Five hours ago I left my fat wallet at Camden Road station. En route to Richmond to get drunk with a friend by the river
I duly arrived, bereft, and got drunk, and it was all good and fun, but on the way back home just now, I began to tot up all the hassly expensive things I would now have to do, and how much it would all cost
At Camden Road station I discovered someone had handed in my wallet. Everything inside it intact
Thankyou London and Londoners and that lovely person. This one thing has restored my faith in my city, and in humanity. It doesn't take much, but TA
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
I think he's using inflationary as a code for 'this is one area where we can save some money by offering even less. Never mind any other impacts'.
I remember losing my wallet a few years back in Switzerland. Again: everything in it. Two weeks later I got an email from the Swiss police saying "someone found it and handed it in, where can we send it"
I recall thinking, Wow, that's amazingly honest, sadly that would probably never happen in London
Most people are basically nice, honest and kind. All things being equal, that is probably the natural disposition of humanity?
It is a pleasant thought, anyway, even if it is wrong
I think it is true, we are just a bit prone to getting directed into bad habits which bring out our collective nasty side (a bit of nastiness being a useful species survival trait).
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
I think he's using inflationary as a code for 'this is one area where we can save some money by offering even less. Never mind any other impacts'.
Yes of course. But it's bullshit. See my micro examples of "savings" in education FPT.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
And here they are. FPT. I'm not sure it is OFSTED in principle. However. I'd accept no pay rise in exchange for. A funding rise in excess of inflation. So that we can order the things we need, within reason, without having to seek approval, which can take months, that we need. That includes things like chews for kids with pica. They aren't particularly pricey, but there are relatively few suppliers. The Education Authority simply won't bulk buy a thousand. So, we wait months. Meanwhile, we have constant disruption for sake of summat to stick in their mouth. This is a micro example replicated across the SENDMH sector. And. A decent pay rise for TA's. Which takes them at least to the levels of Aldi. And pays them for statutory breaks. That way we may be able to keep the very best, who are absolute angelic diamonds. And the competent. Rather than having to make do with the others who verge on the dangerous. Both of these would make my job so much less stressful.
Dorries really mucked up her available options at a narrative by how she announced - with immediate effect - and by instantly tying her actions to not receiving the reward Boris had promised her. She cannot even pretend there's matters of principal here.
It means she has to seem like she does intend to quit, since immediate is pretty clear, but she's locked in her reasons for delay to a preposterous line about how unfair it is that she has not been given a bauble.
She's not even the worst of options for Peers, but she's somehow made her departure even sillier than Boris'.
Most people are basically nice, honest and kind. All things being equal, that is probably the natural disposition of humanity?
It is a pleasant thought, anyway, even if it is wrong
I think it is true, we are just a bit prone to getting directed into bad habits which bring out our collective nasty side (a bit of nastiness being a useful species survival trait).
I think it could be true, there is evidence either way
What I DO know is that niceness and honesty are reinforcing, and positively reproductive. Infectious, even. Someone anonymous has just done something kind, sweet and honest to me, for the next few days (hopefuly longer!) I will be minded to do the same, to increase the sum of human happiness, as my happiness has just itself been nourished
Most people are basically nice, honest and kind. All things being equal, that is probably the natural disposition of humanity?
It is a pleasant thought, anyway, even if it is wrong
I think it is true, we are just a bit prone to getting directed into bad habits which bring out our collective nasty side (a bit of nastiness being a useful species survival trait).
I think it could be true, there is evidence either way
What I DO know is that niceness and honesty are reinforcing, and positively reproductive. Infectious, even. Someone anonymous has just done something kind, sweet and honest to me, for the next few days (hopefuly longer!) I will be minded to do the same, to increase the sum of human happiness, as my happiness has just itself been nourished
One of the best characterised and deepest stories I've ever read, which is shocking as it is a webcomic which started out purely as parody of fantasy tabletop rpgs (Order of the Stick), had some great plot lines around realistic ways the evil and selfish can indeed grow, and how doing good feels good and can build on itself. Some of the merc sold is around alignment, and the good and evil ones always make me smile a bit.
As it also said, we don't live up to the ideals most of the time, but still trying makes a difference.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
I guess it's the idea that it puts money into circulation? But that's old think. And it's less than the average? But putting money into circulation is absolutely always bad for a certain ideology I guess? I assume that's the thinking.
Most people are basically nice, honest and kind. All things being equal, that is probably the natural disposition of humanity?
It is a pleasant thought, anyway, even if it is wrong
I think it is true, we are just a bit prone to getting directed into bad habits which bring out our collective nasty side (a bit of nastiness being a useful species survival trait).
I think it could be true, there is evidence either way
What I DO know is that niceness and honesty are reinforcing, and positively reproductive. Infectious, even. Someone anonymous has just done something kind, sweet and honest to me, for the next few days (hopefuly longer!) I will be minded to do the same, to increase the sum of human happiness, as my happiness has just itself been nourished
Robert Heinlein, the Sci Fi writer, was a big proponent of the principle of 'paying it forward', an idea he introduced in his book 'Between Planets'. Indeed there is a whole organisation in the US set up in his name that does just that.
Most people are basically nice, honest and kind. All things being equal, that is probably the natural disposition of humanity?
It is a pleasant thought, anyway, even if it is wrong
I think it is true, we are just a bit prone to getting directed into bad habits which bring out our collective nasty side (a bit of nastiness being a useful species survival trait).
I think it could be true, there is evidence either way
What I DO know is that niceness and honesty are reinforcing, and positively reproductive. Infectious, even. Someone anonymous has just done something kind, sweet and honest to me, for the next few days (hopefuly longer!) I will be minded to do the same, to increase the sum of human happiness, as my happiness has just itself been nourished
The lovely guy at Camden Road got real pleasure in restoring my wallet to me. He could see my shock and surprise - and gratitude, and pleasure (replacing everything was going to be a massive hassle and a notable expense). I was obviously happy. He told me he'd tell the person who handed it in how happy and grateful I was, and how she would be happy to hear that
It was like a mini kumbaya of human goodness
How much happiness would a thief have got from simply stealing it, using the contactless cards a few times, trying to sell the nice leather wallet, etc?
