Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Starmer still strong betting favourite for post-election PM – politicalbetting.com

145791012

Comments

  • RogerRoger Posts: 17,634

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    That must be very comforting for Conservatives everywhere.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,874
    MISTY said:

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    This is Greek fiscal policy. It didn't work for them. Nor will it for us. We won't even have the Germans to bail us out(!)

    Sooner or later the brakes will be slammed. Sooner if the current tanking of the gilt market is any guide.

    Really hard to overstate the degree to which the Kwarteng Budget has just wrecked the Gilt market.

    Chart shows 20 day change in 5yr fixed rate yields since 1993. Market completely spooked.


    https://twitter.com/toby_n/status/1573251529771188224

    Government bonds are selling off everywhere....also, the bank of England is starting to unwind its enormous balance sheet, the one that Sunak racked up spending GBP400bn paying people to do nothing.

    I really think that the Bank will have to reconsider that policy. Now is really not the time.
  • 4 very different governments, one referendum, one pandemic, one war.

    When circumstances change you change your response.

    I am not saying I agree with any of those responses but criticising 4 different PMs for having different ideas of how to deal with rapidly changing circumstances is not really a sustainable argument.
    It all adds up to 12 years of Tory mismanagement.
    I make no comment on that. I am not a Tory voter and unlikely to be so in the foreseeable future.

    But to criticise changes in plns under such extreme changes in circumstances in addition to changes in PM seems like missing the point.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656
    edited September 2022
    darkage said:

    Is there any indication that Truss is going to do anything to cut public spending?
    Otherwise it isn't really correct that this is a 'right wing' government. They seem more like a continuation of the previous 'populist fantasy' government, but with the added bonus of tax cuts.

    On current plans they want to spend more on popular things but cut the civil service numbers required to both manage them and replace former EU functions; whilst pretending those minimal admin cuts will make a difference. A recipe for very inefficient spending on those popular things.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798
    Looking forward to running all this through our models on Monday.

    Interesting to see what response the Scottish Government make to the income tax changes - could get a real divergence now.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    RIP Hilary Mantel
  • 4 very different governments, one referendum, one pandemic, one war.

    When circumstances change you change your response.

    I am not saying I agree with any of those responses but criticising 4 different PMs for having different ideas of how to deal with rapidly changing circumstances is not really a sustainable argument.
    It all adds up to 12 years of Tory mismanagement.
    I make no comment on that. I am not a Tory voter and unlikely to be so in the foreseeable future.

    But to criticise changes in plns under such extreme changes in circumstances in addition to changes in PM seems like missing the point.
    Especially when you criticised each of those plans. You'd think if it keeps changing eventually you'd have a plan you agree with, and one you disagree with.

    I disagreed with Sunak's Brownite high tax and spend policies. I agree with Truss reversing them. Most here seemed to disagree with Sunak raising NI and disagree with Truss cancelling that rise.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682

    Leon said:

    rkrkrk said:

    I'm urrming and ahhing about planning to do a sprint triathlon in 2024. A 750m swim, a 20k bike, and a 5k run.

    I know I can run 5k easily (though not fast), and I can cycle 20k no probs. It's the swimming that lets me down. The most I've done for years is a few lengths (say 100m) whilst the little 'un's been in the pool. I'd also need a decent road bike, unlike my Apollo.

    All this talk about power meters and ideal RPMs flies merrily over me head...

    I'd say go for it... but sooner than 2024! Swimming is tricky to practice unless you live near the sea... I don't think doing lengths of the pool is quite the same.
    2023 is booked up - I'm currently in training to do 52 marathons next year, to celebrate my 50th birthday! At least that's my intent...

    My vague plan is to not run between the weekly marathons, and instead swim and cycle to give my back and knee muscles a different workout. So I'll use 2023 to train for the triathlon. I'll try and do one in April/May 2024 as a backup, and then the St Neots triathlon in September. If I decide to do it. The swim's the frightening one for me - I've never been a good swimmer.

    As ever, plans depend on external events. I missed two months of running this summer due to my old ankle injury flaring up and having to do childcare. I put on nearly ten kilos. I've shed half that in three weeks of dieting and exercise.
    Why, in the name of sweet Holy fuck-Moses would anyone run 52 marathons in a year?!
    The challenge.

    When I was 13 or 14, I got told I would never walk properly again. When I was 25, I finally got 'fixed' after a few operations. 15 months later I did the Pennine Way; three years after that I walked the coastline of Britain. Last year I ran/jogged every day, averaging over seven miles a day.

    I need a mental and physical challenge, and it seems like a good one to choose.

    So next year you'll either be hearing me talking about my success, or my borken body...
    Or both….
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 14,025

    FF43 said:

    FF43 said:

    This is Greek fiscal policy. It didn't work for them. Nor will it for us. We won't even have the Germans to bail us out(!)

    Sooner or later the brakes will be slammed. Sooner if the current tanking of the gilt market is any guide.

    Really hard to overstate the degree to which the Kwarteng Budget has just wrecked the Gilt market.

    Chart shows 20 day change in 5yr fixed rate yields since 1993. Market completely spooked.


    https://twitter.com/toby_n/status/1573251529771188224
    Barty will be along soon to tell us the gilt markets are being driven by innumerate idiots and they've got it all wrong.
    Prefer @BartholomewRoberts to speak for himself to be honest. He has original ideas, which are interesting to hear.

    To put it another way, his ideas are niche, even for a politics geek website. He seems to have found his political soulmates in Truss and Kwarteng, which makes me suspect THEIR public appeal might be somewhat narrow.

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 19,932
    Are the rich being encouraged to warm their homes by burning their spare £50 notes given to them by the taxpayer as alternative to gas?
  • MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Pretty obvious from the charts here that we burn less gas on windy days, and therefore that if we have more wind turbines we will burn less gas too.

    http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 9,214
    Roger said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    That must be very comforting for Conservatives everywhere.
    Beat you to it Roger 😇 you getting slow to the punch these days
  • WhisperingOracleWhisperingOracle Posts: 7,459
    edited September 2022
    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour and Liberal Dempcrat, even if the richer often living in London will often be the ones to benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    darkage said:

    Is there any indication that Truss is going to do anything to cut public spending?
    Otherwise it isn't really correct that this is a 'right wing' government. They seem more like a continuation of the previous 'populist fantasy' government, but with the added bonus of tax cuts.

