Howdy, Stranger!

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

Hunt’s budget has almost no impact on the general election betting – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited November 17 in General
imageHunt’s budget has almost no impact on the general election betting – politicalbetting.com

Coming as it did less than two months after the last Tory budget it was no surprise that the reaction of the betting markets was far less than the “budget” of Kwarteng for the then Truss government in September. That hugely controversial event led to a massive collapse in Tory polling and a few weeks later the exit of Truss herself.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • PhilPhil Posts: 1,125
    edited November 17
    I’m tempted to agree with Mike here. Unless something changes we’re in for a tough few years & economic circumstances are a very strong determinant of voting intentions.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    NEW
    Some of the language used by Jeremy Hunt such as “unearned income” to describe dividends has infuriated some Conservative MPs. This is the language of the Labour party, one told me.
    More in my analysis on the Autumn statement in today's Chopper's Politics Newsletter.

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1593252896388235264
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,624
    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    What a shame.

    GOP civil war spreads to Georgia runoff
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/17/trump-georgia-senate-race-00068079
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,311

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    there's 2 years to go, so I will wait and see.
  • PhilPhil Posts: 1,125
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW
    Some of the language used by Jeremy Hunt such as “unearned income” to describe dividends has infuriated some Conservative MPs. This is the language of the Labour party, one told me.
    More in my analysis on the Autumn statement in today's Chopper's Politics Newsletter.

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1593252896388235264

    All income ultimately derives from labour, one way or another.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303
    Scott_xP said:

    NEW
    Some of the language used by Jeremy Hunt such as “unearned income” to describe dividends has infuriated some Conservative MPs. This is the language of the Labour party, one told me.
    More in my analysis on the Autumn statement in today's Chopper's Politics Newsletter.

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1593252896388235264

    Haha. "My money worked really hard for this money".
    Actually though it was a pretty Gordon Brown kind of budget so I can understand right wingers frothing about it. Tax hikes on corporates and the rich with the spending cuts punted into the long grass beyond the next general election. Dire economic forecasts though. Probably won't be that bad, but grim nevertheless. Labour majority remains the most likely outcome IMHO, and is still underpriced.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 36,143
    Phil said:

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW
    Some of the language used by Jeremy Hunt such as “unearned income” to describe dividends has infuriated some Conservative MPs. This is the language of the Labour party, one told me.
    More in my analysis on the Autumn statement in today's Chopper's Politics Newsletter.

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1593252896388235264

    All income ultimately derives from labour, one way or another.
    Unearned income just derives from someone else's labour, such as rental income or dividends.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,719

    Scott_xP said:

    NEW
    Some of the language used by Jeremy Hunt such as “unearned income” to describe dividends has infuriated some Conservative MPs. This is the language of the Labour party, one told me.
    More in my analysis on the Autumn statement in today's Chopper's Politics Newsletter.

    https://twitter.com/christopherhope/status/1593252896388235264

    Haha. "My money worked really hard for this money".
    Actually though it was a pretty Gordon Brown kind of budget so I can understand right wingers frothing about it. Tax hikes on corporates and the rich with the spending cuts punted into the long grass beyond the next general election. Dire economic forecasts though. Probably won't be that bad, but grim nevertheless. Labour majority remains the most likely outcome IMHO, and is still underpriced.
    It was also Gordon Brownesque in the way it seemed to extend its policy tentacles well beyond the Treasury and into other people's departments. Hunt has a substantial amount of power on this current front bench. It's quite a turnup given he was seemingly condemned to permanent backbenches only a few short months ago.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    A two year funeral procession for the Conservative government https://twitter.com/TheScepticIsle/status/1593256261331865600/photo/1
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    TimS said:

    Hunt has a substantial amount of power on this current front bench. It's quite a turnup given he was seemingly condemned to permanent backbenches only a few short months ago.

    It occurred to me earlier he is the only winner from the entire Truss debacle
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    some good news for Jeremy Hunt - the Institute of Economics Affairs has slammed his autumn statement
    https://twitter.com/henrymance/status/1593254941304377346
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303
    Scott_xP said:

    TimS said:

    Hunt has a substantial amount of power on this current front bench. It's quite a turnup given he was seemingly condemned to permanent backbenches only a few short months ago.

    It occurred to me earlier he is the only winner from the entire Truss debacle
    Trussterfuck is the approved title. He'd be well placed to lead the party if he had any prospect of holding his seat after the next election.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    The really amazing thing for me about this story is the size of the police department for a town of fewer than 2,500 inhabitants.

    A small pothole that was left alone for months just ate the entire Hinton WV Police Department? 😵‍💫🥴

    https://twitter.com/HeyYo_JClick/status/1592991469790691329
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,926
    Pat McFadden on BBC2 sounded very much as if Lab will pretty much accept Con economic plans.

    A bit of tinkering at the edges - ie abolish Non-Doms, extend windfall tax, change Private Equity.

    But what is noticeable is there is no suggestion at all of any of the really big changes often talked about on here - eg wealth taxes, extending NI to investment income etc.
  • The most striking thing about this Budget is how far it is the polar opposite of that put forward by the same party less than two months ago.

    That really stark, unreconciled schism is a huge problem for the Conservatives, and I think it does filter through to the public.

    In the absence of a unifying mission, it's increasingly hard to see what they are for other than to keep Keir Starmer out of Number 10... and, for all his flaws, it's nearly impossible to sell him as enough of a bogeyman to make that enough.

    I suspect a lot of Tory MPs and members recognise better than anyone that a time in opposition is needed.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 27,891
    edited November 17
    Nigelb said:

    The really amazing thing for me about this story is the size of the police department for a town of fewer than 2,500 inhabitants.

    A small pothole that was left alone for months just ate the entire Hinton WV Police Department? 😵‍💫🥴

    https://twitter.com/HeyYo_JClick/status/1592991469790691329

    Quick google suggests 8 people (photo on first page of results) but some may be p/t or volunteer. Even so ...

    PS quick check shows recent move to surplus building already owned by council. So not nec all used.

    https://www.google.com/maps/@37.6819914,-80.8758382,3a,75y,313.02h,83.36t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s3vRQxm7uJ7W9PA0gkEI9lA!2e0!6shttps://streetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com/v1/thumbnail?panoid=3vRQxm7uJ7W9PA0gkEI9lA&cb_client=maps_sv.tactile.gps&w=203&h=100&yaw=342.1043&pitch=0&thumbfov=100!7i16384!8i8192
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    The Tories have just delivered a depressing Labour budget. Not that they had much choice

    So why tolerate the Tories - who are widely loathed - and simply vote Labour? It will be the same. Crap

    But at least you the satisfaction of kicking the Conservative Party in the cullions

    Conclusion: Labour are going to win big. A majority is more likely than not
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,926
    Stand by for a moment:

    Fuel Duty is going up 12p a litre in March 2023!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    Phil said:

    I’m tempted to agree with Mike here. Unless something changes we’re in for a tough few years & economic circumstances are a very strong determinant of voting intentions.

    I'm tempted to agree with you being tempted to agree with OGH. That is, i agree.
  • londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 2,000
    MikeL said:

    Stand by for a moment:

    Fuel Duty is going up 12p a litre in March 2023!

    This is a really bad idea and will literally fuel inflation! 😡
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,093

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    Maybe - but that would be a disappointment from here.
  • MikeL said:

    Stand by for a moment:

    Fuel Duty is going up 12p a litre in March 2023!

    Suckers, go electric.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 104,868
    Leon said:

    The Tories have just delivered a depressing Labour budget. Not that they had much choice

    So why tolerate the Tories - who are widely loathed - and simply vote Labour? It will be the same. Crap

    But at least you the satisfaction of kicking the Conservative Party in the cullions

    Conclusion: Labour are going to win big. A majority is more likely than not

    Then Labour own the economy and in power have to do largely exactly the same as Sunak and Hunt have done
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    Selebian said:

    kle4 said:

    On economics I tend to take a pretty simplistic view of things, largely because I struggle to understand the more complex stuff. So that understandably downweights my views.

