now keep a rein on 9% pay demands from everybody?
Businesses have no excuse for not paying decent wage increases unless they themselves are struggling - and there are plenty that are making a fortune. Crudely put, let them up pay and cut dividends for a change.
Government could also afford decent wage increases for its workers (and better social security for the poor) through increasing the taxation of residential property, capital gains and inheritances. The current one simply won't do it because it needs to stuff the mouths of its friends - elderly homeowners, their heirs, and the very rich - with gold. This will continue until it is replaced.
Tell me, is it labour's policy to tax residential home owners as I am genuinely interested in a policy that would condemn them to defeat
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
So difficult that nobody can get it right. So we end up with tax cuts for the already well off, fuelling asset price inflation, which benefits the already well off yet further. Meanwhile, tax cuts fail to compensate for the falling living standards of the already struggling, and do naff all for the very poor who already pay very little tax.
Oh, and the tax take won't magically increase, it will go down, and there will be cuts, and austerity, and they'll be heaped on the heads of those who can least afford them - mainly through yet more benefit freezes for the poor (working or otherwise) and yet more pay freezes for public sector workers.
We all know how the Conservative solution to hardship works - or, more accurately, doesn't. We've been there before and that's where they want to go again. Singing the same old tired songs, over and over again.
Except it has been got right in the past. Cutting taxes that were too high in the 80s led to serious economic growth that repaid the lower tax rates many times over.
The problem is that presently this Government is doing things all wrong. You need to cut taxes on the things you want to incentivise, like work, while taxing things you want to discourage, like smoking. This government is increasing taxes on working, while giving tax breaks to the retired. All that's going to do is give even more unearned money to the richest who aren't doing anything to work for it, while reducing the incentives to work for those who actually do something and generate for the economy and on who's backs the rest of society rests.
The taxes on those who work are far too high and need to be reduced. The taxes on those who aren't working and are just extracting rent from others without putting any effort in need to increase.
Spot on.
The weird thing is that I agree, mostly.
Reduce tax on income Increase tax on wealth Borrow to invest, but not much, cos inflation Increase interest rates Redistribute more aggressively Break cartels and monopolies Overhaul the planning system FFS Fix the trading relationship with the EU Give people a future to look fwd to.
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
Depends, the repeal of the FTPA means the ability to call a general election is now back to being the prerogative of the PM.
There is nothing that this or any government can do to stop us having 6-9 months of misery. Inflation is going to remain high until the new year. Unemployment will edge up. A technical recession is very likely. There are going to be masses of public sector strikes and vain attempts by the government to restrain public sector pay. We are all getting poorer, fast and it is not much fun.
By 2023 Q2 things might start to improve. But until then we all need to buckle down and brace ourselves. A government with a sense of direction and a sense of priorities would help but only at the edges. The biggest problem we have are fuel prices because the delivery costs drive the cost of everything else. Rishi took 5p off duty, it turned out to be less than a week's increase. That shows how futile the government's efforts are in the face of the tsunami. Brace, brace and think of the most vulnerable.
If the Putin regime falls and Russia leaves the Ukraine, then things could normalise very quickly.
Otherwise, it's a long slog while the world - as it always does - replaces lost Russian energy sources with those from Israel*/Mozambique/etc. and renewables.
* The Russian invasion couldn't have come at a better time for Israel's Leviathan field; I seriously thought it might be massively scaled back to just domestic Israeli production, but the Russians have done the Israelis a huge favour
I was thinking... if the Ukraine conflict gets resolved, many of the factors driving up inflation could be instantly curbed. This could have a significant positive economic impact.
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Where did you find that? The OECD is a forecast. It rarely recommends action.
Umm no. The Economic Outlook contains both forecasts and recommendations for policies.
Indeed. But it stops well short of saying "taxes are too high, a tax cutting budget is needed." It is in the language of "could" and "should consider" Nor should it. As that's a political decision.
Agreed, it is couched in what may appear to be vague language or generalities, but the country policy-makers can read the runes and interpret them appropriately. Indeed they had a hand in writing them. The Economic Outlook is only published after a to-and-fro between the OECD economists and the senior officials in the country concerned. It was many years ago (mid-70s) that I was engaged in this process on the OECD side, but that is still how it happens.
I did not know that. That must have been an interesting gig.
