How the papers are covering Sunak’s dangerous Monday – politicalbetting.com

System

How the papers are covering Sunak’s dangerous Monday – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

CatMan

First, like the West Indies

londonpubman

Second unlike Watford

Sunil_Prasannan

Dangerous Tuesday, surely!

MJW

The story of Sunak is surely the recent story of the Tory Party. Hit on real issues, whose solutions may require you to think out of your intellectual or political box. Prefer the easy route of lies, nonsense, and appeasing extremists. Then watch the disaster unfold. If only there were a recent lesson of a party leader refusing to have any truck with his own side's fools rather than placating them.

swing_voter

Not sure what he has achieved from all this, he's managed to divide his party, give the usual suspects a taste for blood and a loss of goodwill from others and all for magnifying an issue that really doesnt help them in a GE.

Pulpstar

First work Xmas meal since COVID. Good vibes all round x
Got final bill through from sols for the best part of a grand but at least we know our I'll fated purchase of our old horse is at an end,
Better half received email she's getting the 10k pay rise she wanted - so by July she'll outearn me xD

All in all after the death of our rabbit at the weekend a better Tuesday than most.

williamglenn

There's an interesting parallel lives situation with Rishi Sunak and fellow Southamptonian Craig David. They're both from the same generation, precocious in their fields, not fully comfortable in the spotlight and with an air of inauthenticity despite trying hard to please.

"Can I get a Re-Wanda?"

nico679

Bless , the DT doing its best to make Sunak look like he’s a tough guy. The rest of the papers seem more in touch with reality .

Nigelb

UK at high risk of ‘catastrophic ransomware attack’, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/13/uk-at-high-risk-of-catastrophic-ransomware-attack-report-says
The UK government is at high risk of a “catastrophic ransomware attack” that could “bring the country to a standstill” because of poor planning and a lack of investment, a parliamentary committee has warned.

In a damning report, the joint committee on the national security strategy warned that the UK could face a crippling cyber-attack on its critical national infrastructure (CNI) at any moment. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) describes the CNI as national assets that are essential for the functioning of society, including energy supply, water supply, transportation, health and telecommunications...

...The report said the government was failing to invest sufficiently to prevent large-scale cyber-attacks and criticised the Home Office, who claim the lead on ransomware as a policy issue, and former home secretary Suella Braverman, for failing to make the issue a priority.

The committee said Braverman “showed no interest in [ransomware]. Clear political priority is given instead to other issues, such as illegal migration and small boats.”..

...

swing_voter

Nigelb said:

UK at high risk of ‘catastrophic ransomware attack’, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/13/uk-at-high-risk-of-catastrophic-ransomware-attack-report-says
The UK government is at high risk of a “catastrophic ransomware attack” that could “bring the country to a standstill” because of poor planning and a lack of investment, a parliamentary committee has warned.

In a damning report, the joint committee on the national security strategy warned that the UK could face a crippling cyber-attack on its critical national infrastructure (CNI) at any moment. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) describes the CNI as national assets that are essential for the functioning of society, including energy supply, water supply, transportation, health and telecommunications...

...The report said the government was failing to invest sufficiently to prevent large-scale cyber-attacks and criticised the Home Office, who claim the lead on ransomware as a policy issue, and former home secretary Suella Braverman, for failing to make the issue a priority.

The committee said Braverman “showed no interest in [ransomware]. Clear political priority is given instead to other issues, such as illegal migration and small boats.”..

...

it all smacks of the rather pixxpxxr response by the gov to the NSS citing a pandemic flu back in late 2017/8...look how that turned out.

Roger

All because Sunak's PR told him early on that what Party leaders do to appear focused is a pledge card.....

'Four is too thin and six too woolly and five worked for Blair..... '

A quick glance at the polls gave his team the first four but the fifth without repetition was proving stubborn.....Then as the midnight oil burnt and the coca cola flowed someone was heard saying .......

"Shall we ask Suella?"

AverageNinja

I just don’t believe Sunak actually cares about the boats.

DavidL

The media, in particular the BBC, had built themselves up to a night of drama but, like United, the Tory back benchers failed to deliver a shot on target and it all fizzled out. The headlines are all about them explaining what they got themselves so wound up for in the first place, Grand old Duke of York style.

DavidL

Still no deal at COP28. Looking a bit like the EU and the UK are holding out for a more vigorous text.

squareroot2

DavidL said:

The media, in particular the BBC, had built themselves up to a night of drama but, like United, the Tory back benchers failed to deliver a shot on target and it all fizzled out. The headlines are all about them explaining what they got themselves so wound up for in the first place, Grand old Duke of York style.

The media is desperate to get rid of the Tories and one can understand why. Everything that could cause trouble will be built up as tho it was a crisis.

Monksfield

MJW said:

The story of Sunak is surely the recent story of the Tory Party. Hit on real issues, whose solutions may require you to think out of your intellectual or political box. Prefer the easy route of lies, nonsense, and appeasing extremists. Then watch the disaster unfold. If only there were a recent lesson of a party leader refusing to have any truck with his own side's fools rather than placating them.

And for the Tory Party, read also Republican Party. Same problem. Trying to change the world to fit their narrative, rather than working to deal with the real world as it is.

Foxy

DavidL said:

The media, in particular the BBC, had built themselves up to a night of drama but, like United, the Tory back benchers failed to deliver a shot on target and it all fizzled out. The headlines are all about them explaining what they got themselves so wound up for in the first place, Grand old Duke of York style.

Sack the board!

Foxy

londonpubman said:

Second unlike Watford

Ipswich now top of the table, with Leicester having a game in hand. That Boxing Day match with Leicester is getting tastier.

nico679

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

DecrepiterJohnL

DavidL said:

The media, in particular the BBC, had built themselves up to a night of drama but, like United, the Tory back benchers failed to deliver a shot on target and it all fizzled out. The headlines are all about them explaining what they got themselves so wound up for in the first place, Grand old Duke of York style.

We saw the same during Brexit and the long struggle to oust Theresa May. The ERG ultras could not even direct their own members' votes.