I am fairly sure the grand total of human happiness - indeed pleasure - was raised more, and for more people, by the honest kind act than it would be raised by the mean thieving act
On the other hand the happiness would not be so profound if honesty was taken for granted. The return of the wallet would be less of a surprise, simply expected, as in super honest societies like Japan
In summation, I am not sure there is a grand philosophical lesson to be drawn, apart from: why not be nice, if you can, as that is a bet on a positive outcome for us all
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
More money in the system is inflationary.
An increase in the M3 money supply means more money is moving around the economy which is inflationary. The whole point of increasing interest rates is to slow the movement of money around the economy and bring down inflationary pressures by spending less.
Can someone qualified to do so, please request some chatbot to compose a poem in celebration of the deliverance of Leon's wallet, in the style of Percy Bysshe Shelley? As interpreted by Jeremy Corbyn?
For my part, am thankful Leon did NOT lose his wallet, in the dystopian hell that is Marietta, Ohio!
Whenever someone gets up from a seat on a bus or train I always glance at where they were sitting to make sure they haven't left anything because I know how awful it is to realise you've lost something like a wallet.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
If you gave teachers a pay rise and simultaneously paid for it by taking taxes out of someone else's pay cheques, the net result would be neither inflationary nor deflationary, except to the extent that teachers are more or less likely to spend the money than the person you were taking it from.
Just the tax without the pay rise would reduce inflation (less money chasing available stuff), just the pay rise without the tax would increase inflation (more money chasing available stuff). In public spending the two things are kind of mostly considered independently, so the policy of giving teachers a pay rise amounts to the second of those.
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
My name is Leonadamus, PBer of PBers; Look on my Wallet, ye Lowly, and rejoice! Everything inside remains. From the bustle Of Camden Road boundless but for ULEZ The wack happy traveler wanders on beyond
Can someone qualified to do so, please request some chatbot to compose a poem in celebration of the deliverance of Leon's wallet, in the style of Percy Bysshe Shelley? As interpreted by Jeremy Corbyn?
For my part, am thankful Leon did NOT lose his wallet, in the dystopian hell that is Marietta, Ohio!
From ChatGPT4:
Ah, lost amid the bustling throng, upon Camden's vibrant scene, Lay a trove of forgotten bounty, in a wallet, stout and keen. Like Leon, upon life's journey, had strayed off a measured path, In Richmond's arms, he sought solace, in a river's frothy bath.
No scorn for the world he carried, as his heart swam in his brew, For the city's thrumming pulse, its shades of every hue, Yet, in the back of mirth and ale, a daunting shadow grew, Of the task ahead to mend the loss, and start his life anew.
Yet as day gives way to the dark night, as sorrow seeds delight, In London's heart a kindness bloomed, under the moon's soft light. An unseen hand, a stranger's care, held firm what Leon had lost, Proof that kindness still can thrive, regardless of the cost.
Back at Camden Road station, the journey had its end, With every item in its place, every note and every friend. A testament to the spirit, that fuels this ancient city, That in each heart there beats a rhythm, of love and gritty pity.
Oh London, ever churning, ever faithful, ever bright, You've restored one man's belief, in humanity's shared light. To the stranger who bore witness, who acted, without a plea, Your deed has echoed far and wide, a bell of decency.
We toast to thee, oh London, and to the hearts that dwell within, May your lights never dim, may your love never thin. In the style of Percy Shelley, as Corbyn would convey, In the face of common hardship, it's kindness lights the way.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
I think he's using inflationary as a code for 'this is one area where we can save some money by offering even less. Never mind any other impacts'.
Public sector sets pay rise at 15% (not real case but easier to understand the logic)
Private sector employees use that as a benchmark and demand 16% just because. Mean evil capitalists settle at 12%
Assuming that it’s a service business and 70% of their costs are wages then their cost base has just gone up by 8.5%
Mean evil capitalists increase prices by 10% to compensate for the increase in costs
Public sector sees a cost of living crisis and demands a 15% pay rise to prevent them falling behind in real terms.
Rinse and repeat.
It’s called a wage-price inflationary spiral and it absolutely fucks the economy.
(And the point is that a 6.5% wage increase is below current inflation but above *future expected inflation*)
I remember losing my wallet a few years back in Switzerland. Again: everything in it. Two weeks later I got an email from the Swiss police saying "someone found it and handed it in, where can we send it"
I recall thinking, Wow, that's amazingly honest, sadly that would probably never happen in London
I was wrong
TBF in London they would have couriered it and sent you the bill
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Benchmarking in that it sets the basis for private sector pay (either as a comparator or through competition for staff). I know that teachers have special skill but it could be hiring back of former teachers for example
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
"Police tweet using Top Gun gif to celebrate forensics on my dead daughter was horrendous, says mother
In one tweet crime scene investigators congratulate themselves on the speed of their work by using a high-five gif from the film Top Gun. Another tweet celebrates police drone work with the hashtag "crackingbitofkit"."
"Dutch PM Mark Rutte resigns after collapse of coalition government The Dutch prime minister announced his decision to resign after "irreconcilable" differences emerged within his four party coalition over migration policy."
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
I reckon Nadine is waiting for Tory conf season to have her byelection.... so prob announce it in Aug (can she do it if Parliament in recess?), on the other hand is she bright enough for that sort of machination?
F1: just checking stuff and Albon was third in both practice sessions so far. I may have to actually read a race report because that looks a little unexpected. Edited extra bit: no upgrades, just quick.
Dorries really mucked up her available options at a narrative by how she announced - with immediate effect - and by instantly tying her actions to not receiving the reward Boris had promised her. She cannot even pretend there's matters of principal here.
It means she has to seem like she does intend to quit, since immediate is pretty clear, but she's locked in her reasons for delay to a preposterous line about how unfair it is that she has not been given a bauble.
She's not even the worst of options for Peers, but she's somehow made her departure even sillier than Boris'.
She's not going to be the worst option for the HoL when Charlotte Owen is in the competition.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
Good question which I'm not qualified to answer.
In my rough guestimate, the dodgy month for polling is August. Most private schools only broke up yesterday and state schools still have a few more weeks to go. [Edit. @Foxy snap]
Stories about mortgage difficulties are very evident. I know several people affected including my friend's son who has just seen his mortgage go up from £700 to £1400 pcm.
A lot of this country's stability, in a Maslow sense, is built upon a stable mortgage / housing market. When that starts to quake it reaches the foundations.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
Not yet school holidays.
Lots of retired people go away *outside* the school holidays. Cheaper.