    Abolishing higher rate tax altogether will deliver some humongous pay rises to the already wealthy; I expect the journos are working up some examples as we speak. Whether this will be popular remains to be seen…
  • MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Except that over time as the usage of wind has gone up, the usage of gas has gone down, not the other way around.
  • Jonathan said:

    Thought experiment. If $1 > £1 does Truss resign?

    will 50 Cent have to change his name to 50p?
  • biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 24,682
    DavidL said:

    It's difficult, no doubt about it. But governments are right to try. And try again.
    Maybe if they have had five unsuccessful attempts they should step aside?
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656
    IanB2 said:

    darkage said:

    Is there any indication that Truss is going to do anything to cut public spending?
    Otherwise it isn't really correct that this is a 'right wing' government. They seem more like a continuation of the previous 'populist fantasy' government, but with the added bonus of tax cuts.

    Abolishing higher rate tax altogether will deliver some humongous pay rises to the already wealthy; I expect the journos are working up some examples as we speak. Whether this will be popular remains to be seen…
    I’ll tell you two people who immediately benefit. The PM and the Chancellor…
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 56,756

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    Hmm. I'm not sure how to react to all this.

    Rachel Reeves has more satire than content.

    This is very much froth from KK imo. Lots of badda-badda-bam, but little subtlety.

    The extent of the low business tax zones is interesting - "West Midlands", "Norfolk". But raising Business Rates to their appropriate level by updating property values resulted in a huge squealing in the SE like stuck pigs, so perhaps cutting them for the others is an alternative.

    Driving the demand side of housing again by a crude reduction of Stamp Duty seems Krazy, compared to attempting to create a less distorted market.

    That list of prioritised projects bears some examination.

    Northern Powerhouse Rail is an actual impossibility at the moment, because it won't work without HS2 tracks being built to Leeds. So either they're not doing it, or they're doing something different and calling it NPR.

    If it is what was announced in the IRP, then they are complicit in misleading the House because that is infeasible. Literally, it cannot be done.
    I'm not convinced that's correct. Even in the rather messy recent NPR proposals, there are a fair few upgrades that could be done before HS2 reaches the north. e.g. electrifying Leeds to Hull. True, HS2 is needed to get the most of it, but there's still lots of other work that is probably not dependent on that project.
    Yes, like, for example, MML electrification to Yorkshire.

    But they're not 'Northern Powerhouse Rail.' They are not a new high-speed line linking the East and West coast via the major conurbations across the Pennines.
    I think your definition is incorrect. You are talking about what was HS3: I believe NPR has always been a series of upgrades and enhancements of existing routes, along with potential new ones. Unless your new lines are a spaghetti monster, it's the only way of connecting all the towns and cities.
    Nope, it was to be a complete new line:

    http://www.highspeeduk.co.uk/B10 190606 HS2 - Sabotaging the Northern Powerhouse.pdf

    It has now been redefined to existing routes, one of which is a freight line with a 20mph speed limit that can’t realistically be re-engineered to be faster.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 3,127
    glw said:

    4 very different governments, one referendum, one pandemic, one war.

    When circumstances change you change your response.

    I am not saying I agree with any of those responses but criticising 4 different PMs for having different ideas of how to deal with rapidly changing circumstances is not really a sustainable argument.
    It is an utterly stupid argument made only by people who are morons. The circumstances in 2022 are so different that if the government wasn't taking some sort of drastic action I'd be really worried. Are they doing the right thing? Nobody knows, but you can be absolutely certain that sailing on as though nothing has changed would lead to disaster.

    If there's one thing I'd like to elminate from politics forever it's people bleating on about "U-turns", changing your mind and plans when circumstances change, or your previous plan didn't work, is a good thing. We ought to praise such decisions not criticise them.

    It's so playground. They're trying to give a message "you don't know what you're doing", I assume.
  • glwglw Posts: 8,876
    IanB2 said:

    darkage said:

    Is there any indication that Truss is going to do anything to cut public spending?
    Otherwise it isn't really correct that this is a 'right wing' government. They seem more like a continuation of the previous 'populist fantasy' government, but with the added bonus of tax cuts.

    Abolishing higher rate tax altogether will deliver some humongous pay rises to the already wealthy; I expect the journos are working up some examples as we speak. Whether this will be popular remains to be seen…
    Wouldn't it be nice if instead of wasting everyone's time with such stories the journalists wrote something about the tax take instead? Because ultimately it matters far more how much money the government has to spend than that a relatively few people are coining it.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 24,682

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
    Why do you put such faith in this mythic idea of a curve than no one can prove or disprove, and no one can offer any values for?
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 55,354
    edited September 2022
    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut to corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    The one thing this has done is to make Johnson even more of yesterday's man, thankfully
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    edited September 2022

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,503
    biggles said:

    IanB2 said:

    darkage said:

    Is there any indication that Truss is going to do anything to cut public spending?
    Otherwise it isn't really correct that this is a 'right wing' government. They seem more like a continuation of the previous 'populist fantasy' government, but with the added bonus of tax cuts.

    Abolishing higher rate tax altogether will deliver some humongous pay rises to the already wealthy; I expect the journos are working up some examples as we speak. Whether this will be popular remains to be seen…
    I’ll tell you two people who immediately benefit. The PM and the Chancellor…
    A government minister is on the £150k threshold of the additional 45p rate, it doesn’t affect them personally.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656
    edited September 2022

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
    I should have said “ broadly supported by actual evidence, citation needed” but I’d hoped that was implied.

    The laffer curve is one part common sense (everyone things 95% tax rates will damage growth) and nine parts wishful thinking (that there’s a balance point to be found at sane tax rates, with real people who are faced by many other factors).
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,874
    Eabhal said:

    Looking forward to running all this through our models on Monday.

    Interesting to see what response the Scottish Government make to the income tax changes - could get a real divergence now.

    The additional rate abolition is going to cause them a problem. If the higher earners left in our financial services industry find that they are paying an addition 6% instead of 1% for the pleasures of living in Scotland some may move and it wouldn't take many to have a seriously adverse effect on collections. But the SNP will find falling into line on this very difficult.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650
    edited September 2022
    Someone on £20,000 will benefit by £10 less than someone on £21,000. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE.
    But what about those on £19,000?!
    Yes! Yes, brother, fuck the 20 grand grifters!