Foxy

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

DecrepiterJohnL

Nigelb said:

UK at high risk of ‘catastrophic ransomware attack’, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/13/uk-at-high-risk-of-catastrophic-ransomware-attack-report-says
The UK government is at high risk of a “catastrophic ransomware attack” that could “bring the country to a standstill” because of poor planning and a lack of investment, a parliamentary committee has warned.

In a damning report, the joint committee on the national security strategy warned that the UK could face a crippling cyber-attack on its critical national infrastructure (CNI) at any moment. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) describes the CNI as national assets that are essential for the functioning of society, including energy supply, water supply, transportation, health and telecommunications...

...The report said the government was failing to invest sufficiently to prevent large-scale cyber-attacks and criticised the Home Office, who claim the lead on ransomware as a policy issue, and former home secretary Suella Braverman, for failing to make the issue a priority.

The committee said Braverman “showed no interest in [ransomware]. Clear political priority is given instead to other issues, such as illegal migration and small boats.”..

...

It is scandalous that we do not adequately protect national infrastructure. This sort of thing could easily happen to us (assuming claims are true):-

Ukraine’s HUR disrupts Russian Tax Service, erases entire database, full recovery impossible
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-hur-disrupts-russian-tax-155000773.html

noneoftheabove

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Nigelb said:

UK at high risk of ‘catastrophic ransomware attack’, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/13/uk-at-high-risk-of-catastrophic-ransomware-attack-report-says
The UK government is at high risk of a “catastrophic ransomware attack” that could “bring the country to a standstill” because of poor planning and a lack of investment, a parliamentary committee has warned.

In a damning report, the joint committee on the national security strategy warned that the UK could face a crippling cyber-attack on its critical national infrastructure (CNI) at any moment. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) describes the CNI as national assets that are essential for the functioning of society, including energy supply, water supply, transportation, health and telecommunications...

...The report said the government was failing to invest sufficiently to prevent large-scale cyber-attacks and criticised the Home Office, who claim the lead on ransomware as a policy issue, and former home secretary Suella Braverman, for failing to make the issue a priority.

The committee said Braverman “showed no interest in [ransomware]. Clear political priority is given instead to other issues, such as illegal migration and small boats.”..

...

It is scandalous that we do not adequately protect national infrastructure. This sort of thing could easily happen to us (assuming claims are true):-

Ukraine’s HUR disrupts Russian Tax Service, erases entire database, full recovery impossible
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-hur-disrupts-russian-tax-155000773.html

Some Tory grandee donors might be delighted.....

Fishing

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

Daveyboy1961

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Foxy

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

Sure, financial markets display all the wisdom of panicking sheep.

Nonetheless it is fine to publish such figures, just not over interpret them.

Malmesbury

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

There have been occasions where the quarterly reports said recession. But after revision, no recession. Not sure about the other way round - a hidden recession.

At that point you have to ask if you are actually generating misinformation.

noneoftheabove

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Nigelb

Roger said:

All because Sunak's PR told him early on that what Party leaders do to appear focused is a pledge card.....

'Four is too thin and six too woolly and five worked for Blair..... '

A quick glance at the polls gave his team the first four but the fifth without repetition was proving stubborn.....Then as the midnight oil burnt and the coca cola flowed someone was heard saying .......

"Shall we ask Suella?"

Never ask Suella after midnight.

TimS

Malmesbury said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

There have been occasions where the quarterly reports said recession. But after revision, no recession. Not sure about the other way round - a hidden recession.

At that point you have to ask if you are actually generating misinformation.

I agree the quarterly GDP is a distraction, and the scale of revisions in recent years (not just in the UK but elsewhere too) means it's silly to focus on them unless they are showing something very sustained and marked.

That applies of course when the figures are showing growth too. It's a bit like polling and SKSFPE. You need to look at the average over the long term.

Nigelb

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

TLDR - because people can't be grownups, let's introduce a childish policy ?

(I agree about the unreliability of short term statistics, but that's a very poor reason not to publish them.)

Nigelb

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Nigelb said:

UK at high risk of ‘catastrophic ransomware attack’, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/13/uk-at-high-risk-of-catastrophic-ransomware-attack-report-says
The UK government is at high risk of a “catastrophic ransomware attack” that could “bring the country to a standstill” because of poor planning and a lack of investment, a parliamentary committee has warned.

In a damning report, the joint committee on the national security strategy warned that the UK could face a crippling cyber-attack on its critical national infrastructure (CNI) at any moment. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) describes the CNI as national assets that are essential for the functioning of society, including energy supply, water supply, transportation, health and telecommunications...

...The report said the government was failing to invest sufficiently to prevent large-scale cyber-attacks and criticised the Home Office, who claim the lead on ransomware as a policy issue, and former home secretary Suella Braverman, for failing to make the issue a priority.

The committee said Braverman “showed no interest in [ransomware]. Clear political priority is given instead to other issues, such as illegal migration and small boats.”..

...

It is scandalous that we do not adequately protect national infrastructure. This sort of thing could easily happen to us (assuming claims are true):-

Ukraine’s HUR disrupts Russian Tax Service, erases entire database, full recovery impossible
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-hur-disrupts-russian-tax-155000773.html

If we give responsibility for the protection of critical national infrastructure to the likes of Braverman, then we probably deserve it.

Foxy

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

The difference of quarterly figures of zero, +0.1% and -0.1% is a negligible rounding error.

In any case, slowing down the economy through higher interest rates was the plan to stop inflation, so why the complaints?

RochdalePioneers

Morning all! 6 client days left until we stop for Christmas and lets hope they pass quickly.

I do have to ask the remaining PB Tories what the appeal of their party is supposed to be to ordinary voters. We now have the "Five Families" of Tory MPs - which sounds like the mafia until you remember how shit they are. The country is beaten and broken and crumbling, with people's lived experience an increasingly bewildered mess wondering how things got this bad. And you're all off knifing each other in the front doing performative stupidity.

I know there have been a few attempts on here to deflect onto Starmer - the man who forced Tory MPs to implode their own majority in 2015. But normals think you are crazy, not he...

Foxy

TimS said:

Malmesbury said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

There have been occasions where the quarterly reports said recession. But after revision, no recession. Not sure about the other way round - a hidden recession.