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
DPICM has a failure rate of about 5%. This is going to take decades to clean up. Laotian farmers still get their feet blown off on the reg from unexpended bomblets from 70s.
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
DPICM has a failure rate of about 5%. This is going to take decades to clean up. Laotian farmers still get their feet blown off on the reg from unexpended bomblets from 70s.
The Russians have been using them for years. At least Ukraine is using them in its own country.
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
DPICM has a failure rate of about 5%. This is going to take decades to clean up. Laotian farmers still get their feet blown off on the reg from unexpended bomblets from 70s.
The Russians have been using them for years. At least Ukraine is using them in its own country.
Ukraine faces a whole load of difficult choices. It's their land; they don't want the UXO issues in the future. But they also want their land to be, well, their land, and the alternative to that is for it to be in the control of the fascist Russians.
It's a hideous choice. But it's not the fault of the Americans for providing the weapons, or the Ukrainians for using them (on their own territory); it's the fault of the Russians, who both already use such weapons, and are the invaders.
Don't expect DA to acknowledge these hard choices. Russia stronk, and all that.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
If you gave teachers a pay rise and simultaneously paid for it by taking taxes out of someone else's pay cheques, the net result would be neither inflationary nor deflationary, except to the extent that teachers are more or less likely to spend the money than the person you were taking it from.
Just the tax without the pay rise would reduce inflation (less money chasing available stuff), just the pay rise without the tax would increase inflation (more money chasing available stuff). In public spending the two things are kind of mostly considered independently, so the policy of giving teachers a pay rise amounts to the second of those.
It's ridiculous the government isn't raising income tax right now for everyone. It would be the quickest way to reduce aggregate demand and get a hold of inflation. They could even promise to cut it below what it is now once inflation is under control. The trickle of unlucky sods going onto variable rate each month is a far lower number than the entirety of the blimmin tax base. This isn't the early 90s when everyone was on a variable rate
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
You mean the educated and wealthier Labour and LibDem voters might be out of the country and unable to participate in the polling?
The govts popularity is so low they might as well do the right thing fiscally. I suppose at least the net fiscal drag of people getting clobbered who earn around 50k in real terms and again for those at the higher threshold is something but again thats a few unlucky people who may well also have their mortgage rising too
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
effect (sorry)
I think your pedantry is an affectation and you're just doing it for effect. Nonetheless, corrections can affect others behaviour and effect change, so it not an affectation to say that it could be effective.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
Not yet school holidays.
Plus, can someone show me the 'summer effect' in the previous years covered by this chart?
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
You mean the educated and wealthier Labour and LibDem voters might be out of the country and unable to participate in the polling?
The affluent retired who vote Conservative might be.
I don’t think that on its own accounts for the effect, mind.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
If you gave teachers a pay rise and simultaneously paid for it by taking taxes out of someone else's pay cheques, the net result would be neither inflationary nor deflationary, except to the extent that teachers are more or less likely to spend the money than the person you were taking it from.
Just the tax without the pay rise would reduce inflation (less money chasing available stuff), just the pay rise without the tax would increase inflation (more money chasing available stuff). In public spending the two things are kind of mostly considered independently, so the policy of giving teachers a pay rise amounts to the second of those.
It's ridiculous the government isn't raising income tax right now for everyone. It would be the quickest way to reduce aggregate demand and get a hold of inflation. They could even promise to cut it below what it is now once inflation is under control. The trickle of unlucky sods going onto variable rate each month is a far lower number than the entirety of the blimmin tax base. This isn't the early 90s when everyone was on a variable rate
Yes, to pretend that interest rates are the only tool to control inflation is just absurd. Both tax and spend affect it.
Public Sector net borrowing in May was £20 billion, the second highest May figure on record. That money being pumped into the country is inflationary.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Teachers buy things, too. Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general. The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
You mean the educated and wealthier Labour and LibDem voters might be out of the country and unable to participate in the polling?
The affluent retired who vote Conservative might be.
I don’t think that on its own accounts for the effect, mind.
Competent weighting should sort that - fewer wealthy retired cons in your sample, you upweight. Now, it's possible that they differ in unmeasured ways, e.g. the gammons hate foreigners so much they stay in blighty
Completely O/T has anyone on here tried the Zoe nutrition tests and membership programme, established by Prof Tim Spector? https://joinzoe.com
I find the podcasts informative. I believe the programme is based on 'proper science' rather than pseudo-science. It's quite expensive though.
(I'm increasingly feeling my gut-health is not what it could be as I get older, hence considering this programme. Apols if it's too early in the morning for this topic!)
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
You mean the educated and wealthier Labour and LibDem voters might be out of the country and unable to participate in the polling?
The affluent retired who vote Conservative might be.
I don’t think that on its own accounts for the effect, mind.
Competent weighting should sort that - fewer wealthy retired cons in your sample, you upweight. Now, it's possible that they differ in unmeasured ways, e.g. the gammons hate foreigners so much they stay in blighty
If that’s so then the polls might be exaggerating Tory support
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
More money in the system is inflationary.
An increase in the M3 money supply means more money is moving around the economy which is inflationary. The whole point of increasing interest rates is to slow the movement of money around the economy and bring down inflationary pressures by spending less.
Tends to be inflationary. If the amount if goods and services in the economy is increasing at a faster rate, then it's not.
Our problem is our low rate of growth, and the inability of government to form useful policies to encourage it. (Liz Truss's tax cuts were an extremely inefficient way of trying that - and of course involved more borrowing.)
The decade long distraction of Brexit hasn't been of much help.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
If you gave teachers a pay rise and simultaneously paid for it by taking taxes out of someone else's pay cheques, the net result would be neither inflationary nor deflationary, except to the extent that teachers are more or less likely to spend the money than the person you were taking it from.
Just the tax without the pay rise would reduce inflation (less money chasing available stuff), just the pay rise without the tax would increase inflation (more money chasing available stuff). In public spending the two things are kind of mostly considered independently, so the policy of giving teachers a pay rise amounts to the second of those.
It's ridiculous the government isn't raising income tax right now for everyone. It would be the quickest way to reduce aggregate demand and get a hold of inflation. They could even promise to cut it below what it is now once inflation is under control. The trickle of unlucky sods going onto variable rate each month is a far lower number than the entirety of the blimmin tax base. This isn't the early 90s when everyone was on a variable rate
Yes, to pretend that interest rates are the only tool to control inflation is just absurd. Both tax and spend affect it.