    But it seems to me that we are as a country pretty broke. No one seems to have any clue how to stimulate growth as the latest attempt was simply wishing for it and borrowing to plug a massive hole.

    So no one is offering a growth plan, yet we need a lot more money. Therefore, we need more taxes. Efficiencies have already been largely achieved, in fact we've made false efficiencies, so even though more tax hurts I don't get what alternative there is.

    I am close to a higher tax band so I guess I should hope for no pay rise next year though.

    Speaking to a colleague about to enter higher rate (annual increment will take her into it next year) she was saying she might increase her pension payments (AVCs are possible to a DC pension pot, in addition to the DB main) to stay below and so keep child benefit, rather than paying some back.

    Is that a thing? Would reduce taxable salary, so she wouldn't actually pay higher rate, but would HMRC swallow that with respect to child benefit? Or base that on gross, pre sacrifice, salary? Pension contributions (10%) are already salary sacrifice, so if it does count then she'll have a few years before losing some child benefit, even without AVCs.
    I've got an AVC set up, I confess that had not occurred to me. Sounds too obvious.
    kle4 said:

    On economics I tend to take a pretty simplistic view of things, largely because I struggle to understand the more complex stuff. So that understandably downweights my views.

    But it seems to me that we are as a country pretty broke. No one seems to have any clue how to stimulate growth as the latest attempt was simply wishing for it and borrowing to plug a massive hole.

    So no one is offering a growth plan, yet we need a lot more money. Therefore, we need more taxes. Efficiencies have already been largely achieved, in fact we've made false efficiencies, so even though more tax hurts I don't get what alternative there is.

    I am close to a higher tax band so I guess I should hope for no pay rise next year though.

  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303

    MikeL said:

    Stand by for a moment:

    Fuel Duty is going up 12p a litre in March 2023!

    Suckers, go electric.
    And no vehicle excise duty either! Oh, hang on...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 104,435
    edited November 17
    I'm much more confident in laying a Tory majority than backing a Labour majority.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303
    kle4 said:

    Selebian said:

    kle4 said:

    On economics I tend to take a pretty simplistic view of things, largely because I struggle to understand the more complex stuff. So that understandably downweights my views.

    But it seems to me that we are as a country pretty broke. No one seems to have any clue how to stimulate growth as the latest attempt was simply wishing for it and borrowing to plug a massive hole.

    So no one is offering a growth plan, yet we need a lot more money. Therefore, we need more taxes. Efficiencies have already been largely achieved, in fact we've made false efficiencies, so even though more tax hurts I don't get what alternative there is.

    I am close to a higher tax band so I guess I should hope for no pay rise next year though.

    Speaking to a colleague about to enter higher rate (annual increment will take her into it next year) she was saying she might increase her pension payments (AVCs are possible to a DC pension pot, in addition to the DB main) to stay below and so keep child benefit, rather than paying some back.

    Is that a thing? Would reduce taxable salary, so she wouldn't actually pay higher rate, but would HMRC swallow that with respect to child benefit? Or base that on gross, pre sacrifice, salary? Pension contributions (10%) are already salary sacrifice, so if it does count then she'll have a few years before losing some child benefit, even without AVCs.
    I've got an AVC set up, I confess that had not occurred to me. Sounds too obvious.
    kle4 said:

    On economics I tend to take a pretty simplistic view of things, largely because I struggle to understand the more complex stuff. So that understandably downweights my views.

    But it seems to me that we are as a country pretty broke. No one seems to have any clue how to stimulate growth as the latest attempt was simply wishing for it and borrowing to plug a massive hole.

    So no one is offering a growth plan, yet we need a lot more money. Therefore, we need more taxes. Efficiencies have already been largely achieved, in fact we've made false efficiencies, so even though more tax hurts I don't get what alternative there is.

    I am close to a higher tax band so I guess I should hope for no pay rise next year though.

    On your last point - surely even if a pay rise takes you into a higher tax band you will still have more money than in the absence of the pay rise?
    Unless there's some kind of child benefit shenanigans triggered by it (another piece of Osborne idiocy).
  • Clutch_BromptonClutch_Brompton Posts: 93
    edited November 17
    Autumn Statement shows a key difference between the US and the UK

    In the US conservatives won't concede an election two years after they lost it

    In the UK the Cons just conceded an election two years before they will fight it.

    I now expect a Labour working majority after the next election. The next few years will be grim for most and will be blamed on the current Govt by most. I'm not sure Hunt didn't play his cards as well as anyone could have but he was dealt a desperately bad hand.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 3,284
    MikeL said:

    Stand by for a moment:

    Fuel Duty is going up 12p a litre in March 2023!

    Might as well hand the keys to number 10 to Starmer now and ask him if he'd like to get rid of Boris's awful wallpaper.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,624
    kinabalu said:

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    Maybe - but that would be a disappointment from here.
    Not for me. Getting the Tories out is the target. Anything beyond that is a bonus. And if a hung parliament means we end up with PR for 2028/9, I'll be happy with that.

    1992. Now that was a disappointment.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,093
    MikeL said:

    Pat McFadden on BBC2 sounded very much as if Lab will pretty much accept Con economic plans.

    A bit of tinkering at the edges - ie abolish Non-Doms, extend windfall tax, change Private Equity.

    But what is noticeable is there is no suggestion at all of any of the really big changes often talked about on here - eg wealth taxes, extending NI to investment income etc.

    Don't think they'll risk airing much of that good stuff before the GE. It's about winning first and foremost, and after that about winning.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,468
    Nigelb said:

    The really amazing thing for me about this story is the size of the police department for a town of fewer than 2,500 inhabitants.

    A small pothole that was left alone for months just ate the entire Hinton WV Police Department? 😵‍💫🥴

    https://twitter.com/HeyYo_JClick/status/1592991469790691329

    According to the internet the Hinton WV PD consists of seven full-time sworn officers, so that's a bit more than 300 people in the city per police officer.

    That compares to 32,493 police officers in the Metropolitan police, covering a population of just under 9 million. So there are more police officers in London compared to the size of the population, but that in part reflects the national responsibilities taken on by the Met.

    Apparently they're the only PD in the area to have their own jail. I imagine all the escape tunnels dug over the years had something to do with the sinkhole that emerged...
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,926
    The US midterms do seem to have been a real mixed bag.

    The Democrats have lost several House seats in California which Biden won by over 10% in 2020.

    The Democrats have also done very poorly in New York. Even if their original map had gone through they wouldn't have won anything like the number of seats it was expected to generate.
  • Scott_xP said:

    TimS said:

    Hunt has a substantial amount of power on this current front bench. It's quite a turnup given he was seemingly condemned to permanent backbenches only a few short months ago.

    It occurred to me earlier he is the only winner from the entire Truss debacle
    Trussterfuck is the approved title. He'd be well placed to lead the party if he had any prospect of holding his seat after the next election.
    Isn't his seat chopped up by Boundary Review? That may work quite well for him if he's reasonably popular locally and follows the bluer parts - Lib Dems did quite well last time but still need a swing over 7% and presumably more if he chooses correctly and is selected.

    I don't think he's a serious contender for the leadership in any realistic circumstances, though. If the Tories lose, creating a vacancy, he'd get a fair bit of blame (largely unfair but nevertheless) for raising taxes. He's also a managerial type who isn't what they'll want in opposition. If the Tories win, then he's Chancellor to a much younger PM for the foreseeable future and will be in his 60s before a vacancy arises - not impossibly old, but feels unlikely.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    edited November 17
    Nigelb said:

    What a shame.