It was. On the UK/Ireland desk we wrote the forecast that the IMF used and Peter Jay leaked after a chat with my boss. The beginnings of the UK asking for the infamous loan from the IMF in 1976.
This site is incredibly small-c conservative. Waitrose man, if you like.
There are almost no true lefties, and the only Green on here is essentially a high-octane, performative satire.
It’s also old, male and “hideously” white.
It's got more male lately - someone commented a couple of months back about the rarity of female posters. The slanging match a couple of days ago by well-established posters on who could f*** longest was seriously locker-room stuff that you wouldn't need to be a very sensitive woman to feel a "not a place for me" reaction. it'd be good if the moderators reined it in a bit. Who wants to know about everyone's sex life on a poloitics site?
It is clear to me, and must in reality be clear to you, that the Prime Minister is a cynical, self-regarding liar wholly unfit for any public office. There is no evading this very obvious fact by appeals to burden or standard of proof, rules of natural justice, etc. This is politics, not the law, and different rules apply.
In any case, when I initially wrote to you on this subject, you said that you proposed to await the publication of the Gray report. What is there in that report which in your view exonerates him from any of the charges against him?
Nor am I impressed by your claim that a narrow victory in the vote on Monday is itself evidence of his fitness to govern. I have no doubt that your salary as an MP looks a pittance to you, but you are paid it to exercise your own judgement on behalf of your constituents, not to toe party lines or to go with flows, nor to advance obviously circular and specious arguments.
In short, the only rational attitude to the Prime Minister is one of baffled disgust, and I regret to tell you that the same applies to his supporters. I have consistently voted Conservative since the General Election of 1979. Next time round I shall not do so. Nor shall I abstain: unless I particularly dislike the LibDem candidate, I shall positively campaign and vote in the increasingly realistic hope of repeating the result of 1997
Love ❤ Ishmael x
Is that rude enough?
I am guessing by your response, your email from Cox must have been remarkably similar to mine from Cairns. I might be going out on a limb here, but do you think No 10 has instructed the loyalists on the sort of boosterism BS that had to go into the letters?
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
Depends, the repeal of the FTPA means the ability to call a general election is now back to being the prerogative of the PM.
Not a chance he would get away with that
As soon as he went to the Palace the Queen would have no choice but to dissolve Parliament if he asked, constitutionally.
The Opposition parties of course would fully support an early general election too given current polls
This site is incredibly small-c conservative. Waitrose man, if you like.
There are almost no true lefties, and the only Green on here is essentially a high-octane, performative satire.
It’s also old, male and “hideously” white.
It's got more male lately - someone commented a couple of months back about the rarity of female posters. The slanging match a couple of days ago by well-established posters on who could f*** longest was seriously locker-room stuff that you wouldn't need to be a very sensitive woman to feel a "not a place for me" reaction. it'd be good if the moderators reined it in a bit. Who wants to know about everyone's sex life on a poloitics site?
Cod is a waste of time. It’s fish for people who don’t like fish.
I would think about 1 person in 1000 could reliably distinguish battered cod/haddock/hake/whatever. Fish is fish innit
I could, but then I have had a long association with fishing communities and of course haddock is the fish of choice, especially when landed, brought home, and cooked by my late father/ brother in law from their own seiners
It is clear to me, and must in reality be clear to you, that the Prime Minister is a cynical, self-regarding liar wholly unfit for any public office. There is no evading this very obvious fact by appeals to burden or standard of proof, rules of natural justice, etc. This is politics, not the law, and different rules apply.
In any case, when I initially wrote to you on this subject, you said that you proposed to await the publication of the Gray report. What is there in that report which in your view exonerates him from any of the charges against him?
Nor am I impressed by your claim that a narrow victory in the vote on Monday is itself evidence of his fitness to govern. I have no doubt that your salary as an MP looks a pittance to you, but you are paid it to exercise your own judgement on behalf of your constituents, not to toe party lines or to go with flows, nor to advance obviously circular and specious arguments.
In short, the only rational attitude to the Prime Minister is one of baffled disgust, and I regret to tell you that the same applies to his supporters. I have consistently voted Conservative since the General Election of 1979. Next time round I shall not do so. Nor shall I abstain: unless I particularly dislike the LibDem candidate, I shall positively campaign and vote in the increasingly realistic hope of repeating the result of 1997
Love ❤ Ishmael x
Is that rude enough?