At that point you have to ask if you are actually generating misinformation.

I agree the quarterly GDP is a distraction, and the scale of revisions in recent years (not just in the UK but elsewhere too) means it's silly to focus on them unless they are showing something very sustained and marked.

That applies of course when the figures are showing growth too. It's a bit like polling and SKSFPE. You need to look at the average over the long term.

The major revision in recent years was that covid and associated lockdowns had a smaller impact than thought. For some strange reason that is often not highlighted, but in other revisions the modifications are largely trivial 0.1% or so up or down. By and large the ONS gets it right.

Malmesbury

Nigelb said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

TLDR - because people can't be grownups, let's introduce a childish policy ?

(I agree about the unreliability of short term statistics, but that's a very poor reason not to publish them.)

“because people can't be grownups, let's introduce a childish policy”

That’s the basic theory behind modern government.

OldKingCole

TimS said:

Malmesbury said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

There have been occasions where the quarterly reports said recession. But after revision, no recession. Not sure about the other way round - a hidden recession.

At that point you have to ask if you are actually generating misinformation.

I agree the quarterly GDP is a distraction, and the scale of revisions in recent years (not just in the UK but elsewhere too) means it's silly to focus on them unless they are showing something very sustained and marked.

That applies of course when the figures are showing growth too. It's a bit like polling and SKSFPE. You need to look at the average over the long term.

Morning all!

Perish the thought, and I know there are people who don’t understand them, but it’s always helpful in the circumstances to draw a graph and look at the overall trend!

OnlyLivingBoy

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

The US doesn't publish official monthly GDP estimates. Our monthly GDP numbers are volatile and revision prone but they're not worthless. After all, annual GDP is just twelve monthly numbers in a row. One shouldn't over-interpret them but it is actually quite useful to have some timely information on the near term growth trajectory, however imperfect. And these numbers are surprisingly weak, so it is a meaningful signal IMHO.

viewcode

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

Whilst I can't speak to the origin of the problem, you are right in saying that going below a certain level of granularity is pointless. The problem is that statistics are produced by demand: they only exist because people want them.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

DecrepiterJohnL

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Nigelb said:

UK at high risk of ‘catastrophic ransomware attack’, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/13/uk-at-high-risk-of-catastrophic-ransomware-attack-report-says
The UK government is at high risk of a “catastrophic ransomware attack” that could “bring the country to a standstill” because of poor planning and a lack of investment, a parliamentary committee has warned.

In a damning report, the joint committee on the national security strategy warned that the UK could face a crippling cyber-attack on its critical national infrastructure (CNI) at any moment. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) describes the CNI as national assets that are essential for the functioning of society, including energy supply, water supply, transportation, health and telecommunications...

...The report said the government was failing to invest sufficiently to prevent large-scale cyber-attacks and criticised the Home Office, who claim the lead on ransomware as a policy issue, and former home secretary Suella Braverman, for failing to make the issue a priority.

The committee said Braverman “showed no interest in [ransomware]. Clear political priority is given instead to other issues, such as illegal migration and small boats.”..

...

It is scandalous that we do not adequately protect national infrastructure. This sort of thing could easily happen to us (assuming claims are true):-

Ukraine’s HUR disrupts Russian Tax Service, erases entire database, full recovery impossible
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ukraine-hur-disrupts-russian-tax-155000773.html

While Ukraine is attacking Russia in cyberspace, Russia is attacking Ukraine.

Ukraine's largest mobile operator Kyivstar downed by 'powerful' cyberattack
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/ukraines-largest-mobile-operator-kyivstar-170003054.html

viewcode

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

MarqueeMark

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

bondegezou

Nigelb said:

UK at high risk of ‘catastrophic ransomware attack’, report says
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/dec/13/uk-at-high-risk-of-catastrophic-ransomware-attack-report-says
The UK government is at high risk of a “catastrophic ransomware attack” that could “bring the country to a standstill” because of poor planning and a lack of investment, a parliamentary committee has warned.

In a damning report, the joint committee on the national security strategy warned that the UK could face a crippling cyber-attack on its critical national infrastructure (CNI) at any moment. The National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) describes the CNI as national assets that are essential for the functioning of society, including energy supply, water supply, transportation, health and telecommunications...

...The report said the government was failing to invest sufficiently to prevent large-scale cyber-attacks and criticised the Home Office, who claim the lead on ransomware as a policy issue, and former home secretary Suella Braverman, for failing to make the issue a priority.

The committee said Braverman “showed no interest in [ransomware]. Clear political priority is given instead to other issues, such as illegal migration and small boats.”..

...

“a lack of investment”, we hear the same phrase again.

Casino_Royale

DavidL said:

Still no deal at COP28. Looking a bit like the EU and the UK are holding out for a more vigorous text.

It's absurd. Some of the stubborn holdouts are countries that will be most badly and directly affected by this.

noneoftheabove

viewcode said:

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

Define them by all means but they are presented and widely understood as if:

1) We should judge governments on whether we are in a recession or not
2) We need different courses of future action depending on whether we are in a recession or not

Neither is helpful. I would suggest whether we are in a technical recession or not should have less than 1% influence on both points 1 and 2.

Nigelb

Hyundai Engineering set to export Korean-made small modular reactors
https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=365020

TheScreamingEagles

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

Whilst I can't speak to the origin of the problem, you are right in saying that going below a certain level of granularity is pointless. The problem is that statistics are produced by demand: they only exist because people want them.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Point of pedantry.

The Daily YouGovs were nothing to do with Lord Ashcroft.

In late 2009 and until the 2015 GE we had daily* YouGovs which were commissioned by News International for The Sun and The Sunday Times.

*5 days a week.

The YouGovs were in part the reason how I became deputy editor of PB.

Big shoutout to Chris Huhne too.

RochdalePioneers

noneoftheabove said:

viewcode said:

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

Define them by all means but they are presented and widely understood as if:

1) We should judge governments on whether we are in a recession or not
2) We need different courses of future action depending on whether we are in a recession or not

Neither is helpful. I would suggest whether we are in a technical recession or not should have less than 1% influence on both points 1 and 2.

