What happens to recoverable tax on income at higher tax rates used to charitable donations? Does 40% tax get recovered at 40% etc, or is it capped at base rate?
Like a lot of others my income is going very lumpy, with a chunk being pushed into 21-22 some of which may be at a higher rate therefore.
Wondering about donating some of that to a local community centre charity for the after-Covid recovery project. Do they get extra benefit if I wait until the next FY?
If you are paying tax at 40% the charity only gets the basic rate of 20%. You can reclaim the additional 20% in your tax return (until you are giving so much that your effective tax level falls under the 40% limit).
However, it is possible to make gifts of assets direct to the charity and claim all the value of that to subtract from your income. The charity doesn't need to claim any tax back but you do. NB: there is a formal procedure whereby you can sell it on behalf of the charity and send them the net proceeds, but they have to formally ask you, and you need to keep the paperwork of course. The charity will know what it can and can't do.
Edit: there may be CGT issues with the latter. But CGT is also relieved in such circs I believe. (Wasn't an issue for me as I had just received the shares in question in a bequest.)
Thanks for that.
I have been coming to deals to help struggling tenants through - combination of rent freeze, part write-off and part delayed payments as most LLs are doing to help Ts cope with Covid effects. Unfortunately this shifts my tax profile between years.
I've also got a probate for a parent's estate happening in the middle of it all, so it is very difficult to predict where I will be.
My commiserations re the probate - I was in that position earlier last year, complete pain.
One other point if you are in a charitable mood - you could make your gifts out of the parental estate itself. This would save 40% IHT if that is being incurred. Also, one of the problems of doing probate is small holdings of shares - esp. old privatisation allocations - which are disproportionately expensive to sell off and process. You could transfer them to Sharegift and they will sell them (efficiently, with other like gifts of small holdings) and send the dosh to trhe charity you designate. Sharegift get given lots of shares without any charity being named, so when they send the money from your shares to the charity you name, they add on a share of the unallocated money - so the charity you want gets even more.
This is also a good way to give shares that you yourself hold.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
Well they shouldn't "get blasted" for it, that's ridiculous.
What they do deserve to "get blasted" for is incarcerating the public in their own homes without giving them an idea of when they will be released.
They've given an idea. By the Spring with a formal review in the middle of February.
What more specific information do you want pre-empting the review in the middle of February?
Its the same bullshittery from the media as Wednesday press conference...what about summer holidays for 50% of the questions....we have 30k+ in hospital with covid, 1000+ dying a day, and they attach this incredible importance to the government inability to say if you should book your summer holiday or not....during a global pandemic with mutant variants that we don't know if vaccinations will even work against...but I demand to.know if I can book my usual summer break in Greece.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
Well they shouldn't "get blasted" for it, that's ridiculous.
What they do deserve to "get blasted" for is incarcerating the public in their own homes without giving them an idea of when they will be released.
Well they get blasted for both, so while I'd like to see one too I'm not able to get outraged if they decide to only get blasted for one.
Because setting end dates like this has clearly worked wonders in the past.
It would be mad to set dates for lockdown to ease. But I guess what they could do, to engender some optimism, is set out some metrics that they are going to use to measure when lockdowns could be eased.
For example, we will start easing measures once a) positive tests are less than 5,000 per day, and b) average daily deaths are under 100. It's too early to use vaccination data as part of these metrics.
It needs to be something like cases are falling by x% a week and we have y% spare capacity in the hospitalisation numbers in case the measure(s) we're dropping are enough to get cases rising again.
Easier said than done since there's many different co-variables that don't all move in the same direction at the same time.
Say they announce x% and y% then by the review greater than x% falls are happening (Good), but lower than y% space capacity has been achieved (Bad) - or vice-versa.
You'd have some screaming that the x% has been achieved so end lockdown now, others screaming that y% has not been achieved so lockdown must be maintained - and whatever decision is taken would be excoriated with the media jumping on the bandwagon of whichever of x% of y% is in contravention of the decision made.
The reality is its complicated and a holistic view of the data will be needed. There aren't arbitrary thresholds (except R>1 is awful).
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
Well they shouldn't "get blasted" for it, that's ridiculous.