    GOP civil war spreads to Georgia runoff
    https://www.politico.com/news/2022/11/17/trump-georgia-senate-race-00068079

    Anyone tempted by the odds ?
    1.29 on Betfair isn't massively generous, but it's only a couple of weeks until the outcome.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    London economy Sitrep 926


    Covent Garden

    Still noticeably quieter than pre-Covid, despite a pleasant, mild, sunny autumn day

    About 10-15% of properties on Neal St are still closed - obviously by Covid

    That’s such a prosperous street. Normally every site would be taken. Hmmm

    London is NOT QUITE BACK. Not in WC2 anyway

    Paradoxically the agreeable quietness and some elegant new buildings means it is LOOKING better than ever
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303

    Scott_xP said:

    TimS said:

    Hunt has a substantial amount of power on this current front bench. It's quite a turnup given he was seemingly condemned to permanent backbenches only a few short months ago.

    It occurred to me earlier he is the only winner from the entire Truss debacle
    Trussterfuck is the approved title. He'd be well placed to lead the party if he had any prospect of holding his seat after the next election.
    Isn't his seat chopped up by Boundary Review? That may work quite well for him if he's reasonably popular locally and follows the bluer parts - Lib Dems did quite well last time but still need a swing over 7% and presumably more if he chooses correctly and is selected.

    I don't think he's a serious contender for the leadership in any realistic circumstances, though. If the Tories lose, creating a vacancy, he'd get a fair bit of blame (largely unfair but nevertheless) for raising taxes. He's also a managerial type who isn't what they'll want in opposition. If the Tories win, then he's Chancellor to a much younger PM for the foreseeable future and will be in his 60s before a vacancy arises - not impossibly old, but feels unlikely.
    IIRC his seat is chopped into two that are both worse for him than his current one, but I think I got that from here so who knows?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229

    kle4 said:

    Selebian said:

    kle4 said:

    On economics I tend to take a pretty simplistic view of things, largely because I struggle to understand the more complex stuff. So that understandably downweights my views.

    But it seems to me that we are as a country pretty broke. No one seems to have any clue how to stimulate growth as the latest attempt was simply wishing for it and borrowing to plug a massive hole.

    So no one is offering a growth plan, yet we need a lot more money. Therefore, we need more taxes. Efficiencies have already been largely achieved, in fact we've made false efficiencies, so even though more tax hurts I don't get what alternative there is.

    I am close to a higher tax band so I guess I should hope for no pay rise next year though.

    Speaking to a colleague about to enter higher rate (annual increment will take her into it next year) she was saying she might increase her pension payments (AVCs are possible to a DC pension pot, in addition to the DB main) to stay below and so keep child benefit, rather than paying some back.

    Is that a thing? Would reduce taxable salary, so she wouldn't actually pay higher rate, but would HMRC swallow that with respect to child benefit? Or base that on gross, pre sacrifice, salary? Pension contributions (10%) are already salary sacrifice, so if it does count then she'll have a few years before losing some child benefit, even without AVCs.
    I've got an AVC set up, I confess that had not occurred to me. Sounds too obvious.
    kle4 said:

    On economics I tend to take a pretty simplistic view of things, largely because I struggle to understand the more complex stuff. So that understandably downweights my views.

    But it seems to me that we are as a country pretty broke. No one seems to have any clue how to stimulate growth as the latest attempt was simply wishing for it and borrowing to plug a massive hole.

    So no one is offering a growth plan, yet we need a lot more money. Therefore, we need more taxes. Efficiencies have already been largely achieved, in fact we've made false efficiencies, so even though more tax hurts I don't get what alternative there is.

    I am close to a higher tax band so I guess I should hope for no pay rise next year though.

    On your last point - surely even if a pay rise takes you into a higher tax band you will still have more money than in the absence of the pay rise?
    Unless there's some kind of child benefit shenanigans triggered by it (another piece of Osborne idiocy).
    Probably. I'd never been in a position to think about it before so it was an immediate thought without analysis.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    Mar-a-Lago Model Prosecution Memo

    https://www.justsecurity.org/84168/mar-a-lago-model-prosecution-memo/
    This model prosecution memorandum (or “pros memo”) assesses the potential charges against former President Donald Trump emanating from his handling of classified documents and other government records since leaving office on January 20, 2021. It includes crimes related to the removal and retention of national security information and obstruction of the investigation into his handling of these documents. The authors have decades of experience as federal prosecutors and defense lawyers, as well as other legal expertise. Based upon this experience and the analysis that follows, we conclude that there is a strong basis to charge Trump...

    168 document.
    One of the authors is Mueller's lead prosecutor.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    In terms of climbing the hill, ie gaining seats, the Scottish situation helps not hinders. Labour only gained 7 Scottish seats in the 1997 election, because they held most of them already. They could easily gain more than that in the next election, coming from such a low base.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 44,981
    Interesting thread.

    Trump's candidacy for president raises the prospect of a major party nominee that is effectively on the payroll of a foreign government.

    Since leaving the White House, Trump and his family have received BILLIONS from Saudi officials

    https://twitter.com/JuddLegum/status/1593239272509018112
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    MikeL said:

    The US midterms do seem to have been a real mixed bag.

    The Democrats have lost several House seats in California which Biden won by over 10% in 2020.

    The Democrats have also done very poorly in New York. Even if their original map had gone through they wouldn't have won anything like the number of seats it was expected to generate.

    California and NYC are two places suffering from Democrat Wokeness, high crime and homelessness, and faltering economies as people leave for Texas, Florida etc

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,545

    I'm much more confident in laying a Tory majority than backing a Labour majority.

    The number of ways you can get to NOM seems greater than the number of ways you can get Lab or Tory maj.

    To achieve Lab or Tory maj (325/6 seats) one or the other has to do startlingly well, and the other one startlingly badly. Only two routes. Obvs Labour look on track now to do exactly that, but two years ago they didn't, and the next two years is a long time.

    Whereas to get NOM, this can be done by: both doing well, both doing badly, LDs doing well, both doing OK, one doing OK and the other mediocre etc. Lots of routes.

    I think the most likely scene is that all parties do rather badly - Tories a better team but terrible history; Labour no recent form but a middling team at best (especially on economics where they sound Noddyish); LDs will play to their limited strengths.

    Labour should be good enough (and Tories bad enough) for Labour to come first, but not to win.

    NOM the clear favourite.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,535
    Leon said:

    The Tories have just delivered a depressing Labour budget. Not that they had much choice

    So why tolerate the Tories - who are widely loathed - and simply vote Labour? It will be the same. Crap

    But at least you the satisfaction of kicking the Conservative Party in the cullions

    Conclusion: Labour are going to win big. A majority is more likely than not

    That's probably right, provided Labour don't screw it up.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    When I worked in the Treasury, we knew Tory backbenchers and the tabloid newspapers would make merry hell with any fuel duty rise. I predict a riot over the 23% hike hidden in today's documents
    https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/1593261585744756737
    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1593250257672208386
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    “Wow. The OBR forecasts that living standards in 2027-28 will be still be lower than they were before the pandemic. A huge, long-term squeeze on living standards.”

    https://twitter.com/benkentish/status/1593235081165955079?s=46&t=I4koVwi-qGuwPXIIesp8Rw

    That said I reckon this is pifflecasting

    So many big unpredictable things could and will happen between now and 2027
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 32,093

    kinabalu said:

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    Maybe - but that would be a disappointment from here.
    Not for me. Getting the Tories out is the target. Anything beyond that is a bonus. And if a hung parliament means we end up with PR for 2028/9, I'll be happy with that.