And even if we are not in recession, the economy is so bad that millions feel like we are. The problem is that the government refuses to accept this and attacks the people feeling impoverished. Millions of these were Tor voters in 2019. Were...

Nigelb

Sununu’s Haley endorsement is a huge blow to Chris Christie
The former New Jersey governor is banking his entire campaign on New Hampshire.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/12/sununus-haley-endorsement-is-a-huge-blow-to-chris-christie-00131396

viewcode

TheScreamingEagles said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

Whilst I can't speak to the origin of the problem, you are right in saying that going below a certain level of granularity is pointless. The problem is that statistics are produced by demand: they only exist because people want them.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Point of pedantry.

The Daily YouGovs were nothing to do with Lord Ashcroft.

In late 2009 and until the 2015 GE we had daily* YouGovs which were commissioned by News International for The Sun and The Sunday Times.

*5 days a week.

The YouGovs were in part the reason how I became deputy editor of PB.

Big shoutout to Chris Huhne too.

Points noted, thank you

Stuartinromford

RochdalePioneers said:

noneoftheabove said:

viewcode said:

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

Define them by all means but they are presented and widely understood as if:

1) We should judge governments on whether we are in a recession or not
2) We need different courses of future action depending on whether we are in a recession or not

Neither is helpful. I would suggest whether we are in a technical recession or not should have less than 1% influence on both points 1 and 2.

And even if we are not in recession, the economy is so bad that millions feel like we are. The problem is that the government refuses to accept this and attacks the people feeling impoverished. Millions of these were Tor voters in 2019. Were...

The difference between +0.1% and -0.1% isn't really worth worrying about, though we can expect the government to do that if it allows them to say WE GREW THE ECONOMY.

The difference between either of those numbers and the sort of growth we probably need to make the country function is clear and it's been that way for quite a while now.

Nigelb

What three and a half decades of privatised monopoly has wrought.

If Thames Water has to be nationalised, so be it. Ofwat should not be bullied
https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2023/dec/12/thames-water-nationalised-ofwat-mps-customers

It's a safe prediction that Ofwat is likely to fold to the shareholders' pressure, at the expense of customers.

TimS

Stuartinromford said:

RochdalePioneers said:

noneoftheabove said:

viewcode said:

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

Define them by all means but they are presented and widely understood as if:

1) We should judge governments on whether we are in a recession or not
2) We need different courses of future action depending on whether we are in a recession or not

Neither is helpful. I would suggest whether we are in a technical recession or not should have less than 1% influence on both points 1 and 2.

And even if we are not in recession, the economy is so bad that millions feel like we are. The problem is that the government refuses to accept this and attacks the people feeling impoverished. Millions of these were Tor voters in 2019. Were...

The difference between +0.1% and -0.1% isn't really worth worrying about, though we can expect the government to do that if it allows them to say WE GREW THE ECONOMY.

The difference between either of those numbers and the sort of growth we probably need to make the country function is clear and it's been that way for quite a while now.

There are some much better short term and leading indicators which I wish journalists would pay more attention to. The PMI being probably the most useful because it helps understanding across the sectors and predicts what is likely to happen over the next few months.

eek

Stuartinromford said:

RochdalePioneers said:

noneoftheabove said:

viewcode said:

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

Define them by all means but they are presented and widely understood as if:

1) We should judge governments on whether we are in a recession or not
2) We need different courses of future action depending on whether we are in a recession or not

Neither is helpful. I would suggest whether we are in a technical recession or not should have less than 1% influence on both points 1 and 2.

And even if we are not in recession, the economy is so bad that millions feel like we are. The problem is that the government refuses to accept this and attacks the people feeling impoverished. Millions of these were Tor voters in 2019. Were...

The difference between +0.1% and -0.1% isn't really worth worrying about, though we can expect the government to do that if it allows them to say WE GREW THE ECONOMY.

The difference between either of those numbers and the sort of growth we probably need to make the country function is clear and it's been that way for quite a while now.

What GDP measures are we talking about here.

If the working population increased by 1% (due to immigration) and domestic GDP increases by 0.1% that’s a hell of a drop in GDP per capita because 100.1/101 is really a 0.8% decrease in GDP per capita.

Add inflation at x% and you can see why a lot of people feel worse off - because things are never distributed equally.

londonpubman

Foxy said:

londonpubman said:

Second unlike Watford

Ipswich now top of the table, with Leicester having a game in hand. That Boxing Day match with Leicester is getting tastier.

Last night's result was a little bit disappointing given we were ahead but we have only lost two games out of 12 and they were against Leicester and Ipswich! We now have Blackburn and Preston which are both play off contenders, if we do ok 4+ points from these then maybe we are outside playoff contenders.

Leicester heading up for sure and should finish top, Ipswich doing really well and could get back to back promotions.

eek

Nigelb said:

What three and a half decades of privatised monopoly has wrought.

If Thames Water has to be nationalised, so be it. Ofwat should not be bullied
https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2023/dec/12/thames-water-nationalised-ofwat-mps-customers

It's a safe prediction that Ofwat is likely to fold to the shareholders' pressure, at the expense of customers.

Got to say the announcement seems designed fo scare ofwat.

Reality is I would be asking Thames Water what assets have been used to secure any loans to emphasis that any who has lent them money is about see at the very minimum a serious haircut

Foxy

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

TheScreamingEagles

RIP Captain Holt.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67700088

MarqueeMark

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

Taz

Nigelb said:

What three and a half decades of privatised monopoly has wrought.

If Thames Water has to be nationalised, so be it. Ofwat should not be bullied
https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2023/dec/12/thames-water-nationalised-ofwat-mps-customers

It's a safe prediction that Ofwat is likely to fold to the shareholders' pressure, at the expense of customers.

OFWAT is a classic example of regulatory capture and there is a revolving door between it and the water companies.

In the North East we were rinsed for 15% on our latest bills.

Scott_xP

MarqueeMark said:

Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed.

Even if that were true, and I am not sure it is, it won't matter.

