I do recall commenting on here about 18 months ago that George was taking a year off deficit reduction and it is true the deficit remained at about 120bn for a significant period but I think we will see this week that we are back on the downward path again and that, if anything, it is somewhat steeper than it was before.
He carried on with his cuts in that spending, excluding the automatic stabilizer social security payments went down, but the deficit failed to move because tax income never went up as fast as expected - mainly due to europe's malaise. The current recovery isn't due to a fiscal stimulus.
The fiscal stimulus provided by the government is massive. We have gone from £10bn a month of additional demand being pumped into the economy to £9bn a month. The only reasonable inference is that without that level of support our economy would still collapse completely.
So it is not a new fiscal stimulus. It is simply a continuation of the fiscal stimulus that peaked in 2008/9 and has been running ever since. This is why I do not agree with SO about the consequences of reducing austerity measures. The reason we flatlinned was not a lack of stimulus or "austerity". It was because there was no credit available in the economy to create additional demand or investment and no export markets available that we were capable of exploiting either.
The improving flow of credit is by far the biggest factor in the present recovery.
Credit for who? Certainly not to SMEs.
But either way, we are talking about something that is not available to the French. So unless you think Labour would not have continued with quantative easing there really can be no comparison with what is happening over there.
From my experience, three small businesses I have contact with have had little problem getting finance (or at least no particular more trouble than pre-2008). However one has had terrible trouble getting R&D tax credits paid by the government in a timely manner. When you are a small company, such delays can prove fatal.
I do recall commenting on here about 18 months ago that George was taking a year off deficit reduction and it is true the deficit remained at about 120bn for a significant period but I think we will see this week that we are back on the downward path again and that, if anything, it is somewhat steeper than it was before.
He carried on with his cuts in that spending, excluding the automatic stabilizer social security payments went down, but the deficit failed to move because tax income never went up as fast as expected - mainly due to europe's malaise. The current recovery isn't due to a fiscal stimulus.
The fiscal stimulus provided by the government is massive. We have gone from £10bn a month of additional demand being pumped into the economy to £9bn a month. The only reasonable inference is that without that level of support our economy would still collapse completely.
So it is not a new fiscal stimulus. It is simply a continuation of the fiscal stimulus that peaked in 2008/9 and has been running ever since. This is why I do not agree with SO about the consequences of reducing austerity measures. The reason we flatlinned was not a lack of stimulus or "austerity". It was because there was no credit available in the economy to create additional demand or investment and no export markets available that we were capable of exploiting either.
The improving flow of credit is by far the biggest factor in the present recovery.
Credit for who? Certainly not to SMEs.
But either way, we are talking about something that is not available to the French. So unless you think Labour would not have continued with quantative easing there really can be no comparison with what is happening over there.
Oh come on SO. Ed made great play of Hollandes election to power, and how it was going to provide an alternative narrative. If Hollande had proved a success, do you really think labour wouldn't have made capital out of it?
That's very different. Ed has been made to look very stupid by his support for Hollande and that stupidity has opened up a legitimate line of attack. But it is a disingenuous one nevertheless. France now is not what the UK would have been. We control our currency and so we control monetary policy. They don't. Not that it would have made much of a difference in their case. The French have been living with their heads in the sand for years. Remember Sarkozy's reaction to the original crash?
"The European Commission is close to concluding that Britain’s nuclear programme at Hinkley Point breaches EU state aid rules and may have to be revised, a move that could lead to long delays and even cause the complex deal to unravel.
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
"The EU’s oversight powers in the energy field are ambiguous. It is largely up to the member states to choose their own energy mix but Article 176 of the Lisbon Treaty gives the EU a number of new but vague powers, to be decided under qualified majority vote. This means Britain does not have a veto."
"The EU’s oversight powers in the energy field are ambiguous. It is largely up to the member states to choose their own energy mix but Article 176 of the Lisbon Treaty gives the EU a number of new but vague powers, to be decided under qualified majority vote. This means Britain does not have a veto."
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
Ho ho ho...
In a leaked diplomatic cable from the United States embassy cable entitled "Lame Duck German Governor Kicked Upstairs as New Energy Commissioner in Brussels," Deputy Chief of Mission in Germany, Greg Delawie notes that "Chancellor Angela Merkel nominated Baden-Wuerttemberg (BW) Minister President Guenther Oettinger as EU Energy Commissioner primarily to remove an unloved lame duck from an important CDU bastion." Before going on to claim "Oettinger is noted for a lackluster public speaking style, and some commentators have asserted that Merkel, who has often stood out at EU meetings, wanted to appoint a German Commissioner who would not outshine her."
Surprised this story isn't gaining more traction - EU wont let us have national assets.
Is this supposed to be a national asset? The government position seems to be that there's no public money involved and no implicit government subsidy, so there's no unfair competition going on.
Surprised this story isn't gaining more traction - EU wont let us have national assets.
Is this supposed to be a national asset? The government position seems to be that there's no public money involved and no implicit government subsidy, so there's no unfair competition going on.
The potential energy source is an asset - even if the bricks and mortar aren't.
Mr. Tokyo, the EU should piss off. If the lights are about to go out then a foreign bureaucrat stopping a new power station or two being built won't go down well.
"The European Commission is close to concluding that Britain’s nuclear programme at Hinkley Point breaches EU state aid rules and may have to be revised, a move that could lead to long delays and even cause the complex deal to unravel.