    1992. Now that was a disappointment.
    Understatement of the 21st century so far.
  • Scott_xP said:

    When I worked in the Treasury, we knew Tory backbenchers and the tabloid newspapers would make merry hell with any fuel duty rise. I predict a riot over the 23% hike hidden in today's documents
    https://twitter.com/jameschappers/status/1593261585744756737
    https://twitter.com/LiamHalligan/status/1593250257672208386

    How long before U-turn on this?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,683

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    In terms of climbing the hill, ie gaining seats, the Scottish situation helps not hinders. Labour only gained 7 Scottish seats in the 1997 election, because they held most of them already. They could easily gain more than that in the next election, coming from such a low base.
    I just checked and apparently they've got zero seats in Moldova at the moment, so that could be an even more promising source of seats at the next GE.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,535
    Leon said:

    London economy Sitrep 926


    Covent Garden

    Still noticeably quieter than pre-Covid, despite a pleasant, mild, sunny autumn day

    About 10-15% of properties on Neal St are still closed - obviously by Covid

    That’s such a prosperous street. Normally every site would be taken. Hmmm

    London is NOT QUITE BACK. Not in WC2 anyway

    Paradoxically the agreeable quietness and some elegant new buildings means it is LOOKING better than ever

    Yes, London has recovered to quite an extent but by no means completely. Mondays and Fridays especially are quiet, as people choose to skive off work diligently from home rather than come into the office. Restaurants have reduced their opening times, and theatres and concerts still not back to normal.
  • SirNorfolkPassmoreSirNorfolkPassmore Posts: 4,174
    edited November 17
    MikeL said:

    The US midterms do seem to have been a real mixed bag.

    The Democrats have lost several House seats in California which Biden won by over 10% in 2020.

    The Democrats have also done very poorly in New York. Even if their original map had gone through they wouldn't have won anything like the number of seats it was expected to generate.

    Have the Republicans actually flipped any California House districts the Democrats notionally won in 2020 (appreciate there have been boundary changes)?

    I'm not sure any incumbent has lost so far. 13th district (an open race but should be a bit more Democrat) looks tight and could yet be a loss. But other than that, isn't it broadly going by the form book? The fact Californian districts have taken the GOP over the line doesn't mean they are doing that well there - it's just that California counts notoriously slowly... their wins there so far haven't been shocks.

    It's probably the case that the GOP won some California districts that Biden carried. But these are in places where people split their ballot in 2020 too - California Republicans in relatively marginal districts are understandably a bit more moderate and Trump-sceptical than colleagues in deep red states.

    In New York I agree Democrats clearly did badly - four flips against them.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,468

    Autumn Statement shows a key difference between the US and the UK

    In the US conservatives won't concede an election two years after they lost it

    In the UK the Cons just conceded an election two years before they will fight it.

    I now expect a Labour working majority after the next election. The next few years will be grim for most and will be blamed on the current Govt by most. I'm not sure Hunt didn't play his cards as well as anyone could have but he was dealt a desperately bad hand.

    The debt interest payments Britain is expecting to have to make over the next few years are pretty grim. The error bars on the forecast have probably triggered a deal of gallows humour in the Treasury.

    Not sure how Labour can balance pinning the blame on the Tories for the mess, with minimising its scale so that they can promise public sector investment. Really think they've got to work out some policies and reforms that will be appealing and won't cost the Exchequer any money. Things like abolishing leasehold that can save normal people money, but don't involve spending money were don't have.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Paul is right.

    We are set to spend more on the interest on the debt we owe than on any public service bar the NHS.

    We are borrowing money to pay the money owed on the money we have already borrowed.

    https://twitter.com/VValentineNews/status/1593265730836987907
    https://twitter.com/pjtheeconomist/status/1593227042619027456
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Huge living standards drop forecast

    Real household disposable income per person will drop 4.3% this year

    Biggest drop since records began in 1956. Then it falls again next year.

    Takes measure to lowest point since 2013, wiping out 8yrs of rises.

    https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1593265518076731399
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469

    Leon said:

    London economy Sitrep 926


    Covent Garden

    Still noticeably quieter than pre-Covid, despite a pleasant, mild, sunny autumn day

    About 10-15% of properties on Neal St are still closed - obviously by Covid

    That’s such a prosperous street. Normally every site would be taken. Hmmm

    London is NOT QUITE BACK. Not in WC2 anyway

    Paradoxically the agreeable quietness and some elegant new buildings means it is LOOKING better than ever

    Yes, London has recovered to quite an extent but by no means completely. Mondays and Fridays especially are quiet, as people choose to skive off work diligently from home rather than come into the office. Restaurants have reduced their opening times, and theatres and concerts still not back to normal.
    Ironically, Soho and Covent Garden are both much improved thanks to all the liz line work at the top of Charing Cross road, soho square etc

    Even the old Gin Lane rookery around St Giles/new Oxford street - which has been sketchy since the Romans built a road around the marsh that once sat there - now looks quite pleasant

    After 1,800 years, it got fixed

    I love London’s enormous history. Puts things in perspective. The Smoke has seen it all before. Rise and decline. Then rise again
  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,160
    algarkirk said:

    I'm much more confident in laying a Tory majority than backing a Labour majority.

    The number of ways you can get to NOM seems greater than the number of ways you can get Lab or Tory maj.

    To achieve Lab or Tory maj (325/6 seats) one or the other has to do startlingly well, and the other one startlingly badly. Only two routes. Obvs Labour look on track now to do exactly that, but two years ago they didn't, and the next two years is a long time.

    Whereas to get NOM, this can be done by: both doing well, both doing badly, LDs doing well, both doing OK, one doing OK and the other mediocre etc. Lots of routes.

    I think the most likely scene is that all parties do rather badly - Tories a better team but terrible history; Labour no recent form but a middling team at best (especially on economics where they sound Noddyish); LDs will play to their limited strengths.

    Labour should be good enough (and Tories bad enough) for Labour to come first, but not to win.

    NOM the clear favourite.
    You keep writing this garbage, probably because you find it comforting, but no matter how many times you repeat it, it will still be wrong.

    Rachel Reeves is an Oxbridge and LSE educated economist who has worked as such for the Bank of England, and in private sector banking.

    She is a class act – not just a Chancellor in the making, but a PM.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,502

    MattW said:

    Hmmm. I'd say pretty much what he had to do.

    I'm disappointed that HS2 NE is still deleted, and that the Housing Market is left unreformed.

    A lot of fiscal drag. Good to see some reform of top rate taxes. Hopefully the £100-£125k marginal rate will be next.

    I did not hear anything on defence spending. Aha - I see 2% GDP will be maintained. That may be code for an effective reduction, depending how it is counted.

    I wonder if a typical energy bill will be anywhere near pro-rata £3000 by the time we get to April.

    Brave, but sensible, to go for a revaluation for business rates. A time bomb? Last time it was like stuck pigs squealing to heaven for those not paying wrt their disproportionate property price increases.

    Sensible to raise Min Wage (I think to the highest net in Western Europe), and benefits / basic pensions by inflation rate.

    Local Council finances look to be under threat. I missed whether these would be restricted to +5% on Council Tax this year. Those are also crying out for a re-valuation or reform.

    To me (others will differ) Reeves' speech was a vacuum - about 95% pre-recorded rhetoric.

    Big suspicion is, what good news there is got announced in speech, first impressions matter so they are shaping the first impressions. More controversial things like the Defence Budget cut you flagged, hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly.
    On Topic. And as we were saying “what good news there is got announced in speech, controversial things hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly”

    And so it begins


  • AnabobazinaAnabobazina Posts: 15,160

    Leon said:

    London economy Sitrep 926


    Covent Garden

    Still noticeably quieter than pre-Covid, despite a pleasant, mild, sunny autumn day

    About 10-15% of properties on Neal St are still closed - obviously by Covid

    That’s such a prosperous street. Normally every site would be taken. Hmmm

    London is NOT QUITE BACK. Not in WC2 anyway

    Paradoxically the agreeable quietness and some elegant new buildings means it is LOOKING better than ever

    Yes, London has recovered to quite an extent but by no means completely. Mondays and Fridays especially are quiet, as people choose to skive off work diligently from home rather than come into the office. Restaurants have reduced their opening times, and theatres and concerts still not back to normal.
    Fridays are weekends and as such the hospitality sector is supported by incomers on the razz. 'Twas ever thus.

