Categories
Options
Sunak reminds us how and why he lost to Truss – politicalbetting.com
Sunak reminds us how and why he lost to Truss – politicalbetting.com
Possibly the award for the single most awkward silence in any political interview ever? pic.twitter.com/WnXxoNrjhe
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I felt terrible this morning, had a nap and now feeling okay again.
A bit more seriously: are you getting enough proper sleep? Sleep apnea can cause some very odd symptoms.
Totally seriously: I hope you feel better soon CHB.
"Liz Truss Plots COMEBACK"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhSH9tiR1js
The Supreme Court decision requiring gun laws to be bound by the standards of the 18th century continues to have ramifications.
The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday that it is unconstitutional for a state to ban a person under a domestic violence protection order from possessing firearms.
The highly conservative appeals court’s decision is the latest in a string of lower court cases invalidating gun control laws following the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen in 2022.
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/domestic-violence-gun-appeals-court_n_63dc2c49e4b0c2b49ae1d316
Why, why, why, Delilah
So before they come to break down the door
Forgive me Delilah, I just couldn't take anymore"
Our economy bounced back very strongly after Covid, leading to labour shortages. We could have slammed the brakes on with high interest rates, just as things were recovering. And that was certainly an option.
But it would not have been a costless one. We would have swapped inflation for unemployment. Businesses, which had struggled to survive Covid, would have been hit again as cash was taken out of consumers hands via higher interest rates.
And, by the way, your comparator countries didn't achieve low inflation via high interest rates. Switzerland's interest rate only went above 0% in October of 2022. Japan's interest rates remain below zero.
So pretending that these countries had low inflation because of tighter monetary policy than us is either deliberately misleading or grossly ignorant.
She is just seeking to make money on the lecture circuit and start or join a libertarian, slash the state think tank here and in the US
I'm no fan of Sunak, but what an utterly inane comment to make.
Cameron is only posher than Sunak in the sense he went to Eton not Winchester
Rent 1200
To freeholder (service charge) 125
To taxman 355
To bank 520 (excluding repayment of principal)
To landlord 200.
The landlord just had to install a new boiler that cost almost three years worth of those 200 net monthly payments.
Now this landlord perhaps isn't typical as the rent has been set below market rates as the tenants are refugees and the landlord's plan is to more or less break even (in reality make a small loss most likely). But even if the landlord had set a market rent of eg 1500 then the net monthly flows before any repair bills etc would be 375 with almost 500 going to the taxman. This landlord put £140k of equity into the purchase implying a post tax ROE of 3.2% at market rents, assuming zero repair costs, which doesn't seem especially high.
Sunak doesn’t handle it well, though.
He struggles with gravitas.
That’s possibly a good thing, albeit as landlords are exiting the market we are seeing rent spikes which don’t help either.
📈21pt Labour Lead
🌹Lab 47 (+1)
🌳Con 26 (-3)
🔶LD 9 (=)
➡️Reform 6 (+1)
🌍Green 4… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1621543361776689152
It's not fair, deal with it
These are dire ratings, Sunak should have been able to get them into the 30s. At this rate he's going down back towards Truss - truly we are at the end.
Cameron made himself seem slightly more normal via his personal experiences with the NHS. I don’t think he was cynical about this.
Rishi just lives in another world. He is the irritating McKinsey consultant, fresh out of college, who knows shit about shit.
"@Nigel_Farage
ChatGPT is extremely dangerous.
This is liberal, left-wing bias at every level."
https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1621488269602033664
Cameron came in post Labour which seemed to have lost touch, largely due to Iraq etc and the GFC. He was seen as a change to that which had come before. Wealth wasn't much of a consideration in that thinking.
The problem Sunak has is not that he's rich, it's that he's running a Government that is out of touch and failing. That is why people have more time to attack his character.
I suspect if Brown had been mega wealthy in 2007/2008 onwards they'd have done a lot worse in 2010 than they did.
The right wing majority on the court are a bunch of asshats.
Very odd recession, this one.
But I wondered whether OGH's was a discomectomy? Although I believe the post-operation regime is pretty similar in both cases.
You made fun of Gordon Brown's eye.
You supported the Iraq War and then U-turned when public perception went the other way.
It's politics, it's a dirty business - don't pretend your party is somehow virtuous.