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
"The European Commission is close to concluding that Britain’s nuclear programme at Hinkley Point breaches EU state aid rules and may have to be revised, a move that could lead to long delays and even cause the complex deal to unravel.
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
From Nation to province
Out of interest would you have been happy with this if exactly the same outcome had been the result of a free trade agreement between Britain and the US that banned governments from using taxpayers' money to subsidize domestic industries?
No doubt all the people who didn't like the idea of the French and the Chinese investing in Hinkley Point are now going to be attacking the EU for getting involved in this.
We broke the UK record! 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours! Amazing morning waiting for official confirmation, we knew we had done it by Saturday evening, but we wanted official confirmation before celebrating! Outsold the Xbox One as well by over 100,000 units.
We broke the UK record! 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours! Amazing morning waiting for official confirmation, we knew we had done it by Saturday evening, but we wanted official confirmation before celebrating! Outsold the Xbox One as well by over 100,000 units.
"The European Commission is close to concluding that Britain’s nuclear programme at Hinkley Point breaches EU state aid rules and may have to be revised, a move that could lead to long delays and even cause the complex deal to unravel.
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
From Nation to province
Out of interest would you have been happy with this if exactly the same outcome had been the result of a free trade agreement between Britain and the US that banned governments from using taxpayers' money to subsidize domestic industries?
Happy or unhappy aren't words I'd use but I am being picky.
If we had the same kind of agreement/dispute with the US we could more likely work out a deal without dozens of other countries chipping in couldn't we?
We broke the UK record! 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours! Amazing morning waiting for official confirmation, we knew we had done it by Saturday evening, but we wanted official confirmation before celebrating! Outsold the Xbox One as well by over 100,000 units.
Grats... I probably won't buy a next-gen console for a while, but rest assured, that although I have a X-Box at the moment, I may well jump ship for the PS4 when I do...
He`s not doing too badly considering the big media houses constantly carp against the tiniest Labour sins and don`t criticise the government for big ones.
But it`s notable that Labour are going on the attack on day to day issues which they weren`t doing before and Ed is more often seen on our screens.So that could help improve his ratings.
Not sure more Ed on tv would be a positive for you.
"The European Commission is close to concluding that Britain’s nuclear programme at Hinkley Point breaches EU state aid rules and may have to be revised, a move that could lead to long delays and even cause the complex deal to unravel.
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
From Nation to province
Out of interest would you have been happy with this if exactly the same outcome had been the result of a free trade agreement between Britain and the US that banned governments from using taxpayers' money to subsidize domestic industries?
Happy or unhappy aren't words I'd use but I am being picky.
If we had the same kind of agreement/dispute with the US we could more likely work out a deal without dozens of other countries chipping in couldn't we?
Wouldn't really want anyone to interfere
I doubt it, Japan is trying get an agreement with the US right now and it involves pretty much everyone with a Pacific coastline. But anyway this is exactly the kind of arrangement Britain always wanted. Without Britain there probably wouldn't be anything like this level of anti-subsidy provision in the EU. If the UK was successfully making trade agreements on its own, this is what they'd look like.
"The European Commission is close to concluding that Britain’s nuclear programme at Hinkley Point breaches EU state aid rules and may have to be revised, a move that could lead to long delays and even cause the complex deal to unravel.
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
From Nation to province
Out of interest would you have been happy with this if exactly the same outcome had been the result of a free trade agreement between Britain and the US that banned governments from using taxpayers' money to subsidize domestic industries?
Happy or unhappy aren't words I'd use but I am being picky.
If we had the same kind of agreement/dispute with the US we could more likely work out a deal without dozens of other countries chipping in couldn't we?
Wouldn't really want anyone to interfere
I doubt it, Japan is trying get an agreement with the US right now and it involves pretty much everyone with a Pacific coastline. But anyway this is exactly the kind of arrangement Britain always wanted. Without Britain there probably wouldn't be anything like this level of anti-subsidy provision in the EU. If the UK was successfully making trade agreements on its own, this is what they'd look like.
Back on topic, just re-asking a question people have asked up-thread in case anyone's missed it:
Can anyone defend the proposition that leader ratings are a useful predictor of general election results?
Perhaps not, at some arbitrarily chosen point like 18 months out.
There is still scope for a game-changer. e.g. Winter of Discontent, Falklands...
Fair enough, how about over an average or something? And is there a timescale where they'd be usefully predictive in a way that wasn't already in the polls?
Paris in the summer reminded me of London in the Seventies. Dirty, rude, living on past glories and having lost its place in the world.
Who will be the French Maggie? If ever a nother country needed one, France is it.
My guess is that Marine Le Pen will either win or be a close second next time around....
Not only has she driven up basic support for FN, she's also made it more acceptable for UMP (and even left wing) voters to back FN in the second round.
I still couldn't see the French electing her as President, but FN should make very large gains in the local elections in March 2014, and the subsequent EU elections.
"The EU’s oversight powers in the energy field are ambiguous. It is largely up to the member states to choose their own energy mix but Article 176 of the Lisbon Treaty gives the EU a number of new but vague powers, to be decided under qualified majority vote. This means Britain does not have a veto."