Public Sector net borrowing in May was £20 billion, the second highest May figure on record. That money being pumped into the country is inflationary.
I'd combine it with my other idea to help those who most need it during these tough times, negative vat on staples.
Completely O/T has anyone on here tried the Zoe nutrition tests and membership programme, established by Prof Tim Spector? https://joinzoe.com
I find the podcasts informative. I believe the programme is based on 'proper science' rather than pseudo-science. It's quite expensive though.
(I'm increasingly feeling my gut-health is not what it could be as I get older, hence considering this programme. Apols if it's too early in the morning for this topic!)
Let us know if it proves worthwhile. It does look expensive - but if it produces significant results for you then not ridiculously so. I'm a bit sceptical, FWIW - though I don't think it's a con.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Teachers buy things, too. Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general. The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
That doesn't mean I'm but in favour of a decent settlement fund teachers, btw. And definitely fully funded.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
Not yet school holidays.
Plus, can someone show me the 'summer effect' in the previous years covered by this chart?
Or 2010-15, the last time things didn't get crazy;
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
The key point. ...Ukraine's hardest limit is probably not manpower, or equipment, but artillery ammunition. This is foremost about the numbers. Providing DPICM gives access to a sizable stockpile of artillery ammo that can alleviate the time pressure on UA operations...
It's a bit of a devils bargain - but if they don't drive the Russians out, they'll continue to seed the land with mines and explosives anyway.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
If you gave teachers a pay rise and simultaneously paid for it by taking taxes out of someone else's pay cheques, the net result would be neither inflationary nor deflationary, except to the extent that teachers are more or less likely to spend the money than the person you were taking it from.
Just the tax without the pay rise would reduce inflation (less money chasing available stuff), just the pay rise without the tax would increase inflation (more money chasing available stuff). In public spending the two things are kind of mostly considered independently, so the policy of giving teachers a pay rise amounts to the second of those.
It's ridiculous the government isn't raising income tax right now for everyone. It would be the quickest way to reduce aggregate demand and get a hold of inflation. They could even promise to cut it below what it is now once inflation is under control. The trickle of unlucky sods going onto variable rate each month is a far lower number than the entirety of the blimmin tax base. This isn't the early 90s when everyone was on a variable rate
Yes, to pretend that interest rates are the only tool to control inflation is just absurd. Both tax and spend affect it.
Public Sector net borrowing in May was £20 billion, the second highest May figure on record. That money being pumped into the country is inflationary.
However, visible tax rises are verboten and invisible ones, like threshold freezes, only bring in so much.
Similarly, a lot of the austerity of the last fifteen years has been done by invisible cuts- letting things decay, forcing cuts at second hand in local government, that sort of thing. That process has gone almost as far as it can- we're left with things like the government requiring the closure of train ticket offices now. Everything is just mediocre and probably more expensive than doing it properly in the first place.
So the choice for this and the next government is pretty simple. Increase taxes or withdraw from some aspect of the public sector. And the second of those either means that something stops happening or people pay for it another way. Oh, and we're rapidly running out of bits of country (companies or hydrocarbons) we can sell off to keep ourselves in the lifestyle we're accustomed to.
I'm not sure if it's just a senior moment but Biden answered as question from the press corps about why cluster bombs are now being sent to Ukraine by saying, "They've run out of ammunition."
The key point. ...Ukraine's hardest limit is probably not manpower, or equipment, but artillery ammunition. This is foremost about the numbers. Providing DPICM gives access to a sizable stockpile of artillery ammo that can alleviate the time pressure on UA operations...
It's a bit of a devils bargain - but if they don't drive the Russians out, they'll continue to seed the land with mines and explosives anyway.
This seems to me to skirt the moral issues. It's like a thread enumerating the advantages to Pogačar of paying someone to break Vingegaard's legs. It definitely helps, but...
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Teachers buy things, too. Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general. The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
That doesn't mean I'm but in favour of a decent settlement fund teachers, btw. And definitely fully funded.
The government's choice is either spend more money or have fewer teachers. Stuff costs what it costs.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
Good question which I'm not qualified to answer.
In my rough guestimate, the dodgy month for polling is August. Most private schools only broke up yesterday and state schools still have a few more weeks to go. [Edit. @Foxy snap]
Stories about mortgage difficulties are very evident. I know several people affected including my friend's son who has just seen his mortgage go up from £700 to £1400 pcm.
A lot of this country's stability, in a Maslow sense, is built upon a stable mortgage / housing market. When that starts to quake it reaches the foundations.
Scotland - state schoos have skailed.* But that is unlikely to affect the stats at the subsample level, unless one does a proper survey.
"Dutch PM Mark Rutte resigns after collapse of coalition government The Dutch prime minister announced his decision to resign after "irreconcilable" differences emerged within his four party coalition over migration policy."
Yes, I noticed that as well. PB has blind spots: there have been whole elections that we didn't really cover, and things which would have consumed our interest in the EU days now pass us by unremarked.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Teachers buy things, too. Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general. The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
That doesn't mean I'm but in favour of a decent settlement fund teachers, btw. And definitely fully funded.
The government's choice is either spend more money or have fewer teachers. Stuff costs what it costs.
To use the language of the times, I think a lot in the public sector are "quiet quitting".
I notice that far more clinics in our outpatients finish by 1230, while previously they were still crowded at that time. A lot of my colleagues don't overbook urgent cases anymore, as was near universal a decade ago. It probably was just hiding capacity gaps in the past.
Ms. Heathener, while those are terrible numbers aren't they also par for the course at this point? A bit "Titanic still sinking"?
Hi MD. In as objective and empirical terms as possible, what is notable is a widening of the gap in recent weeks.
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
Is there still a summer affect in the polls?
effect (sorry)
I think your pedantry is an affectation and you're just doing it for effect. Nonetheless, corrections can affect others behaviour and effect change, so it not an affectation to say that it could be effective.
(I really hope I got all that right!)
ETA: dammit, missed the apostrophe on others'
Er... you could have simply edited in the apostrophe without affecting your original intended effect; your confession creates the effect of an affectation. ;-)
@Benpointer I am currently on the Zoe programme. I am finding it very useful. The tests showed my blood sugar control was poor and my blood fat control worse. This was subsequently backed up with some blood tests I had which showed elevated cholesterol; so that reassured me further about the Zoe programme.