    Mondays are more problematic and it's absolutely true that the TWAT culture means lots of pubs and bars are closed Monday where once there were open.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303
    Endillion said:

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    In terms of climbing the hill, ie gaining seats, the Scottish situation helps not hinders. Labour only gained 7 Scottish seats in the 1997 election, because they held most of them already. They could easily gain more than that in the next election, coming from such a low base.
    I just checked and apparently they've got zero seats in Moldova at the moment, so that could be an even more promising source of seats at the next GE.
    Thanks that's a useful comment.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,468
    Britain is in a grim situation with massive amounts of debt interest payments and the big story from the budget is the expectation that the Chancellor will be forced to forego an expected £5.7bn from increased fuel duty, and presumably borrow more instead.

    The disconnect from reality is unreal.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 31,972
    MH17 verdict:

    "Judgment and sentencing #MH17: Life sentence for Girkin, Dubinskiy, Kharchenko for murder and for downing a plane. Acquittal of Pulatov. The three perpetrators are jointly and severally liable for damages to next of kin. Court closes by hoping this alleviates suffering somewhat."

    https://twitter.com/mariekedehoon/status/1593253733735227393
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 6,545

    algarkirk said:

    I'm much more confident in laying a Tory majority than backing a Labour majority.

    The number of ways you can get to NOM seems greater than the number of ways you can get Lab or Tory maj.

    To achieve Lab or Tory maj (325/6 seats) one or the other has to do startlingly well, and the other one startlingly badly. Only two routes. Obvs Labour look on track now to do exactly that, but two years ago they didn't, and the next two years is a long time.

    Whereas to get NOM, this can be done by: both doing well, both doing badly, LDs doing well, both doing OK, one doing OK and the other mediocre etc. Lots of routes.

    I think the most likely scene is that all parties do rather badly - Tories a better team but terrible history; Labour no recent form but a middling team at best (especially on economics where they sound Noddyish); LDs will play to their limited strengths.

    Labour should be good enough (and Tories bad enough) for Labour to come first, but not to win.

    NOM the clear favourite.
    You keep writing this garbage, probably because you find it comforting, but no matter how many times you repeat it, it will still be wrong.

    Rachel Reeves is an Oxbridge and LSE educated economist who has worked as such for the Bank of England, and in private sector banking.

    She is a class act – not just a Chancellor in the making, but a PM.
    Thanks. Hope you are right. There is little for my comfort in politics at the moment. And I would love Labour to prove to have a top quality front bench.
  • Leon said:

    MikeL said:

    The US midterms do seem to have been a real mixed bag.

    The Democrats have lost several House seats in California which Biden won by over 10% in 2020.

    The Democrats have also done very poorly in New York. Even if their original map had gone through they wouldn't have won anything like the number of seats it was expected to generate.

    California and NYC are two places suffering from Democrat Wokeness, high crime and homelessness, and faltering economies as people leave for Texas, Florida etc

    And which particular GOP gains in New York CITY and California do you attribute to this?

    As mentioned, I don't actually think there have been any flips in California yet... there have in New York, but that's been Long Island and upstate New York rather than NYC.
  • OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 10,303

    MattW said:

    Hmmm. I'd say pretty much what he had to do.

    I'm disappointed that HS2 NE is still deleted, and that the Housing Market is left unreformed.

    A lot of fiscal drag. Good to see some reform of top rate taxes. Hopefully the £100-£125k marginal rate will be next.

    I did not hear anything on defence spending. Aha - I see 2% GDP will be maintained. That may be code for an effective reduction, depending how it is counted.

    I wonder if a typical energy bill will be anywhere near pro-rata £3000 by the time we get to April.

    Brave, but sensible, to go for a revaluation for business rates. A time bomb? Last time it was like stuck pigs squealing to heaven for those not paying wrt their disproportionate property price increases.

    Sensible to raise Min Wage (I think to the highest net in Western Europe), and benefits / basic pensions by inflation rate.

    Local Council finances look to be under threat. I missed whether these would be restricted to +5% on Council Tax this year. Those are also crying out for a re-valuation or reform.

    To me (others will differ) Reeves' speech was a vacuum - about 95% pre-recorded rhetoric.

    Big suspicion is, what good news there is got announced in speech, first impressions matter so they are shaping the first impressions. More controversial things like the Defence Budget cut you flagged, hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly.
    On Topic. And as we were saying “what good news there is got announced in speech, controversial things hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly”

    And so it begins


    This was in the March Budget too (it's a bigger increase now because it's linked to RPI which is higher than previously forecast but it's not a change in policy, it was in there already).
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    edited November 17

    Autumn Statement shows a key difference between the US and the UK

    In the US conservatives won't concede an election two years after they lost it

    In the UK the Cons just conceded an election two years before they will fight it.

    I now expect a Labour working majority after the next election. The next few years will be grim for most and will be blamed on the current Govt by most. I'm not sure Hunt didn't play his cards as well as anyone could have but he was dealt a desperately bad hand.

    The debt interest payments Britain is expecting to have to make over the next few years are pretty grim. The error bars on the forecast have probably triggered a deal of gallows humour in the Treasury.

    Not sure how Labour can balance pinning the blame on the Tories for the mess, with minimising its scale so that they can promise public sector investment. Really think they've got to work out some policies and reforms that will be appealing and won't cost the Exchequer any money. Things like abolishing leasehold that can save normal people money, but don't involve spending money were don't have.
    There is one big thing they can do which will be highly controversial but also exceedingly popular with many

    Rejoin the CU/SM

    I can see the Starmer pitch now. “Britain is in crisis. We need to boost the economy all we can. This will reopen the European market to every business in the country. We have no choice”


    Free movement might be less of an issue if the UK economy is deeply unappealing to EU workers

  • TimSTimS Posts: 2,719

    algarkirk said:

    I'm much more confident in laying a Tory majority than backing a Labour majority.

    The number of ways you can get to NOM seems greater than the number of ways you can get Lab or Tory maj.

    To achieve Lab or Tory maj (325/6 seats) one or the other has to do startlingly well, and the other one startlingly badly. Only two routes. Obvs Labour look on track now to do exactly that, but two years ago they didn't, and the next two years is a long time.

    Whereas to get NOM, this can be done by: both doing well, both doing badly, LDs doing well, both doing OK, one doing OK and the other mediocre etc. Lots of routes.

    I think the most likely scene is that all parties do rather badly - Tories a better team but terrible history; Labour no recent form but a middling team at best (especially on economics where they sound Noddyish); LDs will play to their limited strengths.

    Labour should be good enough (and Tories bad enough) for Labour to come first, but not to win.

    NOM the clear favourite.
    You keep writing this garbage, probably because you find it comforting, but no matter how many times you repeat it, it will still be wrong.

    Rachel Reeves is an Oxbridge and LSE educated economist who has worked as such for the Bank of England, and in private sector banking.

    She is a class act – not just a Chancellor in the making, but a PM.
    I was with a friend yesterday who knew her in Oxford Labour club. He was the outgoing chair who proposed her as his successor. There's quite a tight knit group of people of that generation who have all made it into the upper echelons of Labour at a similar time.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Leon said:

    I love London’s enormous history. Puts things in perspective. The Smoke has seen it all before. Rise and decline. Then rise again

    The Luftwaffe set fire to the London Stock Exchange in 1940 and then blasted it with the shockwave of a supersonic missile in 1945 and still did less damage to it than we did.

    https://twitter.com/thehistoryguy/status/1592473575654838272
  • TazTaz Posts: 6,194

    MattW said:

    Hmmm. I'd say pretty much what he had to do.

    I'm disappointed that HS2 NE is still deleted, and that the Housing Market is left unreformed.

    A lot of fiscal drag. Good to see some reform of top rate taxes. Hopefully the £100-£125k marginal rate will be next.