The article isn't very detailed but it doesn't read like those are actually relevant to this decision. It seems to turn on pre-Lisbon competition rules. If it was up to them I'd imagine the Commission would want: (1) cheap energy, (2) low carbon, so they'd be quite happy for British taxpayers to subsidize nuclear energy production, and it's quite neighbourly of the British to do it a respectful distance from the nearest other member states.
I doubt it, Japan is trying get an agreement with the US right now and it involves pretty much everyone with a Pacific coastline. But anyway this is exactly the kind of arrangement Britain always wanted. Without Britain there probably wouldn't be anything like this level of anti-subsidy provision in the EU. If the UK was successfully making trade agreements on its own, this is what they'd look like.
Edmund is absolutely right; the great centerpiece of Mrs Thatcher's European negotiations was a restriction on the French and Italian states using subsidies to bolster national industries that could then compete with British ones. Her view - largely correctly - was that it was only worth being in a free trade zone where you could prevent what she regarded as illegal competition.
Britain has largely avoided being slapped down by these rules in the past (with the exception of some of our banking rescues), because it's not been in the British DNA to subsidise domestic industries. (Or at least, not since the 1970s.)
That all being said, it is extremely unlikely this deal would fall foul of EU competition law, as the guarantees are similar to the ones in Finland for the Olkiluoto 3 reactor, and there (as far as I am aware) have been no issues there.
Back on topic, just re-asking a question people have asked up-thread in case anyone's missed it:
Can anyone defend the proposition that leader ratings are a useful predictor of general election results?
Perhaps not, at some arbitrarily chosen point like 18 months out.
There is still scope for a game-changer. e.g. Winter of Discontent, Falklands...
Indeed so. We also ought to remember that picking a point 18 months out was in the historic cases an ex post facto analysis. The date of the general election was at that point an unknown variable, unlike now. Indeed, the date itself was in some measure a factor of the relative leadership popularity figures so we need to be very careful to understand the dynamics between leadership figures, election date and election result before drawing any conclusions.
This coming weekend we are going on our annual christmas shopping trip to the Metro Centre in Gateshead. We have been doing this most years for over 20 years now and it has always been interesting to see how the place feels.
Last year was probably the worst since the very early 90s with a significant number of empty units in the run up to Christmas and the restaurants being dead and closing early in some cases. Only a new champagne bar added any buzz to the place. I am hoping for a big improvement.
Supposedly the choices for Scotland are: Inside EU, outside UK or outside EU, inside the UK.
Surely the SNP can come up with a better argument than that.
Where in the article did it say you can't vote to leave because of mass immigration. Surely the writer is saying that there can't be open borders IF you leave.
We broke the UK record! 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours! Amazing morning waiting for official confirmation, we knew we had done it by Saturday evening, but we wanted official confirmation before celebrating! Outsold the Xbox One as well by over 100,000 units.
Congratulations, that's absolutely amazing.
I remember going to an Acorn show at Wembley just after the A5000 was launched. There were trailers behind the show, and boxes were being off-loaded straight into customers' arms. It felt like a cross between a hi-tech show and a Rodney Trotter sales event.
I just wish we'd managed that sort of scale. It really is a different world.
(Having said that, I worked on a project that shifted many millions of units in months. Sadly I'm still under NDA...)
We broke the UK record! 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours! Amazing morning waiting for official confirmation, we knew we had done it by Saturday evening, but we wanted official confirmation before celebrating! Outsold the Xbox One as well by over 100,000 units.
Congratulations, that's absolutely amazing.
I remember going to an Acorn show at Wembley just after the A5000 was launched. There were trailers behind the show, and boxes were being off-loaded straight into customers' arms. It felt like a cross between a hi-tech show and a Rodney Trotter sales event.
I just wish we'd managed that sort of scale. It really is a different world.
(Having said that, I worked on a project that shifted many millions of units in months. Sadly I'm still under NDA...)
Ahh the A5000, my dad (a teacher) bought one of those, must have been around 1990. cost him about £1,500 back then, a huge amount considering what you can get computers for now.
It had a hard disk with a grand total of 40MB worth of storage... awesome!!
Edmund is absolutely right; the great centerpiece of Mrs Thatcher's European negotiations was a restriction on the French and Italian states using subsidies to bolster national industries that could then compete with British ones. Her view - largely correctly - was that it was only worth being in a free trade zone where you could prevent what she regarded as illegal competition.
Britain has largely avoided being slapped down by these rules in the past (with the exception of some of our banking rescues), because it's not been in the British DNA to subsidise domestic industries. (Or at least, not since the 1970s.)
This line of argument displays a worrying level of intellectual incoherence. If you don't want HMG to subsidise industry, then elect politicians to the House of Commons who won't grant the appropriations. There is no need for recourse to the EU. This argument is like those who support the EU because of the Social Chapter, knowing that enacting similar policies in Britain would be considerably more difficult. In addition, other governments' industrial policies should be irrelevant to the basis on which we trade with them. If the Italian government subsidies its exports, why should we object to what is in effect foreign aid to British consumers?
Supposedly the choices for Scotland are: Inside EU, outside UK or outside EU, inside the UK.
Mind you this seems to be from a single Daily Express journalist but some Scottish nationalists retweeted it as fact so meh...
The referendum will be a NO. The SNP have had all the time in the world, since their creation in fact, to paint a compelling picture for Independence. They haven't done so. In fact on the really crucial issues like Currency, EU re-entry, Defense, National Debt / Deficit / Balance of payments, etc they have just abjectly failed to propose anything coherent. It's astonishing.