I am guessing by your response, your email from Cox must have been remarkably similar to mine from Cairns. I might be going out on a limb here, but do you think No 10 has instructed the loyalists on the sort of boosterism BS that had to go into the letters?
Yes
I don't understand though why phatboi Cox feels the need to go along with this sort of shit. The only point of extremely rich MPs is that they don't have to, and I don't see Johnson giving him another outing as AG
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
Depends, the repeal of the FTPA means the ability to call a general election is now back to being the prerogative of the PM.
Not a chance he would get away with that
As soon as he went to the Palace the Queen would have no choice but to dissolve Parliament if he asked, constitutionally.
The Opposition parties of course would fully support an early general election too given current polls
Cod is a waste of time. It’s fish for people who don’t like fish.
I would think about 1 person in 1000 could reliably distinguish battered cod/haddock/hake/whatever. Fish is fish innit
I could, but then I have had a long association with fishing communities and of course haddock is the fish of choice, especially when landed, brought home, and cooked by my late father/ brother in law from their own seiners
You shall have a fishy On a little dishie You shall have a haddie When the boat comes in
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
So difficult that nobody can get it right. So we end up with tax cuts for the already well off, fuelling asset price inflation, which benefits the already well off yet further. Meanwhile, tax cuts fail to compensate for the falling living standards of the already struggling, and do naff all for the very poor who already pay very little tax.
Oh, and the tax take won't magically increase, it will go down, and there will be cuts, and austerity, and they'll be heaped on the heads of those who can least afford them - mainly through yet more benefit freezes for the poor (working or otherwise) and yet more pay freezes for public sector workers.
We all know how the Conservative solution to hardship works - or, more accurately, doesn't. We've been there before and that's where they want to go again. Singing the same old tired songs, over and over again.
Except it has been got right in the past. Cutting taxes that were too high in the 80s led to serious economic growth that repaid the lower tax rates many times over.
The problem is that presently this Government is doing things all wrong. You need to cut taxes on the things you want to incentivise, like work, while taxing things you want to discourage, like smoking. This government is increasing taxes on working, while giving tax breaks to the retired. All that's going to do is give even more unearned money to the richest who aren't doing anything to work for it, while reducing the incentives to work for those who actually do something and generate for the economy and on who's backs the rest of society rests.
The taxes on those who work are far too high and need to be reduced. The taxes on those who aren't working and are just extracting rent from others without putting any effort in need to increase.
Spot on.
The weird thing is that I agree, mostly.
Reduce tax on income Increase tax on wealth Borrow to invest, but not much, cos inflation Increase interest rates Redistribute more aggressively Break cartels and monopolies Overhaul the planning system FFS Fix the trading relationship with the EU Give people a future to look fwd to.
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
Depends, the repeal of the FTPA means the ability to call a general election is now back to being the prerogative of the PM.
Not a chance he would get away with that
As soon as he went to the Palace the Queen would have no choice but to dissolve Parliament if he asked, constitutionally.
The Opposition parties of course would fully support an early general election too given current polls
You live in a fantasy world
The only alternative would be to hold a VONC and elect a new Tory leader and PM unopposed within 24 hours effectively
The latter two are so close together that I am not surprised to see their positions reversed in some other sources. (However, it seems likely that sanctions have cut Russian production enough so they are clearly in third place now.)
The fourth, fifth, and sixth nations in that list surprised me.
FWIW, the United States is now self sufficient in oil, producing about as much as we consume: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/07/energy-independence-oil-gas-renewables/ "But even that quickly reverted back again. Since last October, we’ve been exporting more than we import each month, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, an independent government statistical agency. That is, we got back to “energy independence” under Biden, but Republicans forgot to update their talking points."
US tight oil production has very high decline rates, so if you stop drilling, your production rapidly falls. (On the other hand, the geological risk is small: you know where the oil is, you just need to drill.)
During Covid, drilling in the US collapse: from about 660-670 working rigs in March 2020 to a low of about 170.
People left to go find other jobs, and even with record oil and gas prices, getting trained rig workers is tough. Basically, we're still only at 574 rigs, although the numbers keep rising.