    I did not hear anything on defence spending. Aha - I see 2% GDP will be maintained. That may be code for an effective reduction, depending how it is counted.

    I wonder if a typical energy bill will be anywhere near pro-rata £3000 by the time we get to April.

    Brave, but sensible, to go for a revaluation for business rates. A time bomb? Last time it was like stuck pigs squealing to heaven for those not paying wrt their disproportionate property price increases.

    Sensible to raise Min Wage (I think to the highest net in Western Europe), and benefits / basic pensions by inflation rate.

    Local Council finances look to be under threat. I missed whether these would be restricted to +5% on Council Tax this year. Those are also crying out for a re-valuation or reform.

    To me (others will differ) Reeves' speech was a vacuum - about 95% pre-recorded rhetoric.

    Big suspicion is, what good news there is got announced in speech, first impressions matter so they are shaping the first impressions. More controversial things like the Defence Budget cut you flagged, hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly.
    On Topic. And as we were saying “what good news there is got announced in speech, controversial things hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly”

    And so it begins


    This was in the March Budget too (it's a bigger increase now because it's linked to RPI which is higher than previously forecast but it's not a change in policy, it was in there already).
    That will please the Eco Loons though.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 41,859
    MikeL said:

    Stand by for a moment:

    Fuel Duty is going up 12p a litre in March 2023!

    Didnt’ we learn over the summer, that petrol (and especially diesel) prices feed into inflation absolutely everywhere in the economy?

    Anyway, not my problem, Super 98 is 85p a litre for me. Might upgrade the 5 litre V8 to the 6.2 litre V8.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,811

    Scott_xP said:

    TimS said:

    Hunt has a substantial amount of power on this current front bench. It's quite a turnup given he was seemingly condemned to permanent backbenches only a few short months ago.

    It occurred to me earlier he is the only winner from the entire Truss debacle
    Trussterfuck is the approved title. He'd be well placed to lead the party if he had any prospect of holding his seat after the next election.
    Isn't his seat chopped up by Boundary Review? That may work quite well for him if he's reasonably popular locally and follows the bluer parts - Lib Dems did quite well last time but still need a swing over 7% and presumably more if he chooses correctly and is selected.

    I don't think he's a serious contender for the leadership in any realistic circumstances, though. If the Tories lose, creating a vacancy, he'd get a fair bit of blame (largely unfair but nevertheless) for raising taxes. He's also a managerial type who isn't what they'll want in opposition. If the Tories win, then he's Chancellor to a much younger PM for the foreseeable future and will be in his 60s before a vacancy arises - not impossibly old, but feels unlikely.
    IIRC his seat is chopped into two that are both worse for him than his current one, but I think I got that from here so who knows?
    This is my seat so I've been following it closely. The two seats created are both essentially classic Blue Wall, and I don't think either is worse (or much better) than the current one. He should be safe unless there is a major LibDem surge or massive tactical voting, either of which are quite possible. I'd give him a 60% chance of holding on, but that's just my gut sense. An interesting question is whether the prominent LibDem challenger last time, Paul Follows, decides to go for the same seat that Hunt goes for - the other seat with no incumbency bonus may be more vulnerable. I wouldn't be surprised if Hunt goes for the Farnham-based one and Follows goes for the Godalming-based one.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,920
    Leon said:

    London economy Sitrep 926


    Covent Garden

    Still noticeably quieter than pre-Covid, despite a pleasant, mild, sunny autumn day

    About 10-15% of properties on Neal St are still closed - obviously by Covid

    That’s such a prosperous street. Normally every site would be taken. Hmmm

    London is NOT QUITE BACK. Not in WC2 anyway

    Paradoxically the agreeable quietness and some elegant new buildings means it is LOOKING better than ever

    Neal Street has a massive turnover. A friend had one of the first pop-up galleries there in the late 80's. Bar the horoscope/tarot shop at the end, I didn't recognise any of them when I went there last Christmas.

    (She used to get a lot of people from theatre land dropping in. And others. One day, she beckoned me over, slightly flummoxed. A gent had bought six sculptures and was paying by cheque. But he had no cheque guarantee card. Is this OK, she asked.

    I looked at the cheque then at the gent.

    "You'll be fine. Firstly, it's a Coutts cheque. They aren't in the habit of bouncing them for their clients. Secondly, have you looked at the name on the cheque?

    Which she did. "R Plant."

    A pause.

    "THE R Plant?" We both nodded.)
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,502
    Leon said:

    “Wow. The OBR forecasts that living standards in 2027-28 will be still be lower than they were before the pandemic. A huge, long-term squeeze on living standards.”

    https://twitter.com/benkentish/status/1593235081165955079?s=46&t=I4koVwi-qGuwPXIIesp8Rw

    That said I reckon this is pifflecasting

    So many big unpredictable things could and will happen between now and 2027

    Like a stock market crash to go with the housing price fall. That’s not really being predicted, but it’s certainly in play in my opinion. We can’t do big pulls of some levers like they can do in US, government fiscal tightening and BoE monetary QT can crash our over inflated stock market.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Seen at Mar-a-Lago: Kari Lake, per a source.
    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1593272556815007744
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 4,683
    edited November 17

    Endillion said:

    "My own view remains that the next general election outcome will be a hung parliament with Starmer becoming PM."

    I agree. Just too big a hill to climb, especially without a few dozen Scottish seats like in years gone by.

    In terms of climbing the hill, ie gaining seats, the Scottish situation helps not hinders. Labour only gained 7 Scottish seats in the 1997 election, because they held most of them already. They could easily gain more than that in the next election, coming from such a low base.
    I just checked and apparently they've got zero seats in Moldova at the moment, so that could be an even more promising source of seats at the next GE.
    Thanks that's a useful comment.
    It was exactly as useful as yours.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,363

    Leon said:

    London economy Sitrep 926


    Covent Garden

    Still noticeably quieter than pre-Covid, despite a pleasant, mild, sunny autumn day

    About 10-15% of properties on Neal St are still closed - obviously by Covid

    That’s such a prosperous street. Normally every site would be taken. Hmmm

    London is NOT QUITE BACK. Not in WC2 anyway

    Paradoxically the agreeable quietness and some elegant new buildings means it is LOOKING better than ever

    Neal Street has a massive turnover. A friend had one of the first pop-up galleries there in the late 80's. Bar the horoscope/tarot shop at the end, I didn't recognise any of them when I went there last Christmas.

    (She used to get a lot of people from theatre land dropping in. And others. One day, she beckoned me over, slightly flummoxed. A gent had bought six sculptures and was paying by cheque. But he had no cheque guarantee card. Is this OK, she asked.

    I looked at the cheque then at the gent.

    "You'll be fine. Firstly, it's a Coutts cheque. They aren't in the habit of bouncing them for their clients. Secondly, have you looked at the name on the cheque?

    Which she did. "R Plant."

    A pause.

    "THE R Plant?" We both nodded.)
    My apartment is on Shaftesbury Avenue just opposite Neal Street.

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,920

    Autumn Statement shows a key difference between the US and the UK

    In the US conservatives won't concede an election two years after they lost it

    In the UK the Cons just conceded an election two years before they will fight it.

    I now expect a Labour working majority after the next election. The next few years will be grim for most and will be blamed on the current Govt by most. I'm not sure Hunt didn't play his cards as well as anyone could have but he was dealt a desperately bad hand.

    The debt interest payments Britain is expecting to have to make over the next few years are pretty grim. The error bars on the forecast have probably triggered a deal of gallows humour in the Treasury.

    Not sure how Labour can balance pinning the blame on the Tories for the mess, with minimising its scale so that they can promise public sector investment. Really think they've got to work out some policies and reforms that will be appealing and won't cost the Exchequer any money. Things like abolishing leasehold that can save normal people money, but don't involve spending money were don't have.
    The Trade Unions will want their pound of flesh for funding the Labour Party, whose finances are worse than the UK's.