Eck has blithely assumed that simply because he wants a Sterling zone, to be automatically already within the EU, to take such and such a share of the UK debt, etc that everyone else must just play along and say: 'Fine, no problem, whatever you want Alex'. What a naive idiot.
Now he's published a paper that he can't escape from that the Bank of England, the Brussels machine, and the markets can destroy at their leisure. It's becomng clear to me that he never actually wanted Scotland to be independent.
I wonder if part of this is down to the two-party system eroding. Presumably people are more likely to rate the leaders of parties they support, and the main parties now only represent two thirds of voters between them.
Excellent point. Miliband -23 is not really comparable with Kinnock (1985) +9 because back then the main two parties were commanding about 75% of the market, whereas at the last UK GE they commanded 65% of the market.
Both Miliband and Cameron, have a smaller pool of voters from which to attract positive ratings, and a larger pool of voters from which to attract negative ratings, so a double whammy.
Massively late to this, and I suspect everyone's moved on, but this is a pet bugbear of mine - look at the polling at the end of 85/86, and the Lab/Con combined share is about the same as it is now, or even a touch smaller.
At that point the Alliance were at least as big, as the other two. The last poll of 1985 had Tories on 33, Lab and Alliance on 32.5 each.
One of interesting thing about the 80s generally is how low the Lab/Con combined share was in Mid-Term. Three things seem to have changed that : The collapse in the Alliance, the emergence of more 'centrist' Labour and Tory parties in 90s, and lastly, people having to make up their minds about who next government would really be.
We broke the UK record! 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours! Amazing morning waiting for official confirmation, we knew we had done it by Saturday evening, but we wanted official confirmation before celebrating! Outsold the Xbox One as well by over 100,000 units.
Congratulations, that's absolutely amazing.
I remember going to an Acorn show at Wembley just after the A5000 was launched. There were trailers behind the show, and boxes were being off-loaded straight into customers' arms. It felt like a cross between a hi-tech show and a Rodney Trotter sales event.
I just wish we'd managed that sort of scale. It really is a different world.
(Having said that, I worked on a project that shifted many millions of units in months. Sadly I'm still under NDA...)
Ahh the A5000, my dad (a teacher) bought one of those, must have been around 1990. cost him about £1,500 back then, a huge amount considering what you can get computers for now.
It had a hard disk with a grand total of 40MB worth of storage... awesome!!
The operating system (RISC OS) is still going, and you can get it for the Raspberry Pi. I doubt any of my code is in it any more.
Edmund is absolutely right; the great centerpiece of Mrs Thatcher's European negotiations was a restriction on the French and Italian states using subsidies to bolster national industries that could then compete with British ones. Her view - largely correctly - was that it was only worth being in a free trade zone where you could prevent what she regarded as illegal competition.
Britain has largely avoided being slapped down by these rules in the past (with the exception of some of our banking rescues), because it's not been in the British DNA to subsidise domestic industries. (Or at least, not since the 1970s.)
This line of argument displays a worrying level of intellectual incoherence. If you don't want HMG to subsidise industry, then elect politicians to the House of Commons who won't grant the appropriations. There is no need for recourse to the EU. This argument is like those who support the EU because of the Social Chapter, knowing that enacting similar policies in Britain would be considerably more difficult. In addition, other governments' industrial policies should be irrelevant to the basis on which we trade with them. If the Italian government subsidies its exports, why should we object to what is in effect foreign aid to British consumers?
I have some sympathy with that, especially with things like solar panels, where the US and EU are trying to prevent China from subsidizing hardware, then subsidizing the consumers to fit them themselves. Maybe they should just be saying, "Cool, cheap stuff - thanks, China!". If everyone agreed with that we wouldn't need free trade agreements at all, because nobody would be interested in preventing imports in the first place.
But in the world we actually live in politicians and voters want to prevent _producers_ from being competed with on what they see as unfair terms. In this world, free trade agreements need teeth to stop the "unfair" competition that they won't do the deal without. The question is then whether it's done through pure trade agreements, or through common institutions. A lot of people who don't like the EU seem to think trade agreements would be better, which I think suggests they don't follow what happens in actual trade agreements.
Can someone who knows Twitter tell me if things like Thunderclap are useful, or whether they just get annoying in the end? What's the difference between it and spam?
"When I wake up at night and think about arbitration, it never ceases to amaze me that sovereign states have agreed to investment arbitration at all ... Three private individuals are entrusted with the power to review, without any restriction or appeal procedure, all actions of the government, all decisions of the courts, and all laws and regulations emanating from parliament."
That's very different. Ed has been made to look very stupid by his support for Hollande and that stupidity has opened up a legitimate line of attack. But it is a disingenuous one nevertheless. France now is not what the UK would have been. We control our currency and so we control monetary policy. They don't. Not that it would have made much of a difference in their case. The French have been living with their heads in the sand for years. Remember Sarkozy's reaction to the original crash?
As you are generally a sensible left wing poster, what do you think the implications of a potentially booming economy during the election campaign are for Labour? I imagine they will probably try to keep going on living standards. I am unsure on that one. In 16 months time if things keep going the way they are, unemployment could be below 2,000,000 and if thats the case wages will be rising. What will their pitch be, vote for us and we will try not to muck it up again and give everyone presents?