Same issue in the UK. As soon as the slump comes they lay everyone off and then wonder why most of them don't want to come back when things tick up again. Oil field wages are good but not enough to compensate for 3 or 4 years of no work.
They also fail to invest in people. So it is a massively aging workforce with few people coming into it.
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
Depends, the repeal of the FTPA means the ability to call a general election is now back to being the prerogative of the PM.
Not a chance he would get away with that
As soon as he went to the Palace the Queen would have no choice but to dissolve Parliament if he asked, constitutionally.
The Opposition parties of course would fully support an early general election too given current polls
The worst economic performance in the G20 excluding Russia. They're discussing it on C4 News.
Is it Brexit they want to know?
Interesting that the BBC are more balanced about this than Channel 4. A few points from the BBC report.
These are just predictions not actual measures. This year the UK will have the fastest growth in the G7 so 'worst performance' is frankly bollocks. Next year we are predicted to have the worst performance in the G7. So if that comes true then they will have a point. Until the it is nothing more than a prediction and, as the BBC says, there are a huge number of variables that could change it quite considerably.
As I understand the report it is because taxes are too high and a tax cutting budget is needed including vat, corporation tax, and increase personal allowances
Fascinating.
Is this all to be paid for with another thirty trillion quid in borrowing, or are we going back to austerity - in which case, what is the Government going to stop paying for this time?
Paid for by generating growth
That's just the Tory version of the magic money tree. We can spend what we like because for every pound less we raise in tax we'll get two more back through the proceeds of growth.
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
People forget that there's the Laffer Curve isn't a straight line to zero, it has an upwards and downwards slope. You could be on the left of the peak, or the right of it, its like a bell curve.
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
So difficult that nobody can get it right. So we end up with tax cuts for the already well off, fuelling asset price inflation, which benefits the already well off yet further. Meanwhile, tax cuts fail to compensate for the falling living standards of the already struggling, and do naff all for the very poor who already pay very little tax.
Oh, and the tax take won't magically increase, it will go down, and there will be cuts, and austerity, and they'll be heaped on the heads of those who can least afford them - mainly through yet more benefit freezes for the poor (working or otherwise) and yet more pay freezes for public sector workers.
We all know how the Conservative solution to hardship works - or, more accurately, doesn't. We've been there before and that's where they want to go again. Singing the same old tired songs, over and over again.
Except it has been got right in the past. Cutting taxes that were too high in the 80s led to serious economic growth that repaid the lower tax rates many times over.
The problem is that presently this Government is doing things all wrong. You need to cut taxes on the things you want to incentivise, like work, while taxing things you want to discourage, like smoking. This government is increasing taxes on working, while giving tax breaks to the retired. All that's going to do is give even more unearned money to the richest who aren't doing anything to work for it, while reducing the incentives to work for those who actually do something and generate for the economy and on who's backs the rest of society rests.
The taxes on those who work are far too high and need to be reduced. The taxes on those who aren't working and are just extracting rent from others without putting any effort in need to increase.
Spot on.
The weird thing is that I agree, mostly.
Reduce tax on income Increase tax on wealth Borrow to invest, but not much, cos inflation Increase interest rates Redistribute more aggressively Break cartels and monopolies Overhaul the planning system FFS Fix the trading relationship with the EU Give people a future to look fwd to.
Yes. It is strange that many from very differing political starting points can sketch out the broad outlines of what ought to be done. Even whilst quibbling over the details. Yet the need to be elected prevents it.
I would also add Wallace and Truss to Hunt and Mordaunt as the top 3, they tend to be the most popular potential candidates in surveys of Tory members.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
Boris tries that he will be out of office quicker then he can get to the Palace
Depends, the repeal of the FTPA means the ability to call a general election is now back to being the prerogative of the PM.
Not a chance he would get away with that
If he called an unnecessary election I don't think Boris would retain his own seat. It isn't going to happen unless something changes quite fast. On the whole the outer reaches of the London Underground is not strong Tory land at the moment.
It is clear to me, and must in reality be clear to you, that the Prime Minister is a cynical, self-regarding liar wholly unfit for any public office. There is no evading this very obvious fact by appeals to burden or standard of proof, rules of natural justice, etc. This is politics, not the law, and different rules apply.