IanB2

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

If the Tories' saving just "several dozen seats" counts as a good campaign, I'd like to see a bad one....

MarqueeMark

Nigelb said:

Sununu’s Haley endorsement is a huge blow to Chris Christie
The former New Jersey governor is banking his entire campaign on New Hampshire.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/12/sununus-haley-endorsement-is-a-huge-blow-to-chris-christie-00131396

Christie knows he has no chance of making progress, so is filling the role of speaking truth to MAGA.

OldKingCole

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

I suggest some at least of the LibDems problems are down to them being the fourth, not the third, party in Parliament.
When push came to shove they have had some excellent by-election results.

algarkirk

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

londonpubman

OldKingCole said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

I suggest some at least of the LibDems problems are down to them being the fourth, not the third, party in Parliament.
When push came to shove they have had some excellent by-election results.

I'm not expecting LD to make much progress in the GE but hopefully they will overtake SNP to be the third party.

geoffw

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

We should go the full Cowperthwaite (ref HongKong) and stop producing GDP figures

an excessive focus on GDP encourages problematic and excessive state interventions. Sir John Cowperthwaite, a governor of Hong Kong, famously refused to compile statistics on the gross output of Hong Kong on the basis that it would just lead to the temptation to unnecessarily 'manage' the economy
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/106566/html/

OnlyLivingBoy

geoffw said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

We should go the full Cowperthwaite (ref HongKong) and stop producing GDP figures

an excessive focus on GDP encourages problematic and excessive state interventions. Sir John Cowperthwaite, a governor of Hong Kong, famously refused to compile statistics on the gross output of Hong Kong on the basis that it would just lead to the temptation to unnecessarily 'manage' the economy
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/106566/html/

I would say the same logic applies much more forcefully to immigration statistics.

Malmesbury

geoffw said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

We should go the full Cowperthwaite (ref HongKong) and stop producing GDP figures

an excessive focus on GDP encourages problematic and excessive state interventions. Sir John Cowperthwaite, a governor of Hong Kong, famously refused to compile statistics on the gross output of Hong Kong on the basis that it would just lead to the temptation to unnecessarily 'manage' the economy
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/106566/html/

He was lucky to be riding an early version of the developing economy “breakout” - education, stability, infrastructure with a seriously cheap labour force leading to explosive growth. See Japan, South Korea, Taiwan & China.

He was smart enough to step to one side and let it develop.

Malmesbury

algarkirk said:

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

Clause 11 defines Orange as the new Black.

Roger

OT. Reith Lectures .....Very interesting lecture on voting behaviour class education racism etc on Radio 4 now.

'Graduates used to vote Conservative by a majority of 20%. In 2019 it reversed..' etc

Malmesbury

RochdalePioneers said:

noneoftheabove said:

viewcode said:

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

Define them by all means but they are presented and widely understood as if:

1) We should judge governments on whether we are in a recession or not
2) We need different courses of future action depending on whether we are in a recession or not

Neither is helpful. I would suggest whether we are in a technical recession or not should have less than 1% influence on both points 1 and 2.

And even if we are not in recession, the economy is so bad that millions feel like we are. The problem is that the government refuses to accept this and attacks the people feeling impoverished. Millions of these were Tor voters in 2019. Were...

The problem there is segmentation of the economy. For millions they are in the shit. For other millions they are doing ok.

So aggregating to a single figure….

OnlyLivingBoy

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

Clause 11 defines Orange as the new Black.

Pi is 3.2.

geoffw

Roger said:

Very interesting program on voting behaviour class education racism etc on Radio 4 now.

'Graduates used to vote Conservative by a majority of 20% in 2019 it reversed..'

Along with the improving quality of our graduates - most get firsts or upper senconds nowadays. The old days of rubbish graduate quality and support for Conservatives are thankfully behind us

Fishing

Taz said:

Nigelb said:

What three and a half decades of privatised monopoly has wrought.

If Thames Water has to be nationalised, so be it. Ofwat should not be bullied
https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2023/dec/12/thames-water-nationalised-ofwat-mps-customers

It's a safe prediction that Ofwat is likely to fold to the shareholders' pressure, at the expense of customers.

OFWAT is a classic example of regulatory capture and there is a revolving door between it and the water companies.

I don't agree. I know Ofwat extremely well professionally. Their over-cautious "rinsing" of consumers is caused by the difference in their legal duties compared to other regulators. The law forced them to assign a higher priority to maintaining investors' confidence than in, say, energy or telecoms. This was because, when they were privatised, the main priority was to finance a huge programme of capex to replace existing assets and attain an unnecessarily high level of drinking water purity. This has now been replaced by the need to clean up sewers and to finance Net Zero, which affects water less than energy, but is still an expensive proposition.

There is indeed a revolving door between the regulator and the industry, as in most regulators, but I know of only one instance where that clearly influenced regulatory decision making, and that wasn't in the water sector (somebody was about to join a regulated company which was under investigation for some violation or other, and, surely after he left, it was discovered that the papers relating to the investigation were missing, so the investigation had to be dropped. It was the days before electronic filing and obsessive backups of everything). I'm not usually one for given civil servants the benefit of the doubt, but most of the Ofwat staff I dealt with do their best to act in customers' interests. Their over-cautious decisions are due to their legal duties and the nature of the industry, not because they hope to get jobs in the regulated companies.

RochdalePioneers

OldKingCole said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

I suggest some at least of the LibDems problems are down to them being the fourth, not the third, party in Parliament.
When push came to shove they have had some excellent by-election results.

I think we will do much better during an actual election campaign. More visibility, and the failings of the big 2 parties (Con/Lab, Con/SNP) badly exposed.

If the hypothesis is correct and the public want to give a punishment beating to the Tories, there are a stack of seats where the LDs are the weapon of choice...

TheScreamingEagles

Rishi Sunak is now as unpopular as Boris Johnson was when he resigned as prime minister.

Polling from YouGov, carried out before last night’s crunch vote on the Rwanda bill, found 70% of people said they had an unfavourable opinion of Sunak, compared with 21% who had a favourable opinion.

It means the prime minister has been given his lowest ever net favourability score of minus 49, a drop of 10 points from late November.