Others - SSE, for example - are doing very well out of our pain.
But he chose to make himself look out of touch. Plenty of rich people can fill up a car with petrol, or use a contactless reader.
Keir Starmer might be dull but what he does have is a sense of humanity about him, I have no doubt he pops down to watch some footie on a Saturday afternoon for example.
Sunak is going to find it very difficult to navigate this stuff when he's overseeing so much failure. Personality attacks will simply make him look worse
Cameron came after Howard (something of the night) and IDS (impossible to take seriously), so he looked normal relative to those two.
Whilst Truss had mad ideas of how to fix things and BoJo was BoJo, they make it harder for Sunak not to look like an aloof squilluonaire.
However, I am now not sure that this is true. Sunak's own investments are managed by a blind trust now, which is as it should be, but decisions he has made whilst Prime Mininster have benefitted Moderna heavily, and this is one of the companies that Sunak's fund is reported to have a large stake in. There is no reason for anyone to suppose that the trustees have divested their stake in Moderna since they took over; it would be silly to do so. So it is very difficult to see how to absolve Sunak beyond doubt from using his political position to enrich himself.
This is important, because the knock on effect of any percieved weakness on Sunak's part to attacks of covid profiteering is going to make it far more difficult for his Government to pursue missold PPI or any other covid fraud, because of the potential for blowback.
That would make him exceedingly unusual in his party.
(Disclaimer, I'm pretty sure I had a go at both Brown and Milliband on several occasions.)
I don’t see anything beyond woe is me and many on here would be happy for the basic rate interest relief to be scrapped alongside corporate interest relief because the tax re;life on interest is a market distortion that ideally needs to be removed.
He doesn't think quickly on his feet though. It was an offensive question. Why the 'stinking'? Are all rich people stinkers? Who cares if he is rich? If he can run the country ok he's worth his weight in gold, rich or not.
To be honest the Bullingdon kids - Cameron and Johnson - were much more repulsive, but not because of their wealth. It was the sense of entitlement that rankled.
I think Sunak is different and better in this respect, if in no other. He missed the opportunity to make this point.
Maybe there's an irony here - better PM but a worse campaigner. Anyway he'll be gone one way or other at the next GE. It's anybody's guess how many go down with him. NOM remains a possibility but if he doesn't improve his public performances it could easily be much worse.
His only talent seems to have been giving away free money, where else has he demonstrated any other genuine abilities?
I wanted him because he was not Johnson and not Truss. That's it.
Taken with the arms length nature of his investments, that criticism is a bit thin I think.
The idea that he's out of touch with average plebs like us is a stronger critique.
Property upkeep is always underestimated for one thing, both routine and as caused by the tenant. Risk of non payment of rent = worry and hassle, CGT liability on sale, CGT liability (disgracefully) takes no account of indexation for inflation (like it used to), penalty stamp duty rates, higher mortgage interest rate and arrangement fees (usually), income tax on any profit made, illiquid (you can't sell part of a house).
WTF people do it rather than simply buying a property REIT is beyond me (Or, alternatively, just buy shares in a property developer or two.).
We did after all vote ourselves out of the biggest and most successful free trade association ever.
The argument is that our Bank, despite being responsible for keeping inflation at 2%, operated far too loose a monetary policy for too long after the economy was growing and indeed showing signs of overheating, and then hand-braked turned into an extreme tightening that, accompanied by an energy price shock, is going to contribute to a prolonged recession that will (among other things) reduce the tax take and increase public indebtedness. Do you argue otherwise? Are you against Redwood's argument that the Bank should be held more accountable for its actions?
Stock markets look about 9 months ahead. By the Autumn, real wages will be growing quite strongly.
That’s not the case with most other asset classes.
Then you have all the other aspects of home ownership which are deemed beneficial - security, wealth creation, etc etc.
Having said that, I think penalties against BTL have probably swung very slightly towards being overly punitive.
In terms of the subsequent 10 year partnership agreement with Moderna, that is a higher profile decision with (presumably) a bigger and longer term financial footprint.
The high cost of properties doesn't change.