In any case, when I initially wrote to you on this subject, you said that you proposed to await the publication of the Gray report. What is there in that report which in your view exonerates him from any of the charges against him?
Nor am I impressed by your claim that a narrow victory in the vote on Monday is itself evidence of his fitness to govern. I have no doubt that your salary as an MP looks a pittance to you, but you are paid it to exercise your own judgement on behalf of your constituents, not to toe party lines or to go with flows, nor to advance obviously circular and specious arguments.
In short, the only rational attitude to the Prime Minister is one of baffled disgust, and I regret to tell you that the same applies to his supporters. I have consistently voted Conservative since the General Election of 1979. Next time round I shall not do so. Nor shall I abstain: unless I particularly dislike the LibDem candidate, I shall positively campaign and vote in the increasingly realistic hope of repeating the result of 1997
Love ❤ Ishmael x
Is that rude enough?
I am guessing by your response, your email from Cox must have been remarkably similar to mine from Cairns. I might be going out on a limb here, but do you think No 10 has instructed the loyalists on the sort of boosterism BS that had to go into the letters?
Yes
I don't understand though why phatboi Cox feels the need to go along with this sort of shit. The only point of extremely rich MPs is that they don't have to, and I don't see Johnson giving him another outing as AG
Still in Sicily? Enjoying it?
Same with Cairns, an easy shoo in for Welsh Sec. if Johnson fell. I can only conclude he is an idiot
Yes I am. I'm in the North this time, going to have a look at Palermo Duomo tomorrow. I did the South East based in Marina Del Ragusa a few years ago. I can't get over how economically vibrant Sicily is.
Regards, and enjoy your days in the sun away from Johnsonian nonsense.
This site is incredibly small-c conservative. Waitrose man, if you like.
There are almost no true lefties, and the only Green on here is essentially a high-octane, performative satire.
It’s also old, male and “hideously” white.
It's got more male lately - someone commented a couple of months back about the rarity of female posters. The slanging match a couple of days ago by well-established posters on who could f*** longest was seriously locker-room stuff that you wouldn't need to be a very sensitive woman to feel a "not a place for me" reaction. it'd be good if the moderators reined it in a bit. Who wants to know about everyone's sex life on a poloitics site?
So apparently the US is sending 7 artillery pieces to Ukraine out of a total of 600. We are sending 3 out of 44. It makes me wonder how committed to this we really are. Perhaps we are dripping them in slowly as the Ukrainians get used to them. Or perhaps it is a bit pointless if they aren't anywhere near ready to launch a major offensive. Michael Clarke suggesting that they may not be in position to do so until next year! Putin's antics over food ought to be a reason to double down on this.
Comments
If it were that simple the Government could just cut taxes to zero and abolish itself. We'd all be millionaires.
The reality is that this government's policy is trade barriers and threats of trade war with our biggest and nearest trading partner, to raise taxes on the young workers, to tax higher education, and to subsidise the retired and homeowners. To skim off government contracts for their mates and to allow the super-rich to dodge paying taxes.
It is pretty much the antidote to growth.
At 130p the govt took 22p VAT + 58p Fuel Duty = 80p
After the 5p cut in Fuel Duty at 190p the govt takes 32p VAT + 53p Fuel Duty = 85p
The biggest distortion on the price of fuel is our taxes on it, rightly so generally for environmental reasons, but they can come right down for a bit for a few months.
The issue with stagnation is that traditional methods to help problems with unemployment worsen inflation, methods to help problems with inflation worsen unemployment. So if you have both crises simultaneously then you are in a very compromised situation where any action you take to help one crisis will worsen the crisis. You're caught between a rock and a hard place, between the devil and the deep blue sea, you have to jump into the frying pan, or the fire.
Tackling inflation by making unemployment worse when you have millions unemployed is brave, in the Yes, Minister sense.
Without unemployment, on its own inflation and stagnation is pretty meaningless. It means you're not experiencing growth, sure, but if people have full employment and stagnation at that level then its unpleasant but not a crisis, its not ideal but you can tackle the inflation without worrying about worsening the millions unemployed.
Besides nominally the country is growing, the issue is the inflation is eating away that growth. That's not stagflation, that's inflation, you need to address the inflation problem.