The anecdotal evidence currently does me make question this living standards stuff anyway, 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours. Are these people struggling to pay their energy bills? I know that comment is a bit crass but it does make me question the living standards line. Its easy to present statistics of falling wages, rising costs but do the statistics relate to real life. I know I am very Southern based (and around here the economy is definitely flourishing)but my trips north of watford this year have demonstrated to me vibrant cities and people with lots of spare cash.
I still think Labour will probably win the next election as people are suckers for promises of free stuff, but a booming economy may make people think again, especially if our nearest competitors continue to struggle.
@BBCMarkEaston: While median household incomes for retired people ROSE 5.1% in real terms during downturn, they FELL 6.4% for non-retired @ONS
Osborne stoking up house prices and protecting all pensioner benefits, what a good idea
Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.
"Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. However, while GDP per person continued to grow at similar rates between 2004/05 and 2007/08, growth of median household income slowed to a fifth of its previous rate in the years immediately before the start of the economic downturn.
Between 2007/08 and 2011/12, average income from employment and investments for the middle fifth of non-retired households fell from £37,900 to £32,600.
Cash benefits for the middle fifth of non-retired households rose from £3,100 to £4,600 between 2007/08 and 2011/12. As a result, the average proportion of gross income coming from cash benefits increased from 7.6% to 12.3% for this group.
Average direct taxes paid by the middle fifth of non-retired households have fallen from £8,700 in 2007/08 to £6,800 in 2011/12. As a percentage of gross income, this is equivalent to a fall from 21.1% to 18.3%. "
2004-5 was also the year that the eight accession countries could migrate here. This may well have had an effect on wage inflation for the middle quintile.
@BBCMarkEaston: While median household incomes for retired people ROSE 5.1% in real terms during downturn, they FELL 6.4% for non-retired @ONS
Osborne stoking up house prices and protecting all pensioner benefits, what a good idea
Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.
"Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. However, while GDP per person continued to grow at similar rates between 2004/05 and 2007/08, growth of median household income slowed to a fifth of its previous rate in the years immediately before the start of the economic downturn.
Between 2007/08 and 2011/12, average income from employment and investments for the middle fifth of non-retired households fell from £37,900 to £32,600.
Cash benefits for the middle fifth of non-retired households rose from £3,100 to £4,600 between 2007/08 and 2011/12. As a result, the average proportion of gross income coming from cash benefits increased from 7.6% to 12.3% for this group.
Average direct taxes paid by the middle fifth of non-retired households have fallen from £8,700 in 2007/08 to £6,800 in 2011/12. As a percentage of gross income, this is equivalent to a fall from 21.1% to 18.3%. "
Paris in the summer reminded me of London in the Seventies. Dirty, rude, living on past glories and having lost its place in the world.
Who will be the French Maggie? If ever a nother country needed one, France is it.
My guess is that Marine Le Pen will either win or be a close second next time around....
Not only has she driven up basic support for FN, she's also made it more acceptable for UMP (and even left wing) voters to back FN in the second round.
I still couldn't see the French electing her as President, but FN should make very large gains in the local elections in March 2014, and the subsequent EU elections.
"Britain's worst gang hit neighbourhoods are seeing levels of sexual violence as bad as in war zones, it was claimed today."
This is happening in France too - more so even but they're more spread out.
When only 1% or so knew about this the media and political class could easily cover it up but once it hits around 10% or so who have direct personal experience of the gang problem then it becomes increasingly difficult for the BBC and media class to maintain the wall of silence.
2004-5 was also the year that the eight accession countries could migrate here. This may well have had an effect on wage inflation for the middle quintile.
@BBCMarkEaston: While median household incomes for retired people ROSE 5.1% in real terms during downturn, they FELL 6.4% for non-retired @ONS
Osborne stoking up house prices and protecting all pensioner benefits, what a good idea
Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.
"Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. However, while GDP per person continued to grow at similar rates between 2004/05 and 2007/08, growth of median household income slowed to a fifth of its previous rate in the years immediately before the start of the economic downturn.
Between 2007/08 and 2011/12, average income from employment and investments for the middle fifth of non-retired households fell from £37,900 to £32,600.
Cash benefits for the middle fifth of non-retired households rose from £3,100 to £4,600 between 2007/08 and 2011/12. As a result, the average proportion of gross income coming from cash benefits increased from 7.6% to 12.3% for this group.
Average direct taxes paid by the middle fifth of non-retired households have fallen from £8,700 in 2007/08 to £6,800 in 2011/12. As a percentage of gross income, this is equivalent to a fall from 21.1% to 18.3%. "
""Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. "
'Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.'
Spot on.
The Resolution Commission on Living Standards.
'The period from 2003 onwards has seen median wages stagnate, and then fall in the aftermath of the 2008-09 recession. From 2003 to 2008, median wages were stagnant. Despite growth in GDP of 11 percent over the period, median earnings fell by an annual average of 0.2% percent for men, and for women rose by 0.3 percent a year. Put simply, a middle earner in 2008 did not earn noticeably more than a middle earner in 2003.'
This line of argument displays a worrying level of intellectual incoherence. If you don't want HMG to subsidise industry, then elect politicians to the House of Commons who won't grant the appropriations. There is no need for recourse to the EU. This argument is like those who support the EU because of the Social Chapter, knowing that enacting similar policies in Britain would be considerably more difficult. In addition, other governments' industrial policies should be irrelevant to the basis on which we trade with them. If the Italian government subsidies its exports, why should we object to what is in effect foreign aid to British consumers?