Bill Clinton was right "it's the economy stupid", and if voters are struggling and they can pin at least some of the blame on politicians they will punish them at the ballot box, irrespective of their background. They will be further punished if their behaviour is such that whilst the voter is struggling to manage his finances his political servant and master is making whoopie with the public purse. PPE contracts and tax-payer funded defence of Boris Johnson's lockdown behaviour spring to mind. That is not the politics of envy, it is the politics of being taken for a ride.
Boris Johnson, a man with patronage, money and opportunity showered upon him through his connections, and for his entire entitled life, managed to sell himself as a hard-working grafter who could get Brexit done, and he defies your argument. The voter did not give one hoot that he was an old Etonian, he promised them a miracle, and they bought it. If they don't like him now it is not because he is an entitled old Etonian, but because he is a duplicitous, lying Charlatan.
The amplified sound of the dry mouth swallow really brings that award home 🫤 (I can’t un-hear that now and I’ve played it back three times just to check)
https://twitter.com/Leanne_hitch/status/1621467609328754688?t=23GL0N69BO221eOdcQk0zA&s=19
Your judgement of best PM is that it’s someone with a devastating majority who could have made huge “progressive” reforms unopposed with that majority (reforms I’m sure you would have loved such as massive wealth distribution) didn’t do much at all because he didn’t want to scare the horses as it would affect his electoral chances in the future, took us into a war in Iraq on false pretences (which I seem to remember you snarking HYUFD about supporting) accepted a huge bung from Bernie Ecclestone just to skim the top of the cesspool, he was the best PM in living memory. OK.
Starmer, assuming he is next PM, will inherit a weak economy and a fractured society much in the same way that Sunak has. Sunak has managed to gain the trust of the markets, whether you like it or not it’s vital, has to contend with a very split rancorous party and is young and inexperienced and “not a good politician” apparently, so tell me what wonderful things Starmer will do to make him a better PM apart from some policies you agree with?
BTW I’m not sure he will be better or worse but you seem to presume he will be better by virtue of him being Labour not Tory makes him better automatically.
Can you really not see a difference?
Japan has many monetary peculiarities, as does China, and Switzerland, and clearly none of them is going to be a textbook 'here's what you should have done' example for 21st century Britain, because none of them are 21st century Britain. However, it is still worth studying what happened and didn't happen there that has enabled them to avoid the worst of the inflation that the UK has suffered.
Firstly it drives up prices beyond fair value for buyers.
Secondly landlords with less resources than you, struggle with making it work and cut corners on maintenance or meeting legal requirements to stay afloat.
We need both higher taxation on multiple homeowners but also much better financial education so people don't buy extra houses because they have excess wealth that they do not understand what else they could do with.
The SC has struck down gun control laws in numerous states.
It would take a supermajority in Congress to change the constitution, and require ratification by the states.
52/48 wouldn't begin to be enough.
It believes the 2010 Equality Act does allow sports to protect the female category, & will issue a statement saying so
https://twitter.com/danroan/status/1621530433102962689
In recent downturns the year after has always been a strong rebound.
The Shares of the parties are very consistent, stable over the last three months, with a small drift down for the Tories. The Labour lead is about 20% - down quite a bit from Truss given highs but largely plateauing at 20%.
Any problems with this psephology of mine so far?
If you are saying there weren’t two polls this week with -3 -4 falls in Labour share, you are a dangerous liar, because it’s factually true. So what exactly is the problem with any poster choosing to flag that polling fact up?
Here’s a smart piece of psephology, those big falls for Labour, quite often regained in next poll by same pollster is actually caused by Labours top of the flag poll support, over about 44 and around 50% being patchy across the country much like green, reform and Libdem also not universal but patchy enclaves, this makes it tricky for pollsters, so Labour flaps about up and down at the very top end rather like Green, Reform and Lib Dem often do in polls too. For Greens or reform to drop from 7 to 4 is almost like 50% collapse, but it’s just their support isn’t all over but localised like I’m suggesting Labours is over a more consistent 44% in general. What happens on Election Day backs up what I’m saying - Labour failing to get 5% swing to take a seat, not so far away they get one on 9% swing.
Admit it Olly - you were sucked by PBs Pantomime Horse hyperbolic assault on me, post after post from him, not actually reading the very consistent and balanced picture what I was actually been posting all thread, all day and all week. Ever since I got here two years ago.
Work really hard , don't sponge off the state and you may one day be the same.