And why do our chip shops depend on Russian fish, ain’t there plenty more fish in non Russian waters? 🙁
I now have a taste for cod and chips to go with my taste for haddock and chips and pork pie chips and gravy.
But I do find why anyone would choose cod and chips over haddock completely bewildering. Inexplicable.
So. A statement of fact rather than a recommendation of action.
Although. Taxes are too high. Especially at this point of the economic cycle.
When people think of recession, inflation, stagflation, low unemployment, they tend it think it’s as evenly spread across all economy, like a uniform swing in opinion poll seat calc - but all those bad things could hurt more sectorally? So government intervention would be to stop skilled or semi skilled from losing jobs and having to take unskilled ones?
If you're aiming to raise tax revenues, then raise taxes too much and its counterproductive. Cut taxes too much and its also counterproductive. The difficult question to answer is what is the optimal point, or points if its a curve with multiple peaks.
Both of them import nearly all their energy - and both are highly levered to the price of oil.
Energy imports were around 3% of GDP in both those countries last year. With prices having roughly doubled, that's a reduction in GDP of 3% just from the net imports number alone, let alone what it means in terms of reduced domestic economic activity.
FWIW, I would say:
Canada - small positive from high energy prices
US - no net impact (although obviously there are winners and losers) from high energy prices
Germany, France, UK - medium negative, probably pushes us all into recession, but mild
Italy, Japan - big negative, as are such large energy importers
If it is external pressures (Sanctions on Russia forcing up fuel and food prices) in which case domestic spending is not the issue, and a bigger deficit and after tax wage rises are needed to keep economic wheels and domestic demand going.
If you grow by 7% nominally, but have 7% inflation, then you've not grown in real terms but if you have not got millions unemployed then you just need to deal with the problem of inflation, you aren't caught between the two crises with opposing solutions.
If you take away the very reason why stagflation is a problem and apply it to all inflation, you utterly devalue the term and make it meaningless. What we have now is inflation, if we get to a position where we still have inflation but millions unemployed too (and its certainly possible) then that would be stagflation and it would be millions times worse than what we have now.
Edit to add: I think you were thinking of oil exporters, where Saudi is clearly the largest exporter of oil
I wonder if they thought up the new Health tax May 21, buoyant in the polls, would not have gone though with it looking at May 22 polling.
Edit, and yes, I was thinking of exporters who might supply us. The point you make about the impact is well made but we still get enough out of the North Sea to mitigate the impact that France and Germany will suffer. Won't help our exports though.
Nor should it. As that's a political decision.
Oh, and the tax take won't magically increase, it will go down, and there will be cuts, and austerity, and they'll be heaped on the heads of those who can least afford them - mainly through yet more benefit freezes for the poor (working or otherwise) and yet more pay freezes for public sector workers.
We all know how the Conservative solution to hardship works - or, more accurately, doesn't. We've been there before and that's where they want to go again. Singing the same old tired songs, over and over again.
To put in context, UK/France/Germany are all in the 1.5-2.0% of GDP range for energy imports, while Italy and Japan are both north of 3%. (2021 numbers.)
Thank you for your letter of 6 June.
It is clear to me, and must in reality be clear to you, that the Prime Minister is a cynical, self-regarding liar wholly unfit for any public office. There is no evading this very obvious fact by appeals to burden or standard of proof, rules of natural justice, etc. This is politics, not the law, and different rules apply.
In any case, when I initially wrote to you on this subject, you said that you proposed to await the publication of the Gray report. What is there in that report which in your view exonerates him from any of the charges against him?
Nor am I impressed by your claim that a narrow victory in the vote on Monday is itself evidence of his fitness to govern. I have no doubt that your salary as an MP looks a pittance to you, but you are paid it to exercise your own judgement on behalf of your constituents, not to toe party lines or to go with flows, nor to advance obviously circular and specious arguments.
In short, the only rational attitude to the Prime Minister is one of baffled disgust, and I regret to tell you that the same applies to his supporters. I have consistently voted Conservative since the General Election of 1979. Next time round I shall not do so. Nor shall I abstain: unless I particularly dislike the LibDem candidate, I shall positively campaign and vote in the increasingly realistic hope of repeating the result of 1997
Love ❤ Ishmael x
Is that rude enough?
“I am on a traditional pre-payment meter, will I get the £400?