Sunak also faced a new low among 2019 Tory voters, whom he is keen to hold on to ahead of the next election. With that group 56% had a negative view of the prime minister, compared with 40% who had a positive view.

The new figures, seen by The Times, mean Sunak’s overall net favourability score is comparable with Johnson’s during his final months in office, which was minus 46 immediately after he resigned and dropped to minus 53 a month later.

However, it is not as low as Liz Truss’s, which dropped to minus 70.

Sir Keir Starmer, the Labour leader, also saw his score fall nine points to minus 22, with 32% of Britons holding a positive opinion of him compared with 54% who had a negative one.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rishi-sunak-popularity-approval-poll-rating-prime-minister-csr79qbnc

MarqueeMark

IanB2 said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

If the Tories' saving just "several dozen seats" counts as a good campaign, I'd like to see a bad one....

Saving several dozen seats and pushing Labour into a minority Government is probably as good a campaign as the Conservatives can hope for at this point.

Cookie

RochdalePioneers said:

Morning all! 6 client days left until we stop for Christmas and lets hope they pass quickly.

I do have to ask the remaining PB Tories what the appeal of their party is supposed to be to ordinary voters. We now have the "Five Families" of Tory MPs - which sounds like the mafia until you remember how shit they are. The country is beaten and broken and crumbling, with people's lived experience an increasingly bewildered mess wondering how things got this bad. And you're all off knifing each other in the front doing performative stupidity.

I know there have been a few attempts on here to deflect onto Starmer - the man who forced Tory MPs to implode their own majority in 2015. But normals think you are crazy, not he...

I'm not really a pb Tory, but I remain a pb not-Labour.
I have no enthusiasm whatsoever for the current lot, but my view is that everything they are wrong about, for me, Labour are wronger. Obvious example being lockdown.

Fishing

geoffw said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

We should go the full Cowperthwaite (ref HongKong) and stop producing GDP figures

an excessive focus on GDP encourages problematic and excessive state interventions. Sir John Cowperthwaite, a governor of Hong Kong, famously refused to compile statistics on the gross output of Hong Kong on the basis that it would just lead to the temptation to unnecessarily 'manage' the economy
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/106566/html/

As always, I like the way you think. And John Cowperthwaite is, with Nigel Lawson, maybe the best economic policy-maker we've ever produced.

Though I'm afraid we sold the pass on "problematic and excessive state interventions" decades ago.

Malmesbury

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

Clause 11 defines Orange as the new Black.

Pi is 3.2.

Wokist

Pi is 3

david_herdson

OldKingCole said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

I suggest some at least of the LibDems problems are down to them being the fourth, not the third, party in Parliament.
When push came to shove they have had some excellent by-election results.

Their 'excellent by-election results' are displacement activity. The Lib Dems are in danger of simply being a bucket anti-Tory vote (but nicer than Labour) which is fine at a protest election but gets them nowhere when there are serious issues in play and they're not in the debate because they have nothing to say, and get squeezed by those who are.

There is a huge hole opening up in British politics on the soft centre-right. Somewhere roundabout where liberalism ought to sit. If the Lib Dems want a future as a major party, they need to target it ruthlessly and push the Tories into the fringes where they can merge with Reform. That could comfortably sit within their vote coalition but be beyond Labour's.

However, no doubt they'll go back to comfort-zone politics and play with their bar charts.

LostPassword

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

Clause 11 defines Orange as the new Black.

Pi is 3.2.

22/7 is such a good approximation it's uncanny. Accurate to one part in two and a half thousand, but trivially easy to remember. Will Sunak make the 22nd July a bank holiday to teach this bit of maths to the country?

Dura_Ace

MarqueeMark said:

IanB2 said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

If the Tories' saving just "several dozen seats" counts as a good campaign, I'd like to see a bad one....

Saving several dozen seats and pushing Labour into a minority Government is probably as good a campaign as the Conservatives can hope for at this point.

Is that your DB4 GT? Not my cup of 20W-50 but 1 of 100 so sort of cool, I suppose.

StillWaters

eek said:

Stuartinromford said:

RochdalePioneers said:

noneoftheabove said:

viewcode said:

noneoftheabove said:

Daveyboy1961 said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

quarterly reports indicate whether we are in recession or not. Are you wanting to cover up that?

Recessions are defined arbitrarily, way too much attention is given to whether we are in a technical recession or not.

Well yes, but you have to define them somehow.

Define them by all means but they are presented and widely understood as if:

1) We should judge governments on whether we are in a recession or not
2) We need different courses of future action depending on whether we are in a recession or not

Neither is helpful. I would suggest whether we are in a technical recession or not should have less than 1% influence on both points 1 and 2.

And even if we are not in recession, the economy is so bad that millions feel like we are. The problem is that the government refuses to accept this and attacks the people feeling impoverished. Millions of these were Tor voters in 2019. Were...

The difference between +0.1% and -0.1% isn't really worth worrying about, though we can expect the government to do that if it allows them to say WE GREW THE ECONOMY.

The difference between either of those numbers and the sort of growth we probably need to make the country function is clear and it's been that way for quite a while now.

What GDP measures are we talking about here.

If the working population increased by 1% (due to immigration) and domestic GDP increases by 0.1% that’s a hell of a drop in
GDP per capita because 100.1/101 is really a 0.8% decrease in GDP per capita.

Add inflation at x% and you can see why a lot of people feel worse off - because things are never distributed equally.

Reported GDP numbers are in real terms but that only modified rather than counters your point

MarqueeMark

Dura_Ace said:

MarqueeMark said:

IanB2 said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

If the Tories' saving just "several dozen seats" counts as a good campaign, I'd like to see a bad one....

Saving several dozen seats and pushing Labour into a minority Government is probably as good a campaign as the Conservatives can hope for at this point.

Is that your DB4 GT? Not my cup of 20W-50 but 1 of 100 so sort of cool, I suppose.

Oh, I wish...it popped up at our local vintage car event. Stole the show, many jaws dropped..."Never even seen one..." Worth way more than all the other cars combined.

Just thought some might appreciate it!