It provides individualised scores on food to your biology. I find it useful and the lessons and support is decent. I am still struggling to manage my blood fats and understand why some meals work and don't work (although you can chat to support teams). But I have felt better on the scheme and lost some weight too.
It seems the most individualised system I've seen. Support can be a little slow at times, but they do score foods not in their system if you ask. Overall I am enjoying it and think gut science is increasingly key.
One thing they need to improve going forwards (which they are testing) is a follow up testing plan so users can assess progress over time.
"Dutch PM Mark Rutte resigns after collapse of coalition government The Dutch prime minister announced his decision to resign after "irreconcilable" differences emerged within his four party coalition over migration policy."
Yes, I noticed that as well. PB has blind spots: there have been whole elections that we didn't really cover, and things which would have consumed our interest in the EU days now pass us by unremarked.
The Dutch situation was briefly discussed on pb iirc. One problem is there are so many pb messages these days that no-one has time to read all of them, and so some developments get lost.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Teachers buy things, too. Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general. The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
That doesn't mean I'm but in favour of a decent settlement fund teachers, btw. And definitely fully funded.
The government's choice is either spend more money or have fewer teachers. Stuff costs what it costs.
Quite. And note the likely pay review body recommendation - 6.5% - is likely to be rejected by government, despite being below inflation. Teachers have says they'll accept it, IF fully funded.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Teachers buy things, too. Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general. The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
That doesn't mean I'm but in favour of a decent settlement fund teachers, btw. And definitely fully funded.
The government's choice is either spend more money or have fewer teachers. Stuff costs what it costs.
To use the language of the times, I think a lot in the public sector are "quiet quitting".
I notice that far more clinics in our outpatients finish by 1230, while previously they were still crowded at that time. A lot of my colleagues don't overbook urgent cases anymore, as was near universal a decade ago. It probably was just hiding capacity gaps in the past.
Beyond a certain point, Aaron Bell's question, Does the Prime Minister think I'm a fool? becomes inescapable.
And whilst there's nothing fundamentally wrong with Rishi being a squillionaire, or having a squillionaire as Prime Minister, there is a problem with him telling other people they can't have an inflation-matching pay rise from his government.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
PART 1
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
PART 1
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
But here's the problem... 1/n
PART 2
In the 70's and 80's the UK economy, despite the inheritance of the British Empire, was still a closed economy compared to now. In the intervening years credit has become far more available and we have become far more open and we import far more: this is globalisation. In our present moment inflation is driven by a global rise in costs: Ukraine used to be the European breadbasket, China produced cheap chips, the US finds it increasingly difficult to maintain a global order, and so on. Inflation is no longer caused by an increase in money supply, it's caused by - drum roll - goods becoming rarer.
So combatting inflation by restricting teacher's pay just doesn't work any more. And the Conservative Party just doesn't realise it... 2/n
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
PART 1
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
But here's the problem... 1/n
PART 2
In the 70's and 80's the UK economy, despite the inheritance of the British Empire, was still a closed economy compared to now. In the intervening years credit has become far more available and we have become far more open and we import far more: this is globalisation. In our present moment inflation is driven by a global rise in costs: Ukraine used to be the European breadbasket, China produced cheap chips, the US finds it increasingly difficult to maintain a global order, and so on. Inflation is no longer caused by an increase in money supply, it's caused by - drum roll - goods becoming rarer.
So combatting inflation by restricting teacher's pay just doesn't work any more. And the Conservative Party just doesn't realise it... 2/n
PART 3
The Conservative Party no longer knows how to run an economy. Truss tried full-fat Thatcherism and it blew up on the pad. All the party theoreticians spent decades talking about the EU and now focus on cultural issues. They don't have a theory. Lacking a theory they fall back on fossil ideas in their lizard brain: clamp down on the unions, talk hard. But these techniques don't work in the 2020's. So they're flailing.
The reason why Con need to take time out and a time in opposition is not just because I want them to, it's so that they can rebuild ideas. All their theoreticians are fighting culture war, but these are luxury values in deglobalisation. They need to work out how to run an economy (or more likely, observe what works with others) so that they know what to do.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
PART 1
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
But here's the problem... 1/n
PART 2
In the 70's and 80's the UK economy, despite the inheritance of the British Empire, was still a closed economy compared to now. In the intervening years credit has become far more available and we have become far more open and we import far more: this is globalisation. In our present moment inflation is driven by a global rise in costs: Ukraine used to be the European breadbasket, China produced cheap chips, the US finds it increasingly difficult to maintain a global order, and so on. Inflation is no longer caused by an increase in money supply, it's caused by - drum roll - goods becoming rarer.
So combatting inflation by restricting teacher's pay just doesn't work any more. And the Conservative Party just doesn't realise it... 2/n
Two excellent posts. Sorry three!
Post 2 suggests that the BoE are p*ssing up a rope by increasing mortgage rates to reduce spending capacity to reduce demand and hence the money supply to combat inflation.
It's forty years since I studied economics and I am a bit rusty, but generating a recession in the short term to reduce inflation when growth and productivity would resolve the issue in the medium term seems counter-intuitive.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
PART 1
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
But here's the problem... 1/n
PART 2
In the 70's and 80's the UK economy, despite the inheritance of the British Empire, was still a closed economy compared to now. In the intervening years credit has become far more available and we have become far more open and we import far more: this is globalisation. In our present moment inflation is driven by a global rise in costs: Ukraine used to be the European breadbasket, China produced cheap chips, the US finds it increasingly difficult to maintain a global order, and so on. Inflation is no longer caused by an increase in money supply, it's caused by - drum roll - goods becoming rarer.
So combatting inflation by restricting teacher's pay just doesn't work any more. And the Conservative Party just doesn't realise it... 2/n
Two excellent posts.
Post 2 suggests that the BoE are p*ssing up a rope by increasing mortgage rates to reduce spending capacity to reduce demand and hence the money supply, to combat inflation.
It's forty years since I studied economics and I am a bit rusty, but generating a recession in the short term to reduce inflation when growth and productivity would resolve the issue in the medium term seems counter-intuitive.
Increasing interest rates to reduce demand is silly but there is another problem, which is the exchange rate. The Bank of England does need to keep interest rates more-or-less in line with America in order to shore up the exchange rate. A lower rate means exports become cheaper and imports more expensive, and right now it is imports that are the problem.