    Politics of envy 101
  • biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
    Why do you put such faith in this mythic idea of a curve than no one can prove or disprove, and no one can offer any values for?
    That's like saying why do you believe in supply and demand curves that no one can offer any values for.

    Things like supply and demand, Laffer etc are principles, not things that have values.
  • Driver said:

    As someone who works for a bank and is a bit of a property developer on the side this is a perfect budget for me.

    It's fantastic for me - but I don't need the help.
    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/voluntary-payments-donations-to-government
    It's ok to look out financially for oneself and family and to make the most of your legal options. If you also have a bit of a social conscience and would like some fairness in government policies too that is also ok.
    To suggest that any one person should pay the government a drop in the ocean from an unasked for windfall is just silly.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,863

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Onshore wind is as much a solution as fracking. It would take several years to actually getting some output. So no help in the current situation (this winter)

    If you want more wind power, Dogger Bank etc is barely touched. On a timescale of years, increasing offshore wind is pretty much equal in difficulty to onshore. And the latest, most efficient turbines can’t be installed on land. Too big.
    Dogger Bank is the site of the current construction of the world's largest wind farm to date.
    Which was part of my point - it is the largest wind farm. But takes up a tiny, tiny percentage of the available resource - shallow water, with a really nice empty space around it for a long fetch for the wind.

    How many can you pile in before Dogger Bank is vaguely full?

    We can't do anything to change the generating capacity for a coupe of years - minus setup time for anything. At that distance in time, onshore and offshore are pretty much equal.
    Worth bearing in mind that the Dogger Bank is far more than just a bit of shallow water in the middle of the North Sea. It is also one of the most important spawning grounds for many of our North Sea fish species.
    Do the turbines stop the fish spawning ?

    The seafloor footprint for covering the whole bank, assuming 6000 10 metre cylinder turbines would be ~ 0.5 km^2 out of the total area of 17600 km^2.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve...
    Thanks for giving us a flavour of the evidence policy on the basis of which policy is being made.
  • ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    Hmm. I'm not sure how to react to all this.

    Rachel Reeves has more satire than content.

    This is very much froth from KK imo. Lots of badda-badda-bam, but little subtlety.

    The extent of the low business tax zones is interesting - "West Midlands", "Norfolk". But raising Business Rates to their appropriate level by updating property values resulted in a huge squealing in the SE like stuck pigs, so perhaps cutting them for the others is an alternative.

    Driving the demand side of housing again by a crude reduction of Stamp Duty seems Krazy, compared to attempting to create a less distorted market.

    That list of prioritised projects bears some examination.

    Northern Powerhouse Rail is an actual impossibility at the moment, because it won't work without HS2 tracks being built to Leeds. So either they're not doing it, or they're doing something different and calling it NPR.

    If it is what was announced in the IRP, then they are complicit in misleading the House because that is infeasible. Literally, it cannot be done.
    I'm not convinced that's correct. Even in the rather messy recent NPR proposals, there are a fair few upgrades that could be done before HS2 reaches the north. e.g. electrifying Leeds to Hull. True, HS2 is needed to get the most of it, but there's still lots of other work that is probably not dependent on that project.
    Yes, like, for example, MML electrification to Yorkshire.

    But they're not 'Northern Powerhouse Rail.' They are not a new high-speed line linking the East and West coast via the major conurbations across the Pennines.
    I think your definition is incorrect. You are talking about what was HS3: I believe NPR has always been a series of upgrades and enhancements of existing routes, along with potential new ones. Unless your new lines are a spaghetti monster, it's the only way of connecting all the towns and cities.
    Nope, it was to be a complete new line:

    http://www.highspeeduk.co.uk/B10 190606 HS2 - Sabotaging the Northern Powerhouse.pdf

    It has now been redefined to existing routes, one of which is a freight line with a 20mph speed limit that can’t realistically be re-engineered to be faster.
    I'm fairly certain you are wrong on this: things like the improvements to the Hope Valley Line were also under NPR, as the Trans-Pennine Upgrades got rolled into it.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 9,214

    Jonathan said:

    Thought experiment. If $1 > £1 does Truss resign?

    will 50 Cent have to change his name to 50p?
    Welcome to the Kwarzy Shop 😇
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,503
    DavidL said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looking forward to running all this through our models on Monday.

    Interesting to see what response the Scottish Government make to the income tax changes - could get a real divergence now.

    The additional rate abolition is going to cause them a problem. If the higher earners left in our financial services industry find that they are paying an addition 6% instead of 1% for the pleasures of living in Scotland some may move and it wouldn't take many to have a seriously adverse effect on collections. But the SNP will find falling into line on this very difficult.
    How much could Jo Rowling save in income tax, by moving her primary residence from Scotland to England?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut to corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    The one thing this has done is to make Johnson even more of yesterday's man, thankfully
    And maybe the redwall seats Boris won too are yesterday's news for the Tories, we shall see
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656

    DavidL said:

    It's difficult, no doubt about it. But governments are right to try. And try again.
    Maybe if they have had five unsuccessful attempts they should step aside?
    Steady on - I don’t want such dangerous ideas getting out of hand and being applied to me in my job too.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,874

    DavidL said:

    It's difficult, no doubt about it. But governments are right to try. And try again.
    Maybe if they have had five unsuccessful attempts they should step aside?
    Or try something different, like they did today.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
  • glw said:

    IanB2 said:

    darkage said:

    Is there any indication that Truss is going to do anything to cut public spending?
    Otherwise it isn't really correct that this is a 'right wing' government. They seem more like a continuation of the previous 'populist fantasy' government, but with the added bonus of tax cuts.

    Abolishing higher rate tax altogether will deliver some humongous pay rises to the already wealthy; I expect the journos are working up some examples as we speak. Whether this will be popular remains to be seen…
    Wouldn't it be nice if instead of wasting everyone's time with such stories the journalists wrote something about the tax take instead? Because ultimately it matters far more how much money the government has to spend than that a relatively few people are coining it.
    journalists with a reasonable grasp of economics and finance? Maybe in 1960 perhaps -nowadays nah
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 35,876
    edited September 2022
    The 'who knows if LiKwa are doing the right thing but something has to be done' vibe from (some) PB Tories is helluva reassuring. If even they can't rustle up a bit of misplaced, dewy eyed cheerleading..
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656
    Sandpit said:

    biggles said:

    IanB2 said:

    darkage said:

    Is there any indication that Truss is going to do anything to cut public spending?
    Otherwise it isn't really correct that this is a 'right wing' government. They seem more like a continuation of the previous 'populist fantasy' government, but with the added bonus of tax cuts.