Like EiT, I have a lot of sympathy with your view :-)
I think the general cause of the 'government subsidy rules' is the possibility that in a recession our motor could industry go to the wall, as subsidised Fiats and Peugots sell at cheap prices.
Good for consumers; bad for workers in those industries.
2004-5 was also the year that the eight accession countries could migrate here. This may well have had an effect on wage inflation for the middle quintile.
@BBCMarkEaston: While median household incomes for retired people ROSE 5.1% in real terms during downturn, they FELL 6.4% for non-retired @ONS
Osborne stoking up house prices and protecting all pensioner benefits, what a good idea
Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.
"Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. However, while GDP per person continued to grow at similar rates between 2004/05 and 2007/08, growth of median household income slowed to a fifth of its previous rate in the years immediately before the start of the economic downturn.
Between 2007/08 and 2011/12, average income from employment and investments for the middle fifth of non-retired households fell from £37,900 to £32,600.
Cash benefits for the middle fifth of non-retired households rose from £3,100 to £4,600 between 2007/08 and 2011/12. As a result, the average proportion of gross income coming from cash benefits increased from 7.6% to 12.3% for this group.
Average direct taxes paid by the middle fifth of non-retired households have fallen from £8,700 in 2007/08 to £6,800 in 2011/12. As a percentage of gross income, this is equivalent to a fall from 21.1% to 18.3%. "
""Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. "
'Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.'
Spot on.
The Resolution Commission on Living Standards.
'The period from 2003 onwards has seen median wages stagnate, and then fall in the aftermath of the 2008-09 recession. From 2003 to 2008, median wages were stagnant. Despite growth in GDP of 11 percent over the period, median earnings fell by an annual average of 0.2% percent for men, and for women rose by 0.3 percent a year. Put simply, a middle earner in 2008 did not earn noticeably more than a middle earner in 2003.'
If median wages are stagnant, it means that relative poverty is likely to reduce.
2004-5 was also the year that the eight accession countries could migrate here. This may well have had an effect on wage inflation for the middle quintile.
@BBCMarkEaston: While median household incomes for retired people ROSE 5.1% in real terms during downturn, they FELL 6.4% for non-retired @ONS
Osborne stoking up house prices and protecting all pensioner benefits, what a good idea
Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.
"Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. However, while GDP per person continued to grow at similar rates between 2004/05 and 2007/08, growth of median household income slowed to a fifth of its previous rate in the years immediately before the start of the economic downturn.
Between 2007/08 and 2011/12, average income from employment and investments for the middle fifth of non-retired households fell from £37,900 to £32,600.
Cash benefits for the middle fifth of non-retired households rose from £3,100 to £4,600 between 2007/08 and 2011/12. As a result, the average proportion of gross income coming from cash benefits increased from 7.6% to 12.3% for this group.
Average direct taxes paid by the middle fifth of non-retired households have fallen from £8,700 in 2007/08 to £6,800 in 2011/12. As a percentage of gross income, this is equivalent to a fall from 21.1% to 18.3%. "
""Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. "
Biggest credit bubble in history 1998-2008.
Lending for consumption slows the velocity of money by transmuting discretionary income into loan repayments leading to a hidden deflationary spiral.
imo
It's why credit bubbles always bust.
also imo
edit: actually your point doesn't contradict this - i think i misread it
On-topic. Doesn't the tables above blow apart the argument that Mrs Thatcher only won the 1983 election due to the 'Falklands Factor'? According to the leadership ratings above she was well on the way to a landslide in December 81 ie 5 months BEFORE the war.
Perhaps the other critical thing in 2004-5 was the sudden increase in money being remitted to Eastern Europe, reducing the velocity of money in the UK. Whichever factor predominated it is increasingly clear that the Osborne/Alexander economic policy is far more sensible than the Brown/Balls one.
Ed Miliband is an interesting combination of policy ideas and ruthless tactics. His dropping of Hollande is an example of this. He is a lot like Wilson. Balls is no Healey though!
2004-5 was also the year that the eight accession countries could migrate here. This may well have had an effect on wage inflation for the middle quintile.
@BBCMarkEaston: While median household incomes for retired people ROSE 5.1% in real terms during downturn, they FELL 6.4% for non-retired @ONS
Osborne stoking up house prices and protecting all pensioner benefits, what a good idea
Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.
"Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. However, while GDP per person continued to grow at similar rates between 2004/05 and 2007/08, growth of median household income slowed to a fifth of its previous rate in the years immediately before the start of the economic downturn.
Between 2007/08 and 2011/12, average income from employment and investments for the middle fifth of non-retired households fell from £37,900 to £32,600.
Cash benefits for the middle fifth of non-retired households rose from £3,100 to £4,600 between 2007/08 and 2011/12. As a result, the average proportion of gross income coming from cash benefits increased from 7.6% to 12.3% for this group.
Average direct taxes paid by the middle fifth of non-retired households have fallen from £8,700 in 2007/08 to £6,800 in 2011/12. As a percentage of gross income, this is equivalent to a fall from 21.1% to 18.3%. "
""Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. "
Biggest credit bubble in history 1998-2008.