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
PART 1
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
But here's the problem... 1/n
PART 2
In the 70's and 80's the UK economy, despite the inheritance of the British Empire, was still a closed economy compared to now. In the intervening years credit has become far more available and we have become far more open and we import far more: this is globalisation. In our present moment inflation is driven by a global rise in costs: Ukraine used to be the European breadbasket, China produced cheap chips, the US finds it increasingly difficult to maintain a global order, and so on. Inflation is no longer caused by an increase in money supply, it's caused by - drum roll - goods becoming rarer.
So combatting inflation by restricting teacher's pay just doesn't work any more. And the Conservative Party just doesn't realise it... 2/n
PART 3
The Conservative Party no longer knows how to run an economy. Truss tried full-fat Thatcherism and it blew up on the pad. All the party theoreticians spent decades talking about the EU and now focus on cultural issues. They don't have a theory. Lacking a theory they fall back on fossil ideas in their lizard brain: clamp down on the unions, talk hard. But these techniques don't work in the 2020's. So they're flailing.
The reason why Con need to take time out and a time in opposition is not just because I want them to, it's so that they can rebuild ideas. All their theoreticians are fighting culture war, but these are luxury values in deglobalisation. They need to work out how to run an economy (or more likely, observe what works with others) so that they know what to do.
Because right now, they just don't...3/n
PART 4: COMMENTARY
We are all working off ideas formed during the period known as "neoliberalism" (1979?-2019?). The world that existed during that period was increasingly globalised, a global market driving growth thru cheap goods, underpinned by a US enforcing the world order. But that world is on the downslope: US focussing on Pacific, Ukrainan wheat has gone, China isn't nice. In this dying world our ideas no longer work and politicians are flailing, retreating to populism or old ideas. We notice it because of Brexit, but it's a global thing.
Until things stabilize and politicians work out ideas that work, we will have this problem...4/n
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
Teachers buy things, too. Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general. The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
That doesn't mean I'm but in favour of a decent settlement fund teachers, btw. And definitely fully funded.
The government's choice is either spend more money or have fewer teachers. Stuff costs what it costs.
To use the language of the times, I think a lot in the public sector are "quiet quitting".
I notice that far more clinics in our outpatients finish by 1230, while previously they were still crowded at that time. A lot of my colleagues don't overbook urgent cases anymore, as was near universal a decade ago. It probably was just hiding capacity gaps in the past.
Beyond a certain point, Aaron Bell's question, Does the Prime Minister think I'm a fool? becomes inescapable.
And whilst there's nothing fundamentally wrong with Rishi being a squillionaire, or having a squillionaire as Prime Minister, there is a problem with him telling other people they can't have an inflation-matching pay rise from his government.
Having a squillionire as PM is a symptom that there's something fundamentally wrong.
Hint: also, erm, this non-dom stuff not a million miles away ...
According to ITV News Gillian Keegan wants to accept the independent pay review's 6.5% increase recommendation for teacher's pay. Rishi Rich currently believes it to be inflationary and is minded to reject the findings.
How can a pay increase below the rate of inflation be "inflationary"? Surely that is deflationary?
A more fundamental question - and one that may show my ignorance so apologies in advance and thanks to anyone for putting me right
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
PART 1
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
But here's the problem... 1/n
PART 2
In the 70's and 80's the UK economy, despite the inheritance of the British Empire, was still a closed economy compared to now. In the intervening years credit has become far more available and we have become far more open and we import far more: this is globalisation. In our present moment inflation is driven by a global rise in costs: Ukraine used to be the European breadbasket, China produced cheap chips, the US finds it increasingly difficult to maintain a global order, and so on. Inflation is no longer caused by an increase in money supply, it's caused by - drum roll - goods becoming rarer.
So combatting inflation by restricting teacher's pay just doesn't work any more. And the Conservative Party just doesn't realise it... 2/n
Two excellent posts.
Post 2 suggests that the BoE are p*ssing up a rope by increasing mortgage rates to reduce spending capacity to reduce demand and hence the money supply, to combat inflation.
It's forty years since I studied economics and I am a bit rusty, but generating a recession in the short term to reduce inflation when growth and productivity would resolve the issue in the medium term seems counter-intuitive.
Increasing interest rates to reduce demand is silly but there is another problem, which is the exchange rate. The Bank of England does need to keep interest rates more-or-less in line with America in order to shore up the exchange rate. A lower rate means exports become cheaper and imports more expensive, and right now it is imports that are the problem.
We also have the added bonus nugget of increasing gilt yields if we do nothing to bluntly combat inflation.
Comments
Otherwise 'second-ish' depending how long it took me to type this.
I duly arrived, bereft, and got drunk, and it was all good and fun, but on the way back home just now, I began to tot up all the hassly expensive things I would now have to do, and how much it would all cost
At Camden Road station I discovered someone had handed in my wallet. Everything inside it intact
Thankyou London and Londoners and that lovely person. This one thing has restored my faith in my city, and in humanity. It doesn't take much, but TA
It is a pleasant thought, anyway, even if it is wrong
I recall thinking, Wow, that's amazingly honest, sadly that would probably never happen in London
I was wrong
But it's bullshit.
See my micro examples of "savings" in education FPT.
How can any pay rise to teachers in the public sector be inflationary?
As I understand it inflation is measured against the costs of things that we, as the public, buy. Different forms of inflation inlcude different things but in the end they are all about stuff we directly pay for.
But we do not buy state education - we pay for it out of our taxes. Yes ultimately we are paying for it but it is not something that is measured by any of the normal inflation criteria that I am aware of. At worst (and it is of course bad) pay rises for teachers means more Government spending leading to more debt, higher taxes or cuts elsewhere. But it does not mean that the price of anything we are directly paying for goes up.
So how is a public sector pay increase inflationary?
I'm not sure it is OFSTED in principle.
However. I'd accept no pay rise in exchange for.
A funding rise in excess of inflation. So that we can order the things we need, within reason, without having to seek approval, which can take months, that we need. That includes things like chews for kids with pica. They aren't particularly pricey, but there are relatively few suppliers. The Education Authority simply won't bulk buy a thousand. So, we wait months. Meanwhile, we have constant disruption for sake of summat to stick in their mouth.
This is a micro example replicated across the SENDMH sector.
And. A decent pay rise for TA's. Which takes them at least to the levels of Aldi. And pays them for statutory breaks.