Sean_F

Cookie said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Morning all! 6 client days left until we stop for Christmas and lets hope they pass quickly.

I do have to ask the remaining PB Tories what the appeal of their party is supposed to be to ordinary voters. We now have the "Five Families" of Tory MPs - which sounds like the mafia until you remember how shit they are. The country is beaten and broken and crumbling, with people's lived experience an increasingly bewildered mess wondering how things got this bad. And you're all off knifing each other in the front doing performative stupidity.

I know there have been a few attempts on here to deflect onto Starmer - the man who forced Tory MPs to implode their own majority in 2015. But normals think you are crazy, not he...

I'm not really a pb Tory, but I remain a pb not-Labour.
I have no enthusiasm whatsoever for the current lot, but my view is that everything they are wrong about, for me, Labour are wronger. Obvious example being lockdown.

Pretty much the same. I’ve not even voted Conservative since 2017 (I voted independent in the local elections of 2019, and 2023, BXP in 2019, and and for Gavin Shuker in the GE, because of his stand against anti-semitism).

Daveyboy1961

LostPassword said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

Clause 11 defines Orange as the new Black.

Pi is 3.2.

22/7 is such a good approximation it's uncanny. Accurate to one part in two and a half thousand, but trivially easy to remember. Will Sunak make the 22nd July a bank holiday to teach this bit of maths to the country?

Isn't 14th March the accepted date? Might brighten up a rainy march?

OnlyLivingBoy

Daveyboy1961 said:

LostPassword said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

Clause 11 defines Orange as the new Black.

Pi is 3.2.

22/7 is such a good approximation it's uncanny. Accurate to one part in two and a half thousand, but trivially easy to remember. Will Sunak make the 22nd July a bank holiday to teach this bit of maths to the country?

Isn't 14th March the accepted date? Might brighten up a rainy march?

Yes, works better for American dating conventions though (3/14).

Selebian

Malmesbury said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

Malmesbury said:

algarkirk said:

Clause 7 of the Rwanda (Paddington Bear Deportation) Bill deems Tuesdays to be Mondays when the Secretary of State so declares and purports to oust the jurisdiction of any court to decide otherwise or review. I see we are cravenly complying.

Clause 11 defines Orange as the new Black.

Pi is 3.2.

Wokist

Pi is 3

Actually, it's 5

(or 11, almost 12 if we work in years)

kjh

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

As usual, being a LD, I am liking both @MarqueeMark post and those that contradicting him! (eg @Scott_xP)

Agree LD polling is awful. Agree with @OldKingCole being 4th and not 3rd in the HofC really doesn't help, especially with the media. Agree that a good campaign for the Tories would be to convince the voters that Labour are an empty vessel and stem their losses. Similarly to hold off the LDs in the South. But realistically a good result at this stage is not being massacred.

If the LDs can get into the 30 - 50 seat range and ahead of the SNP I think they will be back in the game in the next parliament so the Tories really don't want that to happen.

@MarqueeMark was rather good on his predictions for the LDs in his part of the world (the bastard) so I will be looking out for your predictions this time around Mark.

Nigelb

Fishing said:

Taz said:

Nigelb said:

What three and a half decades of privatised monopoly has wrought.

If Thames Water has to be nationalised, so be it. Ofwat should not be bullied
https://www.theguardian.com/business/nils-pratley-on-finance/2023/dec/12/thames-water-nationalised-ofwat-mps-customers

It's a safe prediction that Ofwat is likely to fold to the shareholders' pressure, at the expense of customers.

OFWAT is a classic example of regulatory capture and there is a revolving door between it and the water companies.

I don't agree. I know Ofwat extremely well professionally. Their over-cautious "rinsing" of consumers is caused by the difference in their legal duties compared to other regulators. The law forced them to assign a higher priority to maintaining investors' confidence than in, say, energy or telecoms. This was because, when they were privatised, the main priority was to finance a huge programme of capex to replace existing assets and attain an unnecessarily high level of drinking water purity. This has now been replaced by the need to clean up sewers and to finance Net Zero, which affects water less than energy, but is still an expensive proposition.

There is indeed a revolving door between the regulator and the industry, as in most regulators, but I know of only one instance where that clearly influenced regulatory decision making, and that wasn't in the water sector (somebody was about to join a regulated company which was under investigation for some violation or other, and, surely after he left, it was discovered that the papers relating to the investigation were missing, so the investigation had to be dropped. It was the days before electronic filing and obsessive backups of everything). I'm not usually one for given civil servants the benefit of the doubt, but most of the Ofwat staff I dealt with do their best to act in customers' interests. Their over-cautious decisions are due to their legal duties and the nature of the industry, not because they hope to get jobs in the regulated companies.

So it's largely the fault of successive governments since Thatcher ?

If Ofwat's "main priority' was to finance a huge program of capex, why did Ofwat allow the extraction of so much capital from companies like Thames by successive owners and bondholders ?

The return to early owners like Macquarie was way beyond what a well functioning market might have demanded - and Thames in particular (and much of the industry in general) has been financially crippled ever since.

Add to that the decisions of managements to finance long term capex with short term borrowings which now need refinancing at higher rates, and the entire exercise has been a disaster.

"The nature of the industry" is meaningless.
And the nature of "legal duties" is defined by government.

You're effectively arguing that Ofwat is a passive bystander - in which case any serious regulator who took the public interest seriously would have said publicly that their job was impossible, and resigned.

Government can borrow more cheaply than private companies. If private management is as incompetent as government when it comes to running a business, then what is the point of privatisation ?
There's no competition to improve things; these are monopolies. Get rid.

viewcode

TheScreamingEagles said:

RIP Captain Holt.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-67700088

Damn. Sixty-one. Too young these days. I forgot he was in Homicide.

RochdalePioneers

Cookie said:

RochdalePioneers said:

Morning all! 6 client days left until we stop for Christmas and lets hope they pass quickly.

I do have to ask the remaining PB Tories what the appeal of their party is supposed to be to ordinary voters. We now have the "Five Families" of Tory MPs - which sounds like the mafia until you remember how shit they are. The country is beaten and broken and crumbling, with people's lived experience an increasingly bewildered mess wondering how things got this bad. And you're all off knifing each other in the front doing performative stupidity.