What they do deserve to "get blasted" for is incarcerating the public in their own homes without giving them an idea of when they will be released.
Bravo!
This is where I agree with you – I've often said that you make interesting points from a philosophical perspective on this matter.
It's your conspiracy theories and love of Trump that lets you down!!
I don;t really love Trump.
What I love is freedom, and I believe the best way to achieve and preserve that freedon is the democratic mixed economy nation state.
I have no truck whatsoever with Qanon, the great reset, Lin Wood or Sidney Powell. For the record.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
Haven't you figured out that everything George Osborne said was wrong so you can throw away your 2010 election notes? Austerity was not the answer then, and we can agree it is not the answer now.
2010 was not now. 2010 was over a year after the recession ended. If the recession ends in the Spring then next year or the year after will be time to take stock of the situation and fix what needs fixing.
But 10% deficits, going long-term when you're not in a recession anymore, are not viable or sustainable and lead to exponential growth. That's why you try not to go into recessions having maxed out the deficit already.
If the deficit was, as you say, maxed out, then it cannot be bigger now. But it is so it wasn't. Nor do we have a national credit card. Nor do we have hyper-inflation. Nor is there a bond market strike.
We are only capable of borrowing more now because the printing presses are rolling. Do you have any idea how much QE has been created this year? 🙄
And this is during a recession, not before it or after it.
Are you still seriously incapable of comprehending what exponential growth does to a system? 10% deficits are absolutely catastrophic - and absolutely the result of being so totally negligent and hubristic to the finances as to think busts had been abolished so it was OK to run a 3% deficit GOING INTO the recession.
Learn from history and move on, stop trying to deny that exponential growth is no big deal - you're as bad as Toby Young.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
Well they shouldn't "get blasted" for it, that's ridiculous.
What they do deserve to "get blasted" for is incarcerating the public in their own homes without giving them an idea of when they will be released.
I think the government has realised giving people false hope is worse than saying nothing until they know what the strategy is. Right now because of the 1 dose gamble there's no real way of knowing what the hospital situation will be like by mid March, so it's better not to say until the current 5m people who have been jabbed start seeing some level of immunity in a couple of weeks and we can finally assess just how much of an effect it will have.
Unfortunately for the public it means not knowing and that's a horrible mental state for a huge number of people, myself included. I'm in a position where I have more knowledge on it than most because of the job that I do and from understanding the mathematical dynamics of viral replication models. For people who aren't studied in such things there is no way to even take a guess other than hoping that by Easter it's better.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
Well they shouldn't "get blasted" for it, that's ridiculous.
What they do deserve to "get blasted" for is incarcerating the public in their own homes without giving them an idea of when they will be released.
They've given an idea. By the Spring with a formal review in the middle of February.
What more specific information do you want pre-empting the review in the middle of February?
I must admit I wasn't aware of a Valentine's Day review. That is better news. Okay.
Yes.
That's the deadline for rolling out the 4 critical priority group vaccines, with the results of the review to be announced the following week.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
We're in worse shape now. If you don't believe me call up Sunak and offer him the swap. He'll bite your hand off.
Better shape to deal with it is what I said.
Imagine if we'd gone into this with Brown's structural deficit rather than having closed that. Horrific thought. 😱
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
Well they shouldn't "get blasted" for it, that's ridiculous.
What they do deserve to "get blasted" for is incarcerating the public in their own homes without giving them an idea of when they will be released.
I think the government has realised giving people false hope is worse than saying nothing until they know what the strategy is. Right now because of the 1 dose gamble there's no real way of knowing what the hospital situation will be like by mid March, so it's better not to say until the current 5m people who have been jabbed start seeing some level of immunity in a couple of weeks and we can finally assess just how much of an effect it will have.
Unfortunately for the public it means not knowing and that's a horrible mental state for a huge number of people, myself included. I'm in a position where I have more knowledge on it than most because of the job that I do and from understanding the mathematical dynamics of viral replication models. For people who aren't studied in such things there is no way to even take a guess other than hoping that by Easter it's better.
Early on when Whitty said the only way out was a vaccine and the timeline was at least 18 months to develop one, i mentally set in for the long haul. I just worked on the principle that the next 2 years will be lived under severe restrictions and ignored Boris claims of free by....I am still sticking to it could easily be the rest of this year and not making plans for foreign trips etc.