    They are going to be bitterly disappointed.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,502

    Britain is in a grim situation with massive amounts of debt interest payments and the big story from the budget is the expectation that the Chancellor will be forced to forego an expected £5.7bn from increased fuel duty, and presumably borrow more instead.

    The disconnect from reality is unreal.

    It does bring in a very useful 5.7bn. At same time Farage & Friends are right, at what cost to small business.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,926

    MikeL said:

    The US midterms do seem to have been a real mixed bag.

    The Democrats have lost several House seats in California which Biden won by over 10% in 2020.

    The Democrats have also done very poorly in New York. Even if their original map had gone through they wouldn't have won anything like the number of seats it was expected to generate.

    Have the Republicans actually flipped any California House districts the Democrats notionally won in 2020 (appreciate there have been boundary changes)?

    I'm not sure any incumbent has lost so far. 13th district (an open race but should be a bit more Democrat) looks tight and could yet be a loss. But other than that, isn't it broadly going by the form book? The fact Californian districts have taken the GOP over the line doesn't mean they are doing that well there - it's just that California counts notoriously slowly... their wins there so far haven't been shocks.

    It's probably the case that the GOP won some California districts that Biden carried. But these are in places where people split their ballot in 2020 too - California Republicans in relatively marginal districts are understandably a bit more moderate and Trump-sceptical than colleagues in deep red states.

    In New York I agree Democrats clearly did badly - four flips against them.
    I think it depends a bit on how flip is defined - I'm not sure they calculate notional 2020 House results and then define flip from there.

    I appreciate there will be some split ticket voting but Dems are losing House seats Biden won by over 10% - I strongly doubt the Reps would have won such seats in 2020 if boundaries had been as they are now.

    CA13 - Rep leads vote count, Biden won by 11%
    CA 22 - Rep leads vote count, Biden won by 13%
    CA27 - Rep declared winner, Biden won by 12%

    And there were at least one or two others which were similar but now deleted from CNN page so I no longer have details.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 46,920
    rcs1000 said:

    Leon said:

    London economy Sitrep 926


    Covent Garden

    Still noticeably quieter than pre-Covid, despite a pleasant, mild, sunny autumn day

    About 10-15% of properties on Neal St are still closed - obviously by Covid

    That’s such a prosperous street. Normally every site would be taken. Hmmm

    London is NOT QUITE BACK. Not in WC2 anyway

    Paradoxically the agreeable quietness and some elegant new buildings means it is LOOKING better than ever

    Neal Street has a massive turnover. A friend had one of the first pop-up galleries there in the late 80's. Bar the horoscope/tarot shop at the end, I didn't recognise any of them when I went there last Christmas.

    (She used to get a lot of people from theatre land dropping in. And others. One day, she beckoned me over, slightly flummoxed. A gent had bought six sculptures and was paying by cheque. But he had no cheque guarantee card. Is this OK, she asked.

    I looked at the cheque then at the gent.

    "You'll be fine. Firstly, it's a Coutts cheque. They aren't in the habit of bouncing them for their clients. Secondly, have you looked at the name on the cheque?

    Which she did. "R Plant."

    A pause.

    "THE R Plant?" We both nodded.)
    My apartment is on Shaftesbury Avenue just opposite Neal Street.

    A great part of town.

    I delivered the sculptures to Robert Plant's house in Primrose Hill.
  • DougSealDougSeal Posts: 8,322

    Britain is in a grim situation with massive amounts of debt interest payments and the big story from the budget is the expectation that the Chancellor will be forced to forego an expected £5.7bn from increased fuel duty, and presumably borrow more instead.

    The disconnect from reality is unreal.

    It does bring in a very useful 5.7bn. At same time Farage & Friends are right, at what cost to small business.
    "Farage & Friends" sounds like the world's worst talk show.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,468

    Autumn Statement shows a key difference between the US and the UK

    In the US conservatives won't concede an election two years after they lost it

    In the UK the Cons just conceded an election two years before they will fight it.

    I now expect a Labour working majority after the next election. The next few years will be grim for most and will be blamed on the current Govt by most. I'm not sure Hunt didn't play his cards as well as anyone could have but he was dealt a desperately bad hand.

    The debt interest payments Britain is expecting to have to make over the next few years are pretty grim. The error bars on the forecast have probably triggered a deal of gallows humour in the Treasury.

    Not sure how Labour can balance pinning the blame on the Tories for the mess, with minimising its scale so that they can promise public sector investment. Really think they've got to work out some policies and reforms that will be appealing and won't cost the Exchequer any money. Things like abolishing leasehold that can save normal people money, but don't involve spending money were don't have.
    The Trade Unions will want their pound of flesh for funding the Labour Party, whose finances are worse than the UK's.

    They are going to be bitterly disappointed.
    If they're hoping for large public sector pay rises then, yes, they'll be disappointed, but some reform of trade union law in their favour - seats on the boards of private companies, for example - might be the sort of zero cost to the Treasury policies that would appeal.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    Apple are amazing. My iPad is screwed because I can’t get the sim out and I need a new sim. Seems like a modest problem but it’s actually a killer. Can’t be solved

    So they’ve just given me a brand new replacement iPad. Just like that
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Chief Treasury Secretary takes full responsibility while explaining nothing is their fault. @SophyRidgeSky asks why we are only G7 economy smaller than before pandemic.

    John Glen: If you look at the growth profile [the what now?] we're behind some and ahead of others. 👀~AA https://twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1593274764520554499/video/1
  • LeonLeon Posts: 28,469
    London is BACK


  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,768
    edited November 17
    I read the 30 page FTX Bankruptcy court filing.

    How bad were FTX's internal controls?

    Here are the worst examples

    https://twitter.com/GRDecter/status/1593272102047580161?s=20&t=8acfXfubqDqrwKxYz8x9Iw

    Appears they ran their outfit like some undergrads running a uni salsa dancing society.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,811

    Autumn Statement shows a key difference between the US and the UK

    In the US conservatives won't concede an election two years after they lost it

    In the UK the Cons just conceded an election two years before they will fight it.

    I now expect a Labour working majority after the next election. The next few years will be grim for most and will be blamed on the current Govt by most. I'm not sure Hunt didn't play his cards as well as anyone could have but he was dealt a desperately bad hand.

    The debt interest payments Britain is expecting to have to make over the next few years are pretty grim. The error bars on the forecast have probably triggered a deal of gallows humour in the Treasury.

    Not sure how Labour can balance pinning the blame on the Tories for the mess, with minimising its scale so that they can promise public sector investment. Really think they've got to work out some policies and reforms that will be appealing and won't cost the Exchequer any money. Things like abolishing leasehold that can save normal people money, but don't involve spending money were don't have.
    The Trade Unions will want their pound of flesh for funding the Labour Party, whose finances are worse than the UK's.

    They are going to be bitterly disappointed.
    Labour's funding position is not as bad as commonly supposed - debt is zero (used to be £millions), and the flood of legal cases during the squabbles in 2019+ has largely dried up. Unite has been less helpful than before under current leadership, but in general the unions are taking the view that even a centrist Labour government with no promises is better than an actively hostile Tory Government.

    We did waste money on a leaflet sent to all CLPs attacking Truss, since she resigned before the ink was dry. Bloody Tories, can't keep a leader long enough for us to attack them :).
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    🔨🔨🔨 £25 BILLION raid on employer NICs payments.

    What the Tories used to call the Jobs Tax… https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1593224639026954242/photo/1
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 8,502
    edited November 17
    “energy price guarantee will be extended for 12 months from April. the average household will pay £3,000, Hunt says.”