I know there have been a few attempts on here to deflect onto Starmer - the man who forced Tory MPs to implode their own majority in 2015. But normals think you are crazy, not he...

I'm not really a pb Tory, but I remain a pb not-Labour.
I have no enthusiasm whatsoever for the current lot, but my view is that everything they are wrong about, for me, Labour are wronger. Obvious example being lockdown.

I suspect that millions of the remaining Tory voters will have a similar mindset - just as Labour ones did in 2017 and 2019.

This is why I have been a life-long advocate of a fairer voting system People should be free to vote for what they want, not be forced to vote against what they don't want.

RochdalePioneers

david_herdson said:

OldKingCole said:

MarqueeMark said:

Foxy said:

MarqueeMark said:

viewcode said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

You may recall 2010-2015, when thanks to Lord Ashcroft there were daily YouGovs. We ended up looking at the daily tree and ignoring/wilfully misinterpreting the die-back in the LibDem forest

Er...not me. I was reporting here on that deforestation.

A notable lack of comment on the current state of play. LD Green shoots, and Conservative mass deforestation methinks.

Too damned busy to comment much. LD pretty poor polling given the state of the Tories - piss-poor leader muchly to blame. Labour going to be asked lots of questions in the election camapign to which they will have no answers - and look evasive and flat-footed. Tories could have a relatively good campaign and save several dozen seats.

We'll know within the year.

I suggest some at least of the LibDems problems are down to them being the fourth, not the third, party in Parliament.
When push came to shove they have had some excellent by-election results.

Their 'excellent by-election results' are displacement activity. The Lib Dems are in danger of simply being a bucket anti-Tory vote (but nicer than Labour) which is fine at a protest election but gets them nowhere when there are serious issues in play and they're not in the debate because they have nothing to say, and get squeezed by those who are.

There is a huge hole opening up in British politics on the soft centre-right. Somewhere roundabout where liberalism ought to sit. If the Lib Dems want a future as a major party, they need to target it ruthlessly and push the Tories into the fringes where they can merge with Reform. That could comfortably sit within their vote coalition but be beyond Labour's.

However, no doubt they'll go back to comfort-zone politics and play with their bar charts.

Some LibDems are centre right, but I think more of us are centre-left. The whole left / right absolutism thing is damaging anyway. Look at New Labour's policies on various areas - clearly right wing as demanded by voters who openly describe themselves as left wing.

Luckyguy1983

DavidL said:

Still no deal at COP28. Looking a bit like the EU and the UK are holding out for a more vigorous text.

Because we've buggered ourselves and we now want everyone else to help us out by doing the same.

viewcode

geoffw said:

Fishing said:

Foxy said:

nico679 said:

Poor economic data just released . At this rate the BOE will be cutting interest rates sooner rather than later .

GDP was flat (0.0% growth) in the three months to October.

In the month of October, GDP fell 0.3%.

➡️ ons.gov.uk/economy/grossd…

https://twitter.com/ONS/status/1734830520742060079?t=ecKRICiN7RpNRpMV5elhWQ&s=19

Monthly and even quarterly GDP statistics are worth precisely nothing, and it is stupid to make decisions on that basis. For one thing, they are routinely revised by large amounts. For another, factors like a snowy spell or a couple of bank holidays or a big sports tournament can thrown everything off. Also the changes month to month are invariably tiny.

But most importantly, an obsessive focus on the very short term detracts from focusing on our main economic problem: that, long term, we have all but stopped growing. And often measures to raise growth in the long term have adverse effects in the short term, as Mrs Thatcher discovered in the early 80s. So if I had my way, I'd stop the production of very short-term numbers - it's an American practice, partly reflecting and partly causing the very short-term focus of US financial markets, and, like so many American habits we've imported, it is hurting not helping us.

We should go the full Cowperthwaite (ref HongKong) and stop producing GDP figures

an excessive focus on GDP encourages problematic and excessive state interventions. Sir John Cowperthwaite, a governor of Hong Kong, famously refused to compile statistics on the gross output of Hong Kong on the basis that it would just lead to the temptation to unnecessarily 'manage' the economy
https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/106566/html/

If memory serves, Matthew Lesh (the person in the link and Head of Public Policy, Institute of Economic Affairs) lifted that almost directly from PJ O'Rourke. I think it was "Eat The Rich" https://vocal.media/theSwamp/p-j-o-rourke-s-brilliant-treatise .

Cowperthwaite used to be put forward as an exemplar quite a lot: it's nice to see him still cited in the 2020s. But the tenor of the times is towards greater govt interference, not less: the Rwanda Bill, where the Govt says what is a safe country, is a ginormous govt overreach.

SouthamObserver

Three takeaways from yesterday's events:

1. There will almost certainly be deportations to Rwanda this side of a general election.

2. That, along with tax cuts in early 2024, will drive something of a Tory comeback. Labour minority or small majority looks like a much better bet than Labour landslide.

3. The post-fascist Tory far-right is nowhere near as powerful as they and the media have led us to believe. There is a very low likelihood of the Braverman/Jenrick branch of the PCP providing the party's next leader. If 1 and 2 do happen, Cleverley is surely likeliest to succeed Sunak.

eek

SouthamObserver said:

Three takeaways from yesterday's events:

1. There will almost certainly be deportations to Rwanda this side of a general election.

2. That, along with tax cuts in early 2024, will drive something of a Tory comeback. Labour minority or small majority looks like a much better bet than Labour landslide.

3. The post-fascist Tory far-right is nowhere near as powerful as they and the media have led us to believe. There is a very low likelihood of the Braverman/Jenrick branch of the PCP providing the party's next leader. If 1 and 2 do happen, Cleverley is surely likeliest to succeed Sunak.

On point 1 - how it has to get through the Lords and it’s not a manifesto commitment so there is no reason for the Lords to wave it through

eek

Will Hayward
@WillHayCardiff
·
36m
·
Rumours Mark Drakeford may announce he is stepping down today.

Nothing confirmed but heard from multiple sources.

New leader election in January potentially.