Because setting end dates like this has clearly worked wonders in the past.
It would be mad to set dates for lockdown to ease. But I guess what they could do, to engender some optimism, is set out some metrics that they are going to use to measure when lockdowns could be eased.
For example, we will start easing measures once a) positive tests are less than 5,000 per day, and b) average daily deaths are under 100. It's too early to use vaccination data as part of these metrics.
It needs to be something like cases are falling by x% a week and we have y% spare capacity in the hospitalisation numbers in case the measure(s) we're dropping are enough to get cases rising again.
Easier said than done since there's many different co-variables that don't all move in the same direction at the same time.
Say they announce x% and y% then by the review greater than x% falls are happening (Good), but lower than y% space capacity has been achieved (Bad) - or vice-versa.
You'd have some screaming that the x% has been achieved so end lockdown now, others screaming that y% has not been achieved so lockdown must be maintained - and whatever decision is taken would be excoriated with the media jumping on the bandwagon of whichever of x% of y% is in contravention of the decision made.
The reality is its complicated and a holistic view of the data will be needed. There aren't arbitrary thresholds (except R>1 is awful).
Fair points. I think those are the sort of criteria they need to use internally, but communicating them certainly is a challenge.
One thing that can be made clear though is that the restrictions will be eased gradually, through regular reviews with enough time between them to assess the impact of previous steps.
More importantly however, I think Barack Obama wins this contest, though I'd give the prize to George W. Bush for having Casino Royale on his watch, like Iraq, we can pretend Die Another Day never happened.
Tricky Dick wins that competition, Bill in second place by virtue of GoldenEye.
Reagan, for me.
Normally we agree on Bond films, but I have to challenge you here.
Lyndon Johnson is the winner I would say – all three of his films are top drawer.
Casino Royale is the best Bond film of all, but sadly Dubya is let down by Die Another Day and Quantum of Solace – two of the very worst pictures in the series.
The Living Daylights is my favourite, but I agree Casino Royale is superb.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
I am looking forwards to the second, or is it third, round of questions along the lines of "its OK for me to X, its OK for me to do Y, but I can't go elephant water skiing on a Thursday with me mam. Its so CONFEWSIN"
Beth Rigby, I'm looking at you, you complete and utter dullard.
Surely Sky are not stupid enough to put her in that position on her return?
The government would put up Gove, and make sure she quickly went right back in her box. “I’m not sure what your question is trying to achieve, but maybe your personal experience shows that you lot should be publicising the rules clearly, rather than trying to find edge-cases and loopholes in them?”
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
Because setting end dates like this has clearly worked wonders in the past.
It would be mad to set dates for lockdown to ease. But I guess what they could do, to engender some optimism, is set out some metrics that they are going to use to measure when lockdowns could be eased.
For example, we will start easing measures once a) positive tests are less than 5,000 per day, and b) average daily deaths are under 100. It's too early to use vaccination data as part of these metrics.
It needs to be something like cases are falling by x% a week and we have y% spare capacity in the hospitalisation numbers in case the measure(s) we're dropping are enough to get cases rising again.
Easier said than done since there's many different co-variables that don't all move in the same direction at the same time.
Say they announce x% and y% then by the review greater than x% falls are happening (Good), but lower than y% space capacity has been achieved (Bad) - or vice-versa.
You'd have some screaming that the x% has been achieved so end lockdown now, others screaming that y% has not been achieved so lockdown must be maintained - and whatever decision is taken would be excoriated with the media jumping on the bandwagon of whichever of x% of y% is in contravention of the decision made.
The reality is its complicated and a holistic view of the data will be needed. There aren't arbitrary thresholds (except R>1 is awful).
Fair points. I think those are the sort of criteria they need to use internally, but communicating them certainly is a challenge.
One thing that can be made clear though is that the restrictions will be eased gradually, through regular reviews with enough time between them to assess the impact of previous steps.
Agreed. Plus of course as we go on then if we can keep R down then the vaccine rollout will be continuing in the background which will further reduce R too and allow greater relaxations too.
One issue though is we are getting the lowest hanging fruit with the vaccine right now - which is good because we need it the most now. From February second doses will be beginning for people and all 14 million who've already got their vaccine will be requiring their booster shot in the next phase of rollout - so we really need to be upping daily vaccinations eventually to >600k per day in weekdays to have an ongoing major impact.
The press are a herd animal, so when they turn - and I think its pretty much nailed on that they will - they will turn as one and it will be as if they were fighting Eurasia all along. Expect that revisionism by the Summer.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
I am looking forwards to the second, or is it third, round of questions along the lines of "its OK for me to X, its OK for me to do Y, but I can't go elephant water skiing on a Thursday with me mam. Its so CONFEWSIN"
Beth Rigby, I'm looking at you, you complete and utter dullard.
Surely Sky are not stupid enough to put her in that position on her return?
The government would put up Gove, and make sure she quickly went right back in her box. “I’m not sure what your question is trying to achieve, but maybe your personal experience shows that you lot should be publicising the rules clearly, rather than trying to find edge-cases and loopholes in them?”
Surely, Sky are not stupid enough to allow Beth Rigby to return at all?
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
I am looking forwards to the second, or is it third, round of questions along the lines of "its OK for me to X, its OK for me to do Y, but I can't go elephant water skiing on a Thursday with me mam. Its so CONFEWSIN"
Beth Rigby, I'm looking at you, you complete and utter dullard.
Surely Sky are not stupid enough to put her in that position on her return?
The government would put up Gove, and make sure she quickly went right back in her box. “I’m not sure what your question is trying to achieve, but maybe your personal experience shows that you lot should be publicising the rules clearly, rather than trying to find edge-cases and loopholes in them?”
I mean, that's the route they should have taken from the effing start.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is that it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
No that's not the point. Last time it was not needed in 2008 because 2008 was during the recession. Who on Earth called for austerity DURING THE RECESSION in 2008?
What you lot seem to forget is that 2010-2018 when austerity finally closed the gap was not during the recession - it was years to a decade after the recession!
The priority right now is to get through the recession out to the other side. Once we're out the other side then difficult choices may be needed. If in 2022/23 we have a 10% deficit then some form of plan or drastic action will absolutely be needed to close it. Hopefully we won't have a 10% deficit this time, despite this recession being far worse, because we weren't so naked going into it.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
The mistake is to mention a date/time. It should be based on benchmarks to do with infection rates, etc.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
I am looking forwards to the second, or is it third, round of questions along the lines of "its OK for me to X, its OK for me to do Y, but I can't go elephant water skiing on a Thursday with me mam. Its so CONFEWSIN"
Beth Rigby, I'm looking at you, you complete and utter dullard.
Surely Sky are not stupid enough to put her in that position on her return?
The government would put up Gove, and make sure she quickly went right back in her box. “I’m not sure what your question is trying to achieve, but maybe your personal experience shows that you lot should be publicising the rules clearly, rather than trying to find edge-cases and loopholes in them?”
I mean, that's the route they should have taken from the effing start.
Oh, very much so. I’ve been one of the most vocal on here about the utter failure of the media to understand their role during the pandemic - driven by following media from several other countries.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
The mistake is to mention a date/time. It should be based on benchmarks to do with infection rates, etc.
The problem is that to do it properly the metrics / formulations would have to be rather complex....so the media would immediately scream TOO CONFUSING...
Spain is literally throwing away unused vaccines and not only on corrupt politicians. some of it goes in the bin. Just as well we have loads to spa...................oh wait a minute .. NO WE F*****G DON'T!
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
We're in worse shape now. If you don't believe me call up Sunak and offer him the swap. He'll bite your hand off.
I think you're mistaken on this.
The economy will roar back once the virus is gone. After the financial crisis that wasn't the case at all.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
We're in worse shape now. If you don't believe me call up Sunak and offer him the swap. He'll bite your hand off.
I think you're mistaken on this.
The economy will roar back once the virus is gone. After the financial crisis that wasn't the case at all.
And that's despite the fact that after the financial crisis the UK economy grew faster over the last decade than the Eurozone did. Despite Brexit being voted for halfway through the decade.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
We're in worse shape now. If you don't believe me call up Sunak and offer him the swap. He'll bite your hand off.
I think you're mistaken on this.
The economy will roar back once the virus is gone. After the financial crisis that wasn't the case at all.
The OBR is not expecting to return to pre-Covid employment levels for FOUR YEARS.
What happens to recoverable tax on income at higher tax rates used to charitable donations? Does 40% tax get recovered at 40% etc, or is it capped at base rate?
Like a lot of others my income is going very lumpy, with a chunk being pushed into 21-22 some of which may be at a higher rate therefore.
Wondering about donating some of that to a local community centre charity for the after-Covid recovery project. Do they get extra benefit if I wait until the next FY?
If you are paying tax at 40% the charity only gets the basic rate of 20%. You can reclaim the additional 20% in your tax return (until you are giving so much that your effective tax level falls under the 40% limit).
However, it is possible to make gifts of assets direct to the charity and claim all the value of that to subtract from your income. The charity doesn't need to claim any tax back but you do. NB: there is a formal procedure whereby you can sell it on behalf of the charity and send them the net proceeds, but they have to formally ask you, and you need to keep the paperwork of course. The charity will know what it can and can't do.
Wow. That's detailed advice.
I have a question about VAT registration if I may.
If I make most of my income from employment (PAYE) does this count against the VAT registration limit on the freelance work I do on the side?
i.e. do I have to register for VAT if my total income (including my salary) exceeds £85k pa or only if my freelance commissions (excluding my salary) do?
This is definitely veering into "ask your accountant" territory, but no, in general your PAYE income doesn’t count against the VAT registration limit /so long as these are separate businesses/.
If you’re paying yourself PAYE out of a personal services limited company & doing freelance work on the side in the same line of work then I have a strong feeling the HMRC would regard this as deliberately splitting up a single line of business in order to avoid the VAT threshold & get very unhappy were they ever to spot it.
On the other hand, my understanding is that if you were (say) working in IT on a PAYE basis for a large firm & doing IT work on the side then there’s no way these two businesses could be conflated & so the VAT threshold would apply solely to the freelance work. The VAT threshold is technically a per business thing, not a per person thing.
But as I say, this is really a question for your accountant.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
If Sunak is stupid enough to go for austerity in a few months time, or next year or whatever, then we will be able to handily compare and contrast as Biden turns on the taps in the US. Big infrastructure spending coming.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is that it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
No that's not the point. Last time it was not needed in 2008 because 2008 was during the recession. Who on Earth called for austerity DURING THE RECESSION in 2008?
What you lot seem to forget is that 2010-2018 when austerity finally closed the gap was not during the recession - it was years to a decade after the recession!
The priority right now is to get through the recession out to the other side. Once we're out the other side then difficult choices may be needed. If in 2022/23 we have a 10% deficit then some form of plan or drastic action will absolutely be needed to close it. Hopefully we won't have a 10% deficit this time, despite this recession being far worse, because we weren't so naked going into it.
I'm afraid something does not cease to be a point purely because you have no answer to it. We were screwed then and had to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. We are screwed now and will have to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. As to timing, you should read what I write instead of rushing to argue with it. I'm not suggesting austerity right this minute. That would be crazy. I'm talking about once we've clambered up off the floor. At that point difficult choices will (not may) be needed. Emphasis on tax rises rather than spending cuts this time, I hope, and with those tax rises targeted at the better off.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
If Sunak is stupid enough to go for austerity in a few months time, or next year or whatever, then we will be able to handily compare and contrast as Biden turns on the taps in the US. Big infrastructure spending coming.
We're not going to have austerity measures. I actually think the US and UK will begin to silently scrub QE debt to some off the books ledger and then be forgotten about forever.
What happens when the U.K. shuts the border or demands daily testing for the unvaccinated French?
My opinion? This year will produce a vintage French whine.....
And the English varieties are also now very competitive. Sparkling? Not so much.
Well, apart from Best Sparkling Wine Producer at the International Wine and Spirit Competition 2020? I'm talking in the world - ahead of all the French champagne houses. Langham Wine Estate, Dorset. From vines only planted a decade ago.
Seriously, I see the logic, but wonder about 1. the moral hazard; 2. what qualifies as being a smoker; and 3. how is it going to be implemented.
For example, who is a smoker? Is it someone who smoked for 30 years and quit 2 years ago? Is it someone who has been smoking for 3 months and continues to do so? How is this going to be verified?
If someone turned up for a job interview with me looking that...I would not employ them.
First job I had at a tech start-up, the owner had a green mohawk and lived in this chalked stained hole-ridden jumper the whole time I worked there. He retired in his early 30s as he had made so much money. I hate to think if his business hadn't worked out and he ever had to go for a normal job.
What happens to recoverable tax on income at higher tax rates used to charitable donations? Does 40% tax get recovered at 40% etc, or is it capped at base rate?
Like a lot of others my income is going very lumpy, with a chunk being pushed into 21-22 some of which may be at a higher rate therefore.
Wondering about donating some of that to a local community centre charity for the after-Covid recovery project. Do they get extra benefit if I wait until the next FY?
If you are paying tax at 40% the charity only gets the basic rate of 20%. You can reclaim the additional 20% in your tax return (until you are giving so much that your effective tax level falls under the 40% limit).
However, it is possible to make gifts of assets direct to the charity and claim all the value of that to subtract from your income. The charity doesn't need to claim any tax back but you do. NB: there is a formal procedure whereby you can sell it on behalf of the charity and send them the net proceeds, but they have to formally ask you, and you need to keep the paperwork of course. The charity will know what it can and can't do.
Wow. That's detailed advice.
I have a question about VAT registration if I may.
If I make most of my income from employment (PAYE) does this count against the VAT registration limit on the freelance work I do on the side?
i.e. do I have to register for VAT if my total income (including my salary) exceeds £85k pa or only if my freelance commissions (excluding my salary) do?
This is definitely veering into "ask your accountant" territory, but no, in general your PAYE income doesn’t count against the VAT registration limit /so long as these are separate businesses/.
If you’re paying yourself PAYE out of a personal services limited company & doing freelance work on the side in the same line of work then I have a strong feeling the HMRC would regard this as deliberately splitting up a single line of business in order to avoid the VAT threshold & get very unhappy were they ever to spot it.
On the other hand, my understanding is that if you were (say) working in IT on a PAYE basis for a large firm & doing IT work on the side then there’s no way these two businesses could be conflated & so the VAT threshold would apply solely to the freelance work. The VAT threshold is technically a per business thing, not a per person thing.
But as I say, this is really a question for your accountant.
I'm definitely in the latter group (albeit a different industry). I'm full-time employed through a company and do the odd freelance commission on the side. Indeed what I can find online fully supports what you have said.
It is entirely deliberate, for some reason his entirely fake personality of a bumbling idiot means a significant number of people excuse his persistent blunders. He is way more aware of this than the public are.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Or a century or two of gradually allowing it to erode through moderate levels of inflation, related to sustainable levels of growth. Austerity has been fairly conclusively demonstrated to be counter-productive, so why not just build from where we are? We've still got relatively favourable borrowing rates, we're still a fiat currency. We are in "the danger is deflation" phase of the historical cycle, and we can shift into a "the danger is inflation" phase if necessary, in the short term.
People seem to think we need to address these things in the order of a parliament, or a decade, or a generation, but it doesn't really seem like we do. This isn't a minor correction for an over-egged pudding. It's part of a multi-generational shift.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is that it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
No that's not the point. Last time it was not needed in 2008 because 2008 was during the recession. Who on Earth called for austerity DURING THE RECESSION in 2008?
What you lot seem to forget is that 2010-2018 when austerity finally closed the gap was not during the recession - it was years to a decade after the recession!
The priority right now is to get through the recession out to the other side. Once we're out the other side then difficult choices may be needed. If in 2022/23 we have a 10% deficit then some form of plan or drastic action will absolutely be needed to close it. Hopefully we won't have a 10% deficit this time, despite this recession being far worse, because we weren't so naked going into it.
I'm afraid something does not cease to be a point purely because you have no answer to it. We were screwed then and had to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. We are screwed now and will have to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. As to timing, you should read what I write instead of rushing to argue with it. I'm not suggesting austerity right this minute. That would be crazy. I'm talking about once we've clambered up off the floor. At that point difficult choices will (not may) be needed. Emphasis on tax rises rather than spending cuts this time, I hope, and with those tax rises targeted at the better off.
I'm going to continue to push my theory that at some point there will be a co-ordinated global write-off of Covid debt. However unprecedented it might be, once world leaders contemplate the consequences of the conventional alternative of a decade of spending cuts and tax rises, they'll go for the option that doesn't result in them being booted out of power and replaced by the kind of demagogues who'll make Donald Trump look like Eisenhower.
And, give him his due, it's a jolly effective brand. (I think there are enough behind-the-scenes stories of him deliberately mussing up his hair moments before showtime for us to conclude that it's deliberate.) I can think of two reasons why it works;
One (which I don't think is original) is the "Boris is keeping it real. He's not like all those sculpted, buttoned-up politician types." thing. The other (which I haven't seen commented on as much) is that he's doing the thing that seriously elite people are at risk of doing. The "Don't you know who I am? If I want to dress like a scarecrow, I damn well will. Because I'm a Johnson, dontchaknow, and I'm in charge." Eccentricity as a power play- are you going to dare call him out on it? JRM is the other obvious example of it in the current political scene.
Trust me- spotting dickish power plays is another of those surprising things that teachers have to get good at.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
We're in worse shape now. If you don't believe me call up Sunak and offer him the swap. He'll bite your hand off.
Better shape to deal with it is what I said.
Imagine if we'd gone into this with Brown's structural deficit rather than having closed that. Horrific thought. 😱
Bit of a SOTBO and your wording is tainted by Brownaphobia, but yes. If our deficit had been higher than it was at the onset of the pandemic our fiscal position right now would be even worse than it is.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is that it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
No that's not the point. Last time it was not needed in 2008 because 2008 was during the recession. Who on Earth called for austerity DURING THE RECESSION in 2008?
What you lot seem to forget is that 2010-2018 when austerity finally closed the gap was not during the recession - it was years to a decade after the recession!
The priority right now is to get through the recession out to the other side. Once we're out the other side then difficult choices may be needed. If in 2022/23 we have a 10% deficit then some form of plan or drastic action will absolutely be needed to close it. Hopefully we won't have a 10% deficit this time, despite this recession being far worse, because we weren't so naked going into it.
I'm afraid something does not cease to be a point purely because you have no answer to it. We were screwed then and had to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. We are screwed now and will have to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. As to timing, you should read what I write instead of rushing to argue with it. I'm not suggesting austerity right this minute. That would be crazy. I'm talking about once we've clambered up off the floor. At that point difficult choices will (not may) be needed. Emphasis on tax rises rather than spending cuts this time, I hope, and with those tax rises targeted at the better off.
I'm going to continue to push my theory that at some point there will be a co-ordinated global write-off of Covid debt. However unprecedented it might be, once world leaders contemplate the consequences of the conventional alternative of a decade of spending cuts and tax rises, they'll go for the option that doesn't result in them being booted out of power and replaced by the kind of demagogues who'll make Donald Trump look like Eisenhower.
Just sell the debt to each other, on the understanding that no interest will accrue and no capital repayments will be asked for or made. Just parked in the central banks in boxes marked "DO NOT OPEN - EVER."
Seriously, I see the logic, but wonder about 1. the moral hazard; 2. what qualifies as being a smoker; and 3. how is it going to be implemented.
For example, who is a smoker? Is it someone who smoked for 30 years and quit 2 years ago? Is it someone who has been smoking for 3 months and continues to do so? How is this going to be verified?
Turn up without an appointment sporting an Arturo Fuente Hemingway.....
"Ireland will be in and out of lockdown until 2022 unless we adopt a zero Covid policy, top microbiologist James McInerney has said.
The Head of School of Life Science in the University of Nottingham said Ireland almost had zero Covid cases in July, but the only way to get back to this is to adopt the same policy as New Zealand.
Speaking on RTÉ’s Morning Ireland, he said: “Moving from one place to another is the major cause of spread of this infection.
"I don’t wish to point out the obvious but Ireland is an island and it can be sealed. For lots of people who are