    Using the same method? At what cost? And how is it paid for? This is where the OBR has been pretty useless as an OBR today - the excuse we can’t possibly know the cost just doesn’t wash, because not knowing at what cost or funding mechanism is exactly what spooked the markets after Kwarsi budget.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 10,468

    Britain is in a grim situation with massive amounts of debt interest payments and the big story from the budget is the expectation that the Chancellor will be forced to forego an expected £5.7bn from increased fuel duty, and presumably borrow more instead.

    The disconnect from reality is unreal.

    It does bring in a very useful 5.7bn. At same time Farage & Friends are right, at what cost to small business.
    Maybe it's the worst possible way to raise nearly £6bn, but then the story is where else that £6bn is going to come from.

    Britain is still right on the edge of the precipice in terms of losing credibility in terms of being able to pay its debts. If the government gives way on £6bn right now then there's not much credibility in terms of resisting pressure on other tax increase and spending cuts.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 28,101
    Excellent content here. Is this the new Circle Line pub crawl? A much more manageable twelve pints as well.

    https://twitter.com/thatguypeters/status/1592840102082121728?s=20&t=2IJxTrY3sU40fkpPV4uCEw
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 48,363

    Autumn Statement shows a key difference between the US and the UK

    In the US conservatives won't concede an election two years after they lost it

    In the UK the Cons just conceded an election two years before they will fight it.

    I now expect a Labour working majority after the next election. The next few years will be grim for most and will be blamed on the current Govt by most. I'm not sure Hunt didn't play his cards as well as anyone could have but he was dealt a desperately bad hand.

    Well, when we went down the opposite path and had giveaways for all to avoid having an economic slowdown, then the markets hated it, and sent borrowing costs skyrocketing.

    Reality intervenes at some point.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    Scott_xP said:

    Paul is right.

    We are set to spend more on the interest on the debt we owe than on any public service bar the NHS.

    We are borrowing money to pay the money owed on the money we have already borrowed.

    https://twitter.com/VValentineNews/status/1593265730836987907
    https://twitter.com/pjtheeconomist/status/1593227042619027456

    That's been the case for ages. The extent is increased, but it's a bit late to be outraged at the principle of borrowing to pay interest on previous borrowing.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,693
    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm. I'd say pretty much what he had to do.

    I'm disappointed that HS2 NE is still deleted, and that the Housing Market is left unreformed.

    A lot of fiscal drag. Good to see some reform of top rate taxes. Hopefully the £100-£125k marginal rate will be next.

    I did not hear anything on defence spending. Aha - I see 2% GDP will be maintained. That may be code for an effective reduction, depending how it is counted.

    I wonder if a typical energy bill will be anywhere near pro-rata £3000 by the time we get to April.

    Brave, but sensible, to go for a revaluation for business rates. A time bomb? Last time it was like stuck pigs squealing to heaven for those not paying wrt their disproportionate property price increases.

    Sensible to raise Min Wage (I think to the highest net in Western Europe), and benefits / basic pensions by inflation rate.

    Local Council finances look to be under threat. I missed whether these would be restricted to +5% on Council Tax this year. Those are also crying out for a re-valuation or reform.

    To me (others will differ) Reeves' speech was a vacuum - about 95% pre-recorded rhetoric.

    Big suspicion is, what good news there is got announced in speech, first impressions matter so they are shaping the first impressions. More controversial things like the Defence Budget cut you flagged, hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly.
    On Topic. And as we were saying “what good news there is got announced in speech, controversial things hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly”

    And so it begins


    This was in the March Budget too (it's a bigger increase now because it's linked to RPI which is higher than previously forecast but it's not a change in policy, it was in there already).
    That will please the Eco Loons though.
    Certainly this one!

    Driving has got much cheaper over the last 20 years, and the number of cars in a city like Edinburgh (with superb public transport) has grown, leading to massive congestion.

    It wouldn't be my solution though, given it shafts people in rural areas. I'd instead do some combination of:

    - VED on axle weight as well as emissions to discourage these huge trucks
    - congestion charges
    - no VAT on pushbikes
    - cancel road infrastructure projects in cities, replace with bike infrastructure

    This would drive down demand for fuel, thereby making it cheaper for people who really do need cars to get around
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 2,693
    Eabhal said:

    Taz said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm. I'd say pretty much what he had to do.

    I'm disappointed that HS2 NE is still deleted, and that the Housing Market is left unreformed.

    A lot of fiscal drag. Good to see some reform of top rate taxes. Hopefully the £100-£125k marginal rate will be next.

    I did not hear anything on defence spending. Aha - I see 2% GDP will be maintained. That may be code for an effective reduction, depending how it is counted.

    I wonder if a typical energy bill will be anywhere near pro-rata £3000 by the time we get to April.

    Brave, but sensible, to go for a revaluation for business rates. A time bomb? Last time it was like stuck pigs squealing to heaven for those not paying wrt their disproportionate property price increases.

    Sensible to raise Min Wage (I think to the highest net in Western Europe), and benefits / basic pensions by inflation rate.

    Local Council finances look to be under threat. I missed whether these would be restricted to +5% on Council Tax this year. Those are also crying out for a re-valuation or reform.

    To me (others will differ) Reeves' speech was a vacuum - about 95% pre-recorded rhetoric.

    Big suspicion is, what good news there is got announced in speech, first impressions matter so they are shaping the first impressions. More controversial things like the Defence Budget cut you flagged, hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly.
    On Topic. And as we were saying “what good news there is got announced in speech, controversial things hidden away in the budget wording, or not even clearly there, it needs someone to ask the right question to have the way forward explained publicly”

    And so it begins


    This was in the March Budget too (it's a bigger increase now because it's linked to RPI which is higher than previously forecast but it's not a change in policy, it was in there already).
    That will please the Eco Loons though.
    Certainly this one!

    Driving has got much cheaper over the last 20 years, and the number of cars in a city like Edinburgh (with superb public transport) has grown, leading to massive congestion.

    It wouldn't be my solution though, given it shafts people in rural areas. I'd instead do some combination of:

    - VED on axle weight as well as emissions to discourage these huge trucks
    - congestion charges
    - no VAT on pushbikes
    - cancel road infrastructure projects in cities, replace with bike infrastructure

    This would drive down demand for fuel, thereby making it cheaper for people who really do need cars to get around
    About 75% of cars in Edinburgh are single occupancy at rush hour.
  • mwadamsmwadams Posts: 2,248
    MikeL said:

    Pat McFadden on BBC2 sounded very much as if Lab will pretty much accept Con economic plans.

    A bit of tinkering at the edges - ie abolish Non-Doms, extend windfall tax, change Private Equity.

    But what is noticeable is there is no suggestion at all of any of the really big changes often talked about on here - eg wealth taxes, extending NI to investment income etc.

    The 1997 playbook. Make it really easy for waverers to vote Labour when the economic policy is basically "acceptable" rather than opposition for opposition's sake.
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 6,926

    “energy price guarantee will be extended for 12 months from April. the average household will pay £3,000, Hunt says.”

    Using the same method? At what cost? And how is it paid for? This is where the OBR has been pretty useless as an OBR today - the excuse we can’t possibly know the cost just doesn’t wash, because not knowing at what cost or funding mechanism is exactly what spooked the markets after Kwarsi budget.

    It's clearly stated on page 47 of OBR release:

    22/23 - Cost = £58.4bn
    23/24 - Cost = £25bn

    https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1118417/CCS1022065440-001_SECURE_HMT_Autumn_Statement_November_2022_Web_accessible__1_.pdf
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 81,229
    edited November 17

    I read the 30 page FTX Bankruptcy court filing.

    How bad were FTX's internal controls?

    Here are the worst examples

    https://twitter.com/GRDecter/status/1593272102047580161?s=20&t=8acfXfubqDqrwKxYz8x9Iw

    Appears they ran their outfit like some undergrads running a uni salsa dancing society.

    Horrifyingly dumb. Some people make a virtue out of their recklessness (this is not the same as being bold)
Sign In or Register to comment.