Yes. Previous schemes have used vouchers to reach those on prepayment meters and we will ensure that households whose energy is managed in this way will receive the grant.”
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/energy-bills-support-scheme-explainer
It’s fish for people who don’t like fish.
Otherwise, it's a long slog while the world - as it always does - replaces lost Russian energy sources with those from Israel*/Mozambique/etc. and renewables.
* The Russian invasion couldn't have come at a better time for Israel's Leviathan field; I seriously thought it might be massively scaled back to just domestic Israeli production, but the Russians have done the Israelis a huge favour
The latter two are so close together that I am not surprised to see their positions reversed in some other sources. (However, it seems likely that sanctions have cut Russian production enough so they are clearly in third place now.)
The fourth, fifth, and sixth nations in that list surprised me.
FWIW, the United States is now self sufficient in oil, producing about as much as we consume: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/06/07/energy-independence-oil-gas-renewables/
"But even that quickly reverted back again. Since last October, we’ve been exporting more than we import each month, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, an independent government statistical agency. That is, we got back to “energy independence” under Biden, but Republicans forgot to update their talking points."
The problem is that presently this Government is doing things all wrong. You need to cut taxes on the things you want to incentivise, like work, while taxing things you want to discourage, like smoking. This government is increasing taxes on working, while giving tax breaks to the retired. All that's going to do is give even more unearned money to the richest who aren't doing anything to work for it, while reducing the incentives to work for those who actually do something and generate for the economy and on who's backs the rest of society rests.
The taxes on those who work are far too high and need to be reduced. The taxes on those who aren't working and are just extracting rent from others without putting any effort in need to increase.
Waitrose man, if you like.
There are almost no true lefties, and the only Green on here is essentially a high-octane, performative satire.
It’s also old, male and “hideously” white.
However it may be the next Tory leader ends up Leader of the Opposition not PM, there are rumours that if the 1922 cttee tries to change the rules to hold another VONC within a year then Boris would threaten to call a snap general election first. Patel would also be a contender for Leader of the Opposition, even if probably not PM at this time
It's very English rude.
Something we rule the waves at.
Government could also afford decent wage increases for its workers (and better social security for the poor) through increasing the taxation of residential property, capital gains and inheritances. The current one simply won't do it because it needs to stuff the mouths of its friends - elderly homeowners, their heirs, and the very rich - with gold. This will continue until it is replaced.
From the voters of Wakefield...
Although shorthand aside, the longhand is probably the key takeaway here 😬 https://twitter.com/JenWilliamsMEN/status/1534622431507361794/photo/1
During Covid, drilling in the US collapse: from about 660-670 working rigs in March 2020 to a low of about 170.
People left to go find other jobs, and even with record oil and gas prices, getting trained rig workers is tough. Basically, we're still only at 574 rigs, although the numbers keep rising.
Reduce tax on income
Increase tax on wealth
Borrow to invest, but not much, cos inflation
Increase interest rates
Redistribute more aggressively
Break cartels and monopolies
Overhaul the planning system FFS
Fix the trading relationship with the EU
Give people a future to look fwd to.
https://www.ft.com/content/3b583050-d277-11e6-b06b-680c49b4b4c0
One can certainly tell If something is cod or haddock. Even with my Covid-impaired tastebuds I can.
The Opposition parties of course would fully support an early general election too given current polls
I don't understand though why phatboi Cox feels the need to go along with this sort of shit. The only point of extremely rich MPs is that they don't have to, and I don't see Johnson giving him another outing as AG
Still in Sicily? Enjoying it?
Haddock a distant second.
On a little dishie
You shall have a haddie
When the boat comes in
They also fail to invest in people. So it is a massively aging workforce with few people coming into it.
Yet the need to be elected prevents it.
EXC: Liz Truss is fighting weakened Boris Johnson's attempts to slash the bloated civil service, The Sun can reveal.
Asked to cut 900 staff, the Foreign Secretary is demanding an extra £100million to hire 1,000 more officials instead...
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/18826044/liz-truss-wants-bigger-civil-service/
Yes I am. I'm in the North this time, going to have a look at Palermo Duomo tomorrow. I did the South East based in Marina Del Ragusa a few years ago. I can't get over how economically vibrant Sicily is.
Regards, and enjoy your days in the sun away from Johnsonian nonsense.