    Abolishing higher rate tax altogether will deliver some humongous pay rises to the already wealthy; I expect the journos are working up some examples as we speak. Whether this will be popular remains to be seen…
    I’ll tell you two people who immediately benefit. The PM and the Chancellor…
    A government minister is on the £150k threshold of the additional 45p rate, it doesn’t affect them personally.
    The PM is on £164k and almost certainly has some bits of rental income. She’ll directly benefit.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
    Why do you put such faith in this mythic idea of a curve than no one can prove or disprove, and no one can offer any values for?
    We know that if you raise tax from 0% to 1%, the government will get more money. We also know that if you raise it from 99% to 100% the government will get less money. The uncertainty is merely with the bit in between.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 72,863
    edited September 2022

    MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Pretty obvious from the charts here that we burn less gas on windy days, and therefore that if we have more wind turbines we will burn less gas too.

    http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
    Both templar and iamkate aren't real time monitoring. Looked this morning and the sun was up but 0.0 GW solar was showing, which (Even if it was a touch cloudy) must obviously have been out of date info. Realtime info IS needed however in order to balance the grid at 50 hz, bit annoying it's not provided directly.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,154
    edited September 2022

    MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Hmmm. What's the case for suggesting that electricity generation by offshore wind does not reduce gas consumption?

    TBH I think you are muddled between gas power generation being necessary as a swing resource, and how much that resource is actually used.

    Leaving domestic heating aside and the trend from gas ->electric, in 2020 29% of gas used in the UK was for electricity generation in gas power stations, which is something like 240 TWh of gas used for electricity generation per annum.
    (Ref:https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-gas-supply-explainer)

    New offshore wind commissioned in 2022 is approx 3.2 GW of nameplate capacity, which running the numbers (3.2 * 365 * 24 * 0.55 / 1000) (0.55 is the approx capacity factor) equates to approx 15 TWh of electricity production per annum.

    Why would that not be more or less a straight ~6% reduction in gas used for power generation? Especially given the comparative current prices which favour less expensive renewables first.

    Offshore wind commissioned between 2020 and 2025 is around 12 GW nameplate capacity, which represents a reduction of ~20-22%+ in use of gas to generate electricity (on these numbers).

    Clearly there are other factors at the margin, but the replacement elec from one by elec from the other seems quite clear.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 3,127

    Driver said:

    As someone who works for a bank and is a bit of a property developer on the side this is a perfect budget for me.

    It's fantastic for me - but I don't need the help.
    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/voluntary-payments-donations-to-government
    It's ok to look out financially for oneself and family and to make the most of your legal options. If you also have a bit of a social conscience and would like some fairness in government policies too that is also ok.
    To suggest that any one person should pay the government a drop in the ocean from an unasked for windfall is just silly.
    It's the logical response to anyone objecting to the changes because "I don't need the money".
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073

    4 very different governments, one referendum, one pandemic, one war.

    When circumstances change you change your response.

    I am not saying I agree with any of those responses but criticising 4 different PMs for having different ideas of how to deal with rapidly changing circumstances is not really a sustainable argument.
    It all adds up to 12 years of Tory mismanagement.
    To be fair, the Lib Dems still have responsibility for the first 5 years of mismanagement.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut to corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    The one thing this has done is to make Johnson even more of yesterday's man, thankfully
    More wacky than the clown; now there’s a thing….
  • DriverDriver Posts: 3,127

    DavidL said:

    It's difficult, no doubt about it. But governments are right to try. And try again.
    Maybe if they have had five unsuccessful attempts they should step aside?
    Hah. Nice try. Labour do actually need to win an election first.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656
    I just had a horrible thought. If this was just the emergency budget, what on earth is going to be the “rabbit out of the hat” in the actual budget….?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 37,054
    It is also the time to find out how literate the public is.

    I sincerely hope they will mourn Hilary Mantel because she was a tremendous writer. I mentioned her the other day in the same breath as Proust and I stick to that for the world she created and trapped you happily and rewardingly inside.

    The other thing people will have to read up on is Riccardian Equivalance because if people suspect that all might not be well with the UK in the months and years to come, it will once again show its relevance.

    The savings rate is the key indicator here.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 43,682
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    It's difficult, no doubt about it. But governments are right to try. And try again.
    Maybe if they have had five unsuccessful attempts they should step aside?
    Or try something different, like they did today.
    Because that’s gone so well for Italian voters?
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 1,059
    There is another powerful argument for regular cardio exercise: It improves your mental health, especially if it can be done outside. (Gretchen Reynolds, formerly at the New York Times, now at the Washington Post, has been very good on the subject, relaying the scientific findings. But they wouldn't surprise any experienced grade school teacher.)
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650
    edited September 2022
    At least we know there is zero chance this government would ever impose any covid restrictions.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 9,214

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut to corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    The one thing this has done is to make Johnson even more of yesterday's man, thankfully
    Nope. People fed up with Boris lies, but will much prefer Johnson’s government economic approach than this. This makes Boris more likely to come back, not less.

    You need to listen to HY more, he pretty well nailed it in this post.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798
    DavidL said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looking forward to running all this through our models on Monday.

    Interesting to see what response the Scottish Government make to the income tax changes - could get a real divergence now.

    The additional rate abolition is going to cause them a problem. If the higher earners left in our financial services industry find that they are paying an addition 6% instead of 1% for the pleasures of living in Scotland some may move and it wouldn't take many to have a seriously adverse effect on collections. But the SNP will find falling into line on this very difficult.
    Northumberland/Lakes are rather pretty. Cheaper than Edinburgh, too...
  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    @HYUFD has this weird view that only his hero Johnson can win red wall seats and as he has gone they are all going to labour as some form of revenge over deposing Johnson

    Today is so dramatic that it is simply impossible to predict but at least business is welcoming todays measures and as a conservative it is good to see Truss binning Johnson 's f_ _ _ business attitudes
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316

    MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Except that over time as the usage of wind has gone up, the usage of gas has gone down, not the other way around.
    @Luckyguy1983 is confusing reliance on gas backup with the volume of gas usage. Which is pretty basic.
    What increasing wind capacity will do is increase the marginal cost of gas backup - but that will also increase incentives for developing storage backup, and/or additional cross border HVDC interconnects.