Lending for consumption slows the velocity of money by transmuting discretionary income into loan repayments leading to a hidden deflationary spiral.
imo
It's why credit bubbles always bust.
also imo
edit: actually your point doesn't contradict this - i think i misread it
On-topic. Doesn't the tables above blow apart the argument that Mrs Thatcher only won the 1983 election due to the 'Falklands Factor'? According to the leadership ratings above she was well on the way to a landslide in December 81 ie 5 months BEFORE the war.
Hardly , the December 1981 polls had the Conservatives in 3rd place with Aliiance polling over 40% and in one Gallup poll over 50% .
Perhaps the other critical thing in 2004-5 was the sudden increase in money being remitted to Eastern Europe, reducing the velocity of money in the UK. Whichever factor predominated it is increasingly clear that the Osborne/Alexander economic policy is far more sensible than the Brown/Balls one.
Ed Miliband is an interesting combination of policy ideas and ruthless tactics. His dropping of Hollande is an example of this. He is a lot like Wilson. Balls is no Healey though!
2004-5 was also the year that the eight accession countries could migrate here. This may well have had an effect on wage inflation for the middle quintile.
@BBCMarkEaston: While median household incomes for retired people ROSE 5.1% in real terms during downturn, they FELL 6.4% for non-retired @ONS
Osborne stoking up house prices and protecting all pensioner benefits, what a good idea
Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.
"Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. However, while GDP per person continued to grow at similar rates between 2004/05 and 2007/08, growth of median household income slowed to a fifth of its previous rate in the years immediately before the start of the economic downturn.
Between 2007/08 and 2011/12, average income from employment and investments for the middle fifth of non-retired households fell from £37,900 to £32,600.
Cash benefits for the middle fifth of non-retired households rose from £3,100 to £4,600 between 2007/08 and 2011/12. As a result, the average proportion of gross income coming from cash benefits increased from 7.6% to 12.3% for this group.
Average direct taxes paid by the middle fifth of non-retired households have fallen from £8,700 in 2007/08 to £6,800 in 2011/12. As a percentage of gross income, this is equivalent to a fall from 21.1% to 18.3%. "
""Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. "
Biggest credit bubble in history 1998-2008.
Lending for consumption slows the velocity of money by transmuting discretionary income into loan repayments leading to a hidden deflationary spiral.
imo
It's why credit bubbles always bust.
also imo
edit: actually your point doesn't contradict this - i think i misread it
"money being remitted to Eastern Europe, reducing the velocity of money in the UK"
yes, money being shipped out must have an effect on this.
Comments
This might just be the tech sector, though.
(shakes head in DISGUST).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10487375/Hinkley-Point-deal-under-threat-from-EU-ruling.html
"The European Commission is close to concluding that Britain’s nuclear programme at Hinkley Point breaches EU state aid rules and may have to be revised, a move that could lead to long delays and even cause the complex deal to unravel.
"Günther Oettinger, the EU’s energy commissioner, warned last month that “35-year feed-in tariffs may be a problem”, adding that the EU might do better to invest more in wind and gas. He earlier described the UK nuclear deal as a throw-back to the “Soviet” era."
"The EU’s oversight powers in the energy field are ambiguous. It is largely up to the member states to choose their own energy mix but Article 176 of the Lisbon Treaty gives the EU a number of new but vague powers, to be decided under qualified majority vote. This means Britain does not have a veto."
Mr. Flashman (deceased), the EU is a vile organisation.
In a leaked diplomatic cable from the United States embassy cable entitled "Lame Duck German Governor Kicked Upstairs as New Energy Commissioner in Brussels," Deputy Chief of Mission in Germany, Greg Delawie notes that "Chancellor Angela Merkel nominated Baden-Wuerttemberg (BW) Minister President Guenther Oettinger as EU Energy Commissioner primarily to remove an unloved lame duck from an important CDU bastion." Before going on to claim "Oettinger is noted for a lackluster public speaking style, and some commentators have asserted that Merkel, who has often stood out at EU meetings, wanted to appoint a German Commissioner who would not outshine her."
We broke the UK record! 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours! Amazing morning waiting for official confirmation, we knew we had done it by Saturday evening, but we wanted official confirmation before celebrating! Outsold the Xbox One as well by over 100,000 units.
*kidding*
If we had the same kind of agreement/dispute with the US we could more likely work out a deal without dozens of other countries chipping in couldn't we?
Wouldn't really want anyone to interfere
That said, I expected no less from the world's first parallelepiped console.
[NB don't own a PS4 and won't get one for months at least, I'm just curious]
There is still scope for a game-changer. e.g. Winter of Discontent, Falklands...
Ed has a habit of that, not to be trusted.
Still, it is a useful reminder of socialism in action.
I still couldn't see the French electing her as President, but FN should make very large gains in the local elections in March 2014, and the subsequent EU elections.
http://wingsoverscotland.com/juxtaposed-with-eu/
Supposedly the choices for Scotland are: Inside EU, outside UK or outside EU, inside the UK.
Mind you this seems to be from a single Daily Express journalist but some Scottish nationalists retweeted it as fact so meh...
Britain has largely avoided being slapped down by these rules in the past (with the exception of some of our banking rescues), because it's not been in the British DNA to subsidise domestic industries. (Or at least, not since the 1970s.)
That all being said, it is extremely unlikely this deal would fall foul of EU competition law, as the guarantees are similar to the ones in Finland for the Olkiluoto 3 reactor, and there (as far as I am aware) have been no issues there.