That way we may be able to keep the very best, who are absolute angelic diamonds.
And the competent.
Rather than having to make do with the others who verge on the dangerous.
Both of these would make my job so much less stressful.
It means she has to seem like she does intend to quit, since immediate is pretty clear, but she's locked in her reasons for delay to a preposterous line about how unfair it is that she has not been given a bauble.
She's not even the worst of options for Peers, but she's somehow made her departure even sillier than Boris'.
What I DO know is that niceness and honesty are reinforcing, and positively reproductive. Infectious, even. Someone anonymous has just done something kind, sweet and honest to me, for the next few days (hopefuly longer!) I will be minded to do the same, to increase the sum of human happiness, as my happiness has just itself been nourished
As it also said, we don't live up to the ideals most of the time, but still trying makes a difference.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xqn4pYyJz40
And it's less than the average?
But putting money into circulation is absolutely always bad for a certain ideology I guess?
I assume that's the thinking.
It was like a mini kumbaya of human goodness
How much happiness would a thief have got from simply stealing it, using the contactless cards a few times, trying to sell the nice leather wallet, etc?
I am fairly sure the grand total of human happiness - indeed pleasure - was raised more, and for more people, by the honest kind act than it would be raised by the mean thieving act
On the other hand the happiness would not be so profound if honesty was taken for granted. The return of the wallet would be less of a surprise, simply expected, as in super honest societies like Japan
In summation, I am not sure there is a grand philosophical lesson to be drawn, apart from: why not be nice, if you can, as that is a bet on a positive outcome for us all
An increase in the M3 money supply means more money is moving around the economy which is inflationary. The whole point of increasing interest rates is to slow the movement of money around the economy and bring down inflationary pressures by spending less.
For my part, am thankful Leon did NOT lose his wallet, in the dystopian hell that is Marietta, Ohio!
Just the tax without the pay rise would reduce inflation (less money chasing available stuff), just the pay rise without the tax would increase inflation (more money chasing available stuff). In public spending the two things are kind of mostly considered independently, so the policy of giving teachers a pay rise amounts to the second of those.
https://twitter.com/KofmanMichael/status/1677435161514737665
Look on my Wallet, ye Lowly, and rejoice!
Everything inside remains. From the bustle
Of Camden Road boundless but for ULEZ
The wack happy traveler wanders on beyond
Ah, lost amid the bustling throng, upon Camden's vibrant scene,
Lay a trove of forgotten bounty, in a wallet, stout and keen.
Like Leon, upon life's journey, had strayed off a measured path,
In Richmond's arms, he sought solace, in a river's frothy bath.
No scorn for the world he carried, as his heart swam in his brew,
For the city's thrumming pulse, its shades of every hue,
Yet, in the back of mirth and ale, a daunting shadow grew,
Of the task ahead to mend the loss, and start his life anew.
Yet as day gives way to the dark night, as sorrow seeds delight,
In London's heart a kindness bloomed, under the moon's soft light.
An unseen hand, a stranger's care, held firm what Leon had lost,
Proof that kindness still can thrive, regardless of the cost.
Back at Camden Road station, the journey had its end,
With every item in its place, every note and every friend.
A testament to the spirit, that fuels this ancient city,
That in each heart there beats a rhythm, of love and gritty pity.
Oh London, ever churning, ever faithful, ever bright,
You've restored one man's belief, in humanity's shared light.
To the stranger who bore witness, who acted, without a plea,
Your deed has echoed far and wide, a bell of decency.
We toast to thee, oh London, and to the hearts that dwell within,
May your lights never dim, may your love never thin.
In the style of Percy Shelley, as Corbyn would convey,
In the face of common hardship, it's kindness lights the way.
Private sector employees use that as a benchmark and demand 16% just because. Mean evil capitalists settle at 12%
Assuming that it’s a service business and 70% of their costs are wages then their cost base has just gone up by 8.5%
Mean evil capitalists increase prices by 10% to compensate for the increase in costs
Public sector sees a cost of living crisis and demands a 15% pay rise to prevent them falling behind in real terms.
Rinse and repeat.
It’s called a wage-price inflationary spiral and it absolutely fucks the economy.
(And the point is that a 6.5% wage increase is below current inflation but above *future expected inflation*)
In one tweet crime scene investigators congratulate themselves on the speed of their work by using a high-five gif from the film Top Gun. Another tweet celebrates police drone work with the hashtag "crackingbitofkit"."
https://news.sky.com/story/police-tweet-using-top-gun-gif-to-celebrate-forensics-on-my-dead-daughter-was-horrendous-says-mother-12916726
https://news.sky.com/story/dutch-pm-mark-rutte-resigns-after-collapse-of-coalition-government-12917179
"Dutch PM Mark Rutte resigns after collapse of coalition government
The Dutch prime minister announced his decision to resign after "irreconcilable" differences emerged within his four party coalition over migration policy."
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1677435161514737665.html
Mr. kle4, Order of the Stick sounds pretty interesting.
I think the only webcomic I read was 8-Bit Theater. That was pretty fantastic, from fuzzy memory.
Labour leads of 23%, 21%, 25%, and 26% respectively.
I reckon the housing market / mortgage situation is starting to have an impact, on top of the rest.
Par for the course at this point if you are heading for electoral disaster, maybe.
I blame MoonRabbitdamus for the latest dip:
I'm concerned that those betting on the outcome of the General Election, which is now either 10 months or 15 months away should be as factually based as possible. For reasons previously stated, I think we make a mistake in using GE2019 as a benchmark for swing. December GE2019 was a unique 'Get Brexit Done' election against an unelectable anti-semitic trotskyite. The real GE benchmark, I have argued, is the June 2017 one, which was a hung parliament.
p.s. Saw loads of Morris Dancers in Teignmouth a couple of Saturdays back. Many wearing dark outfits which was new to me.
And yes, you're right that's a clear widening of the gap just recently.
Edited extra bit: https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2023/07/uk-pre-qualifying-2023.html
In my rough guestimate, the dodgy month for polling is August. Most private schools only broke up yesterday and state schools still have a few more weeks to go. [Edit. @Foxy snap]
Stories about mortgage difficulties are very evident. I know several people affected including my friend's son who has just seen his mortgage go up from £700 to £1400 pcm.
A lot of this country's stability, in a Maslow sense, is built upon a stable mortgage / housing market. When that starts to quake it reaches the foundations.