    Sooner or later we have to wean ourselves off gas, if only from the POV of energy security. Much more wind capacity is part of the solution, not the problem.
  • biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
    The best you can say then is that reducing tax rates might bring in enough extra revenue to make the sums add up. That the pie will grow so much that a smaller slice of the bigger pie is more than a bigger slice of a smaller pie, without making everyone hungrier.

    It's not at all certain that that is the case, and the people who make money by quickly working this out don't seem at all convinced.
  • HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut to corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    The one thing this has done is to make Johnson even more of yesterday's man, thankfully
    Nope. People fed up with Boris lies, but will much prefer Johnson’s government economic approach than this. This makes Boris more likely to come back, not less.

    You need to listen to HY more, he pretty well nailed it in this post.
    Nonsense
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    @HYUFD has this weird view that only his hero Johnson can win red wall seats and as he has gone they are all going to labour as some form of revenge over deposing Johnson

    Today is so dramatic that it is simply impossible to predict but at least business is welcoming todays measures and as a conservative it is good to see Truss binning Johnson 's f_ _ _ business attitudes
    Quite. Im not sure what to make of it yet. It might shank us horribly but it might equally turbo charge us. The hyperventilating does suggest at least a fear in the establishment and opposition of the latter and a rewritten orthodoxy.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073

    ... business is welcoming todays measures ...

    I suppose the 2.17% fall in the FTSE100 doesn't reflect anything whatsoever to do with business, among the remaining PB Tory loyalists?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 47,268

    MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Pretty obvious from the charts here that we burn less gas on windy days, and therefore that if we have more wind turbines we will burn less gas too.

    http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
    Fine - until you have a high pressure system sitting over the country in a cold snap.

    Then your wind turbines are generating diddly squat - just when you need them most.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,798
    Pulpstar said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Onshore wind is as much a solution as fracking. It would take several years to actually getting some output. So no help in the current situation (this winter)

    If you want more wind power, Dogger Bank etc is barely touched. On a timescale of years, increasing offshore wind is pretty much equal in difficulty to onshore. And the latest, most efficient turbines can’t be installed on land. Too big.
    Dogger Bank is the site of the current construction of the world's largest wind farm to date.
    Which was part of my point - it is the largest wind farm. But takes up a tiny, tiny percentage of the available resource - shallow water, with a really nice empty space around it for a long fetch for the wind.

    How many can you pile in before Dogger Bank is vaguely full?

    We can't do anything to change the generating capacity for a coupe of years - minus setup time for anything. At that distance in time, onshore and offshore are pretty much equal.
    Worth bearing in mind that the Dogger Bank is far more than just a bit of shallow water in the middle of the North Sea. It is also one of the most important spawning grounds for many of our North Sea fish species.
    Do the turbines stop the fish spawning ?

    The seafloor footprint for covering the whole bank, assuming 6000 10 metre cylinder turbines would be ~ 0.5 km^2 out of the total area of 17600 km^2.
    I think trawling has more to answer for, tbh.

  • DriverDriver Posts: 3,127

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
    The best you can say then is that reducing tax rates might bring in enough extra revenue to make the sums add up. That the pie will grow so much that a smaller slice of the bigger pie is more than a bigger slice of a smaller pie, without making everyone hungrier.

    It's not at all certain that that is the case, and the people who make money by quickly working this out don't seem at all convinced.
    I don't think anyone is claiming it is "certain".
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 10,792

    By election alert!


    Dundee Utd are also proud to announce the appointment of A. Werrity to the position of "Ball Boy".
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    biggles said:

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve, in my opinion and it is only my opinion, I think taxes at a 74 year high choking off growth has put us to the right of the peak.

    Its possible we were to the left of the peak for all of the past 74 years and we're still to the left of it now, but I'd be equally entitled to ask for a Citation for that.
    I should have said “ broadly supported by actual evidence, citation needed” but I’d hoped that was implied.

    The laffer curve is one part common sense (everyone things 95% tax rates will damage growth) and nine parts wishful thinking (that there’s a balance point to be found at sane tax rates, with real people who are faced by many other factors).
    Such evidence as there is suggests that the optimal rate for maximising tax take (irrespective of other considerations) is well over 50% for income tax.
    As a guide to policy, the idea of a 'curve' is completely useless.

    Equating it to principles like supply and demand is just delusional.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 9,073

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    @HYUFD has this weird view that only his hero Johnson can win red wall seats and as he has gone they are all going to labour as some form of revenge over deposing Johnson

    Today is so dramatic that it is simply impossible to predict but at least business is welcoming todays measures and as a conservative it is good to see Truss binning Johnson 's f_ _ _ business attitudes
    Quite. Im not sure what to make of it yet. It might shank us horribly but it might equally turbo charge us. The hyperventilating does suggest at least a fear in the establishment and opposition of the latter and a rewritten orthodoxy.
    That's rather like saying that the quickened heartbeat of people watching someone jumping off a high building suggests a fear that they might start flying and the laws of gravity would have to be rewritten.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 42,503

    MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Pretty obvious from the charts here that we burn less gas on windy days, and therefore that if we have more wind turbines we will burn less gas too.

    http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
    Fine - until you have a high pressure system sitting over the country in a cold snap.

    Then your wind turbines are generating diddly squat - just when you need them most.
    There has to be a point at which more investment in wind is pointless in the grand scheme of things, until there’s reliable storage available for windy days, that can balance those calm days in winter when demand is at the peak.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    MattW said:

    Hmm. I'm not sure how to react to all this.

    Rachel Reeves has more satire than content.

    This is very much froth from KK imo. Lots of badda-badda-bam, but little subtlety.

    The extent of the low business tax zones is interesting - "West Midlands", "Norfolk". But raising Business Rates to their appropriate level by updating property values resulted in a huge squealing in the SE like stuck pigs, so perhaps cutting them for the others is an alternative.

    Driving the demand side of housing again by a crude reduction of Stamp Duty seems Krazy, compared to attempting to create a less distorted market.

    That list of prioritised projects bears some examination.

    Northern Powerhouse Rail is an actual impossibility at the moment, because it won't work without HS2 tracks being built to Leeds. So either they're not doing it, or they're doing something different and calling it NPR.

    If it is what was announced in the IRP, then they are complicit in misleading the House because that is infeasible. Literally, it cannot be done.
    I'm not convinced that's correct. Even in the rather messy recent NPR proposals, there are a fair few upgrades that could be done before HS2 reaches the north. e.g. electrifying Leeds to Hull. True, HS2 is needed to get the most of it, but there's still lots of other work that is probably not dependent on that project.
    Yes, like, for example, MML electrification to Yorkshire.

    But they're not 'Northern Powerhouse Rail.' They are not a new high-speed line linking the East and West coast via the major conurbations across the Pennines.
    I think your definition is incorrect. You are talking about what was HS3: I believe NPR has always been a series of upgrades and enhancements of existing routes, along with potential new ones. Unless your new lines are a spaghetti monster, it's the only way of connecting all the towns and cities.
    Nope, it was to be a complete new line:

    http://www.highspeeduk.co.uk/B10 190606 HS2 - Sabotaging the Northern Powerhouse.pdf

    It has now been redefined to existing routes, one of which is a freight line with a 20mph speed limit that can’t realistically be re-engineered to be faster.
    I'm fairly certain you are wrong on this: things like the improvements to the Hope Valley Line were also under NPR, as the Trans-Pennine Upgrades got rolled into it.
    Government has played bait and switch in this so often that any definition is useless.
    That the plans which would have had the greatest effect in the region have been severely downgraded on several occasions is fairly undeniable.

  • HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    @HYUFD has this weird view that only his hero Johnson can win red wall seats and as he has gone they are all going to labour as some form of revenge over deposing Johnson

    Today is so dramatic that it is simply impossible to predict but at least business is welcoming todays measures and as a conservative it is good to see Truss binning Johnson 's f_ _ _ business attitudes
    Yes, and no. Which businesses do you refer to? If it is a big financial institution this is party tie. If this is a small business who feels the full effects of the recession, less so.
  • Dura_Ace said:

    By election alert!


    Dundee Utd are also proud to announce the appointment of A. Werrity to the position of "Ball Boy".
    Good on defence
  • biggles said:

    I just had a horrible thought. If this was just the emergency budget, what on earth is going to be the “rabbit out of the hat” in the actual budget….?

    Tax on thingy. https://www.facebook.com/SBSVICELAND/videos/monty-pythons-flying-circus-tax-on-thingy/753784875510846/
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 107,356
    edited September 2022

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    Of course there is ambition in the redwall but how many people in the redwall earn over £100k? How many FTSE 100 corporation HQs are based in the redwall? As they were the biggest winners from this budget.

    Even the stamp duty threshold rise does not help first time buyers in the redwall much as most didn't pay it anyway. Plus we need to hope this leads to a surge in growth and revenue not the deficit
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650
    Chris said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    @HYUFD has this weird view that only his hero Johnson can win red wall seats and as he has gone they are all going to labour as some form of revenge over deposing Johnson

    Today is so dramatic that it is simply impossible to predict but at least business is welcoming todays measures and as a conservative it is good to see Truss binning Johnson 's f_ _ _ business attitudes
    Quite. Im not sure what to make of it yet. It might shank us horribly but it might equally turbo charge us. The hyperventilating does suggest at least a fear in the establishment and opposition of the latter and a rewritten orthodoxy.
    That's rather like saying that the quickened heartbeat of people watching someone jumping off a high building suggests a fear that they might start flying and the laws of gravity would have to be rewritten.
    They wouldn't need to rewrite the laws of gravity if the person started flying.
  • Chris said:

    ... business is welcoming todays measures ...

    I suppose the 2.17% fall in the FTSE100 doesn't reflect anything whatsoever to do with business, among the remaining PB Tory loyalists?
    The falls in shares are right across Europe today with the FTSE at -1.83 ( now)

    Germany -2.08
    France - 1.90
    Italy -2.85
    Spain - 2.40

    Try to isolate it to UK is not going to wash and yes business welcomes todays measures
  • Chris said:

    ... business is welcoming todays measures ...

    I suppose the 2.17% fall in the FTSE100 doesn't reflect anything whatsoever to do with business, among the remaining PB Tory loyalists?
    thats a worldwide fall - euro indexes down similar. The days when a Chancellor can influence the FTSE100 are well gone , maybe the FTSE 250 at the margins
  • Chris said:

    biggles said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    This liberal is back supporting the Conservatives again after today. 👍

    Sunak lost my vote by increasing NI, Truss has won it back by reversing that mistake.
    You're not a fan of sound money. Borrowing for tax cuts is such a no-no it beggars belief that anyone with half a brain cell could go for that. Tax cuts focussed on folks earning over £150k, well that's just taking the piss.
    … cutting tax rates raises more tax revenues over the longer term, paying for that borrowing in full.
    Citation needed.
    Look up the Laffer Curve.

    We could be to the left or the right of the peak of the Laffer Curve...
    Thanks for giving us a flavour of the evidence policy on the basis of which policy is being made.
    Evidence:

    Taxes are at the highest they've been at for 74 years.
    Growth trends are lower than they've been in those 74 years.

    Evidence that when we had lower tax rates we had higher growth rates. Entirely fitting with the postulation.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 29,264
    Jonathan said:

    Are there any conservatives left in the Conservative party? Or are they all Kwasi-conservatives now?

    The current term of art is KamiKwaze
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 47,316
    edited September 2022

    MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Pretty obvious from the charts here that we burn less gas on windy days, and therefore that if we have more wind turbines we will burn less gas too.

    http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
    Fine - until you have a high pressure system sitting over the country in a cold snap.

    Then your wind turbines are generating diddly squat - just when you need them most.
    That's hardly controversial or unrecognised for decades. And it's not an economic case against building more capacity.

    It might be a pretty decent case for having at least three weeks gas storage capacity in current circumstances, of course.
    Though that probably won't be necessary in a decade or so.

    Also, as I'm sure you'll agree, a good case in favour of tidal as part of the mix, though we've left that very late in the day.
  • Chris said:

    ... business is welcoming todays measures ...

    I suppose the 2.17% fall in the FTSE100 doesn't reflect anything whatsoever to do with business, among the remaining PB Tory loyalists?
    The falls in shares are right across Europe today with the FTSE at -1.83 ( now)

    Germany -2.08
    France - 1.90
    Italy -2.85
    Spain - 2.40

    Try to isolate it to UK is not going to wash and yes business welcomes todays measures
    You've said that twice now, and I can see that they are broadly welcoming the specific bits of policy. But we both know that they won't welcome the longer and deeper recession to follow...
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,486
    Endillion said:

    tlg86 said:

    https://www.theguardian.com/football/2022/sep/23/liverpool-fans-1700-legal-action-uefa-paris-champions-league-final

    Clients have reported anxiety, PTSD, nightmares, never wanting to go to a European football match or even France again.

    Some would pay good money for a medical diagnosis that effectively prevents them from ever having to go to France again.
    Moronic post
  • MattWMattW Posts: 15,154
    Nigelb said:

    MattW said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Personally I'm not a fan of onshore wind on farmland or countryside; we already have substantial reductions in gas usage to generate electricity by offshore wind.
    It's also quite funny that people think that increasing the amount of wind capacity reduces gas usage, as opposed to hard wiring it into the system.
    Pretty obvious from the charts here that we burn less gas on windy days, and therefore that if we have more wind turbines we will burn less gas too.

    http://gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
    Fine - until you have a high pressure system sitting over the country in a cold snap.

    Then your wind turbines are generating diddly squat - just when you need them most.
    That's hardly controversial or unrecognised for decades. And it's not an economic case against building more capacity.

    It might be a pretty decent case for having at least three weeks gas storage capacity in current circumstances, of course.
    Though that probably won't be necessary in a decade or so.
    That's a bloke trying to promote tidal :smile: .
  • Pulpstar said:

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Onshore wind is as much a solution as fracking. It would take several years to actually getting some output. So no help in the current situation (this winter)

    If you want more wind power, Dogger Bank etc is barely touched. On a timescale of years, increasing offshore wind is pretty much equal in difficulty to onshore. And the latest, most efficient turbines can’t be installed on land. Too big.
    Dogger Bank is the site of the current construction of the world's largest wind farm to date.
    Which was part of my point - it is the largest wind farm. But takes up a tiny, tiny percentage of the available resource - shallow water, with a really nice empty space around it for a long fetch for the wind.

    How many can you pile in before Dogger Bank is vaguely full?

    We can't do anything to change the generating capacity for a coupe of years - minus setup time for anything. At that distance in time, onshore and offshore are pretty much equal.
    Worth bearing in mind that the Dogger Bank is far more than just a bit of shallow water in the middle of the North Sea. It is also one of the most important spawning grounds for many of our North Sea fish species.
    Do the turbines stop the fish spawning ?

    The seafloor footprint for covering the whole bank, assuming 6000 10 metre cylinder turbines would be ~ 0.5 km^2 out of the total area of 17600 km^2.
    Yes. They completely disrupt the spawning grounds. This is why there is a lot of care about where they are placed. This is in no way an argument against the turbines. They are great. But like anything they need to be put in the right place.

    Besides right now the limitations on offshore turbines have nothing to do with availability of sites. There are huge numbers of potential sites which would cause little or no damage environmentally. The limitations are on the availability of people and equipment to actually put the things up. As I have repeated on here many times, we have the largest offshore wind development programme in the world and are working at capacity to execute it.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 6,650
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    Of course there is ambition in the redwall but how many people in the redwall earn over £100k? How many FTSE 100 corporation HQs are based in the redwall? As they were the biggest winners from this budget.

    Even the stamp duty threshold rise does not held first time buyers in the redwall much as most didn't pay it anyway. Plus we need to hope this needs to a surge in growth and revenue not the deficit
    The red wall is a very diverse area. Plenty of parts where most property is over 125 grand, plenty earning good income, plenty IR35s, plenty paying basic rate income tax, plenty reliant on businesses succeeding.
    You dont have to be the biggest winner to be a winner.
  • DynamoDynamo Posts: 651
    edited September 2022
  • Rocco Forte, on R4 just now, is overjoyed at the budget, so all must be fine.

    I've asked him if I could stay at one of his hotels for a while without putting the money up front, and promised that my children would pay the bill somewhere down the line. He said he's fine with that.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 8,345
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut ro corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    Not in this corner of West London, or a lot of other parts of London either, I suspect. London will stay Labour, even if the richer often living in London will often benefit. It's much as London and Manchester were still often centres of social conscience as well as being key engines of Victorian capitalism.

    It might save Cities of London and Westminster and some seats in Surrey though. The social democrat intellectual conscience of London is North London, West London has always been the home of London's richest and wealthiest.

    It was not a budget to save Bishop Auckland, Blyth Valley, Stoke, West Bromwich or Burnley from going red however
    Yeah theres no ambition in those places. Everyone has a whippet and eats the dust from their flying ducks on the wall
    Of course there is ambition in the redwall but how many people in the redwall earn over £100k? How many FTSE 100 corporation HQs are based in the redwall? As they were the biggest winners from this budget.

    Even the stamp duty threshold rise does not help first time buyers in the redwall much as most didn't pay it anyway. Plus we need to hope this leads to a surge in growth and revenue not the deficit
    I know I sometimes have a go at you @hyufd, but that was a good post. Your last sentence is key. This is the big gamble. I have my fingers crossed.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 19,093
    edited September 2022

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut to corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    The one thing this has done is to make Johnson even more of yesterday's man, thankfully
    Nope. People fed up with Boris lies, but will much prefer Johnson’s government economic approach than this. This makes Boris more likely to come back, not less.

    You need to listen to HY more, he pretty well nailed it in this post.
    Nonsense
    After today's effort from Kwartang I long for those heady days of stability from Johnson and Sunak.

    I wanted Johnson out. Always be wary for what you wish for!

    Could we tempt Johnson back with a moratorium on elections for twenty years, £10 million a year and gift him the Royal Yacht Britannia and Chequers? It is surely worth a try.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,604
    Dynamo said:
    Thanks for keeping us updated Comrade.
  • Chris said:

    ... business is welcoming todays measures ...

    I suppose the 2.17% fall in the FTSE100 doesn't reflect anything whatsoever to do with business, among the remaining PB Tory loyalists?
    The falls in shares are right across Europe today with the FTSE at -1.83 ( now)

    Germany -2.08
    France - 1.90
    Italy -2.85
    Spain - 2.40

    Try to isolate it to UK is not going to wash and yes business welcomes todays measures
    You've said that twice now, and I can see that they are broadly welcoming the specific bits of policy. But we both know that they won't welcome the longer and deeper recession to follow...
    Any recession will not be because of todays measures but the effects of war in Ukraine and will be Europe wide and felt further
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 32,145

    carnforth said:

    Onshore wind back on too. Not in the speech, but in the notes:

    https://twitter.com/s8mb/status/1573242291992821760?s=46&t=ZzyA5syq1AyEsi-b0vYLVA

    That's fantastic news. Legalise fracking to distract the Neanderthals on the Tory backbenches, and then allow onshore wind to go ahead to rapidly reduce the amount of gas we need to burn.
    Onshore wind is as much a solution as fracking. It would take several years to actually getting some output. So no help in the current situation (this winter)

    If you want more wind power, Dogger Bank etc is barely touched. On a timescale of years, increasing offshore wind is pretty much equal in difficulty to onshore. And the latest, most efficient turbines can’t be installed on land. Too big.
    Dogger Bank is the site of the current construction of the world's largest wind farm to date.
    Which was part of my point - it is the largest wind farm. But takes up a tiny, tiny percentage of the available resource - shallow water, with a really nice empty space around it for a long fetch for the wind.

    How many can you pile in before Dogger Bank is vaguely full?

    We can't do anything to change the generating capacity for a coupe of years - minus setup time for anything. At that distance in time, onshore and offshore are pretty much equal.
    Worth bearing in mind that the Dogger Bank is far more than just a bit of shallow water in the middle of the North Sea. It is also one of the most important spawning grounds for many of our North Sea fish species.
    The evidence from the North Sea Oil platforms (and others around the world) is that structures in the sea create an oasis for sea life, if they aren't spewing toxic chemicals.

    The actual physical footprint of the turbines is a tiny proportion of the area of the array.

    Though the fishermen might be uspet about not being able to bottom trawl through the area.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 30,637
    TOPPING said:

    It is also the time to find out how literate the public is.

    I sincerely hope they will mourn Hilary Mantel because she was a tremendous writer. I mentioned her the other day in the same breath as Proust and I stick to that for the world she created and trapped you happily and rewardingly inside.

    The other thing people will have to read up on is Riccardian Equivalance because if people suspect that all might not be well with the UK in the months and years to come, it will once again show its relevance.

    The savings rate is the key indicator here.

    You also said Ben Okri is as good as James Joyce, and you failed to identify Masaccio’s The Holy Trinity, so your judgement is, to say the least, rather questionable
  • Chris said:

    ... business is welcoming todays measures ...

    I suppose the 2.17% fall in the FTSE100 doesn't reflect anything whatsoever to do with business, among the remaining PB Tory loyalists?
    The falls in shares are right across Europe today with the FTSE at -1.83 ( now)

    Germany -2.08
    France - 1.90
    Italy -2.85
    Spain - 2.40

    Try to isolate it to UK is not going to wash and yes business welcomes todays measures
    You've said that twice now, and I can see that they are broadly welcoming the specific bits of policy. But we both know that they won't welcome the longer and deeper recession to follow...
    Any recession will not be because of todays measures but the effects of war in Ukraine and will be Europe wide and felt further
    It will probably be Gordon Brown's fault.
  • ClippPClippP Posts: 1,370
    Chris said:

    4 very different governments, one referendum, one pandemic, one war.

    When circumstances change you change your response.

    I am not saying I agree with any of those responses but criticising 4 different PMs for having different ideas of how to deal with rapidly changing circumstances is not really a sustainable argument.
    It all adds up to 12 years of Tory mismanagement.
    To be fair, the Lib Dems still have responsibility for the first 5 years of mismanagement.
    The Lib Dems were able to stop some of the Tory mismanagement, but not, alas, all of it. The Tories were in the driving seat.
  • bigglesbiggles Posts: 2,656
    edited September 2022

    HYUFD said:

    So the top rate of income tax slashed, caps on bankers bonuses ended and an end to Sunak's NI rise and a cut to corporation tax. This was an ultra capitalist, classical liberal budget from Truss and Kwarteng.

    However the biggest beneficiaries will be the rich and high earners, despite the cut in the basic rate of income tax and stamp duty cut. Rules around universal credit tightened too. I suspect it will go down better in West London and the Home counties than the redwall

    The one thing this has done is to make Johnson even more of yesterday's man, thankfully
    Nope. People fed up with Boris lies, but will much prefer Johnson’s government economic approach than this. This makes Boris more likely to come back, not less.

    You need to listen to HY more, he pretty well nailed it in this post.
    Nonsense
    After today's effort from Kwartang I long for those heady days of stability from Johnson and Sunak.

    I wanted Johnson out. Always be wary for what you wish for!

    Could we tempt Johnson back with a moratorium on elections for twenty years, £10 million a year and gift him the Royal Yacht Britannia and Chequers? It is surely worth a try.
    If that’s the deal, I’ll do it and guarantee absolutely no government policy change for all twenty years. Perfect stability.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 45,874
    Eabhal said:

    DavidL said:

    Eabhal said:

    Looking forward to running all this through our models on Monday.

    Interesting to see what response the Scottish Government make to the income tax changes - could get a real divergence now.

    The additional rate abolition is going to cause them a problem. If the higher earners left in our financial services industry find that they are paying an addition 6% instead of 1% for the pleasures of living in Scotland some may move and it wouldn't take many to have a seriously adverse effect on collections. But the SNP will find falling into line on this very difficult.
    Northumberland/Lakes are rather pretty. Cheaper than Edinburgh, too...
    If I could find a publicly traded business with substantial exposure to the property market in Berwick I’d be on.

  • Chris said:

    ... business is welcoming todays measures ...

    I suppose the 2.17% fall in the FTSE100 doesn't reflect anything whatsoever to do with business, among the remaining PB Tory loyalists?
    The falls in shares are right across Europe today with the FTSE at -1.83 ( now)

    Germany -2.08
    France - 1.90
    Italy -2.85
    Spain - 2.40

    Try to isolate it to UK is not going to wash and yes business welcomes todays measures
    You've said that twice now, and I can see that they are broadly welcoming the specific bits of policy. But we both know that they won't welcome the longer and deeper recession to follow...
    Any recession will not be because of todays measures but the effects of war in Ukraine and will be Europe wide and felt further
    It will probably be Gordon Brown's fault.
    On this no - Putin is the only one to blame
This discussion has been closed.