Last year was probably the worst since the very early 90s with a significant number of empty units in the run up to Christmas and the restaurants being dead and closing early in some cases. Only a new champagne bar added any buzz to the place. I am hoping for a big improvement.
I remember going to an Acorn show at Wembley just after the A5000 was launched. There were trailers behind the show, and boxes were being off-loaded straight into customers' arms. It felt like a cross between a hi-tech show and a Rodney Trotter sales event.
I just wish we'd managed that sort of scale. It really is a different world.
(Having said that, I worked on a project that shifted many millions of units in months. Sadly I'm still under NDA...)
It had a hard disk with a grand total of 40MB worth of storage... awesome!!
Eck has blithely assumed that simply because he wants a Sterling zone, to be automatically already within the EU, to take such and such a share of the UK debt, etc that everyone else must just play along and say: 'Fine, no problem, whatever you want Alex'. What a naive idiot.
Now he's published a paper that he can't escape from that the Bank of England, the Brussels machine, and the markets can destroy at their leisure. It's becomng clear to me that he never actually wanted Scotland to be independent.
At that point the Alliance were at least as big, as the other two. The last poll of 1985 had Tories on 33, Lab and Alliance on 32.5 each.
See here: http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-1983-1987
One of interesting thing about the 80s generally is how low the Lab/Con combined share was in Mid-Term. Three things seem to have changed that : The collapse in the Alliance, the emergence of more 'centrist' Labour and Tory parties in 90s, and lastly, people having to make up their minds about who next government would really be.
https://www.riscosopen.org/content/
I miss it. How can anyone feel a yearning for something as esoteric as an operating system?
But in the world we actually live in politicians and voters want to prevent _producers_ from being competed with on what they see as unfair terms. In this world, free trade agreements need teeth to stop the "unfair" competition that they won't do the deal without. The question is then whether it's done through pure trade agreements, or through common institutions. A lot of people who don't like the EU seem to think trade agreements would be better, which I think suggests they don't follow what happens in actual trade agreements.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/30/obama-miliband-no-10-mitt-romney-labour-campaign
Can someone who knows Twitter tell me if things like Thunderclap are useful, or whether they just get annoying in the end? What's the difference between it and spam?
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/us-trade-deal-full-frontal-assault-on-democracy
Quoting a judge from an investor-state tribunal:
That's very different. Ed has been made to look very stupid by his support for Hollande and that stupidity has opened up a legitimate line of attack. But it is a disingenuous one nevertheless. France now is not what the UK would have been. We control our currency and so we control monetary policy. They don't. Not that it would have made much of a difference in their case. The French have been living with their heads in the sand for years. Remember Sarkozy's reaction to the original crash?
As you are generally a sensible left wing poster, what do you think the implications of a potentially booming economy during the election campaign are for Labour? I imagine they will probably try to keep going on living standards. I am unsure on that one. In 16 months time if things keep going the way they are, unemployment could be below 2,000,000 and if thats the case wages will be rising. What will their pitch be, vote for us and we will try not to muck it up again and give everyone presents?
The anecdotal evidence currently does me make question this living standards stuff anyway, 250,000 PS4s sold in 24 hours. Are these people struggling to pay their energy bills? I know that comment is a bit crass but it does make me question the living standards line. Its easy to present statistics of falling wages, rising costs but do the statistics relate to real life. I know I am very Southern based (and around here the economy is definitely flourishing)but my trips north of watford this year have demonstrated to me vibrant cities and people with lots of spare cash.
I still think Labour will probably win the next election as people are suckers for promises of free stuff, but a booming economy may make people think again, especially if our nearest competitors continue to struggle.
"Britain's worst gang hit neighbourhoods are seeing levels of sexual violence as bad as in war zones, it was claimed today."
This is happening in France too - more so even but they're more spread out.
When only 1% or so knew about this the media and political class could easily cover it up but once it hits around 10% or so who have direct personal experience of the gang problem then it becomes increasingly difficult for the BBC and media class to maintain the wall of silence.
""Between 1995/96 and 2004/05, UK median household income grew at an average rate of 3.7% per year, faster than GDP per person, which grew at 2.9% per year. "
Biggest credit bubble in history 1998-2008.
'Hmm, stagnating median incomes even before the recession. Looks like Labour's cost of living crisis started while they were in power.'
Spot on.
The Resolution Commission on Living Standards.
'The period from 2003 onwards has seen median wages stagnate, and then fall in the aftermath of the 2008-09 recession.
From 2003 to 2008, median wages were stagnant. Despite growth in GDP of 11 percent over the period, median earnings fell by an annual average of 0.2% percent for men, and for women rose by 0.3 percent a year. Put simply, a middle earner in 2008 did not earn noticeably more than a middle earner in 2003.'
I think the general cause of the 'government subsidy rules' is the possibility that in a recession our motor could industry go to the wall, as subsidised Fiats and Peugots sell at cheap prices.
Good for consumers; bad for workers in those industries.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2069214/Child-poverty-Iain-Duncan-Smith-right-Gordon-Browns-goalposts-back.html
And if people decide on silly targets, it is the poor wot suffer!
imo
It's why credit bubbles always bust.
also imo
edit: actually your point doesn't contradict this - i think i misread it
Ed Miliband is an interesting combination of policy ideas and ruthless tactics. His dropping of Hollande is an example of this. He is a lot like Wilson. Balls is no Healey though!
yes, money being shipped out must have an effect on this.