It's a hideous choice. But it's not the fault of the Americans for providing the weapons, or the Ukrainians for using them (on their own territory); it's the fault of the Russians, who both already use such weapons, and are the invaders.
Don't expect DA to acknowledge these hard choices. Russia stronk, and all that.
(I really hope I got all that right!)
ETA: dammit, missed the apostrophe on others'
I don’t think that on its own accounts for the effect, mind.
Public Sector net borrowing in May was £20 billion, the second highest May figure on record. That money being pumped into the country is inflationary.
Also, if government is borrowing to pay public sector suffers, it is increasing the money supply in general.
The increase in pay isn't, as you note, linked to any increase in goods or services.
The overall effect is small - but one public sector pay deal influences others.
Above inflation pay rises across the economy are the definition of wage inflation, if pay is increasing faster than the increase in gods and services. More money chasing the same amount of stuff pushes prices up.
I find the podcasts informative. I believe the programme is based on 'proper science' rather than pseudo-science. It's quite expensive though.
(I'm increasingly feeling my gut-health is not what it could be as I get older, hence considering this programme. Apols if it's too early in the morning for this topic!)
If the amount if goods and services in the economy is increasing at a faster rate, then it's not.
Our problem is our low rate of growth, and the inability of government to form useful policies to encourage it.
(Liz Truss's tax cuts were an extremely inefficient way of trying that - and of course involved more borrowing.)
The decade long distraction of Brexit hasn't been of much help.
It does look expensive - but if it produces significant results for you then not ridiculously so.
I'm a bit sceptical, FWIW - though I don't think it's a con.
And definitely fully funded.
...Ukraine's hardest limit is probably not manpower, or equipment, but artillery ammunition. This is foremost about the numbers. Providing DPICM gives access to a sizable stockpile of artillery ammo that can alleviate the time pressure on UA operations...
It's a bit of a devils bargain - but if they don't drive the Russians out, they'll continue to seed the land with mines and explosives anyway.
The devil's bargain was forced on them by the devil's minion in the Kremlin.
Similarly, a lot of the austerity of the last fifteen years has been done by invisible cuts- letting things decay, forcing cuts at second hand in local government, that sort of thing. That process has gone almost as far as it can- we're left with things like the government requiring the closure of train ticket offices now. Everything is just mediocre and probably more expensive than doing it properly in the first place.
So the choice for this and the next government is pretty simple. Increase taxes or withdraw from some aspect of the public sector. And the second of those either means that something stops happening or people pay for it another way. Oh, and we're rapidly running out of bits of country (companies or hydrocarbons) we can sell off to keep ourselves in the lifestyle we're accustomed to.
*Emptied in a chaotic manner.
I notice that far more clinics in our outpatients finish by 1230, while previously they were still crowded at that time. A lot of my colleagues don't overbook urgent cases anymore, as was near universal a decade ago. It probably was just hiding capacity gaps in the past.
It provides individualised scores on food to your biology. I find it useful and the lessons and support is decent. I am still struggling to manage my blood fats and understand why some meals work and don't work (although you can chat to support teams). But I have felt better on the scheme and lost some weight too.
It seems the most individualised system I've seen. Support can be a little slow at times, but they do score foods not in their system if you ask. Overall I am enjoying it and think gut science is increasingly key.
One thing they need to improve going forwards (which they are testing) is a follow up testing plan so users can assess progress over time.
Hope that helps.
And note the likely pay review body recommendation - 6.5% - is likely to be rejected by government, despite being below inflation.
Teachers have says they'll accept it, IF fully funded.
The government is simply wrong on this.
And whilst there's nothing fundamentally wrong with Rishi being a squillionaire, or having a squillionaire as Prime Minister, there is a problem with him telling other people they can't have an inflation-matching pay rise from his government.
It's a hangover from previous times. Many of the ideas in people's heads about how to run an economy (what causes inflation, how to prevent unemployment, etc) were built in the 70's and 80s. The theory goes that inflation is driven by the "money supply" - the amount of money in the economy. The theory says that the amount of goods and services in an economy changes slowly, so if the amount of money in the economy goes up quickly, inflation inevitably grows. By restricting teacher's pay, he hopes to discourage others and prevent money supply from growing and hence kill inflation
But here's the problem... 1/n
In the 70's and 80's the UK economy, despite the inheritance of the British Empire, was still a closed economy compared to now. In the intervening years credit has become far more available and we have become far more open and we import far more: this is globalisation. In our present moment inflation is driven by a global rise in costs: Ukraine used to be the European breadbasket, China produced cheap chips, the US finds it increasingly difficult to maintain a global order, and so on. Inflation is no longer caused by an increase in money supply, it's caused by - drum roll - goods becoming rarer.
So combatting inflation by restricting teacher's pay just doesn't work any more. And the Conservative Party just doesn't realise it... 2/n
The Conservative Party no longer knows how to run an economy. Truss tried full-fat Thatcherism and it blew up on the pad. All the party theoreticians spent decades talking about the EU and now focus on cultural issues. They don't have a theory. Lacking a theory they fall back on fossil ideas in their lizard brain: clamp down on the unions, talk hard. But these techniques don't work in the 2020's. So they're flailing.
The reason why Con need to take time out and a time in opposition is not just because I want them to, it's so that they can rebuild ideas. All their theoreticians are fighting culture war, but these are luxury values in deglobalisation. They need to work out how to run an economy (or more likely, observe what works with others) so that they know what to do.
Because right now, they just don't...3/n
Post 2 suggests that the BoE are p*ssing up a rope by increasing mortgage rates to reduce spending capacity to reduce demand and hence the money supply to combat inflation.
It's forty years since I studied economics and I am a bit rusty, but generating a recession in the short term to reduce inflation when growth and productivity would resolve the issue in the medium term seems counter-intuitive.
We are all working off ideas formed during the period known as "neoliberalism" (1979?-2019?). The world that existed during that period was increasingly globalised, a global market driving growth thru cheap goods, underpinned by a US enforcing the world order. But that world is on the downslope: US focussing on Pacific, Ukrainan wheat has gone, China isn't nice. In this dying world our ideas no longer work and politicians are flailing, retreating to populism or old ideas. We notice it because of Brexit, but it's a global thing.
Until things stabilize and politicians work out ideas that work, we will have this problem...4/n
We do seem to be up an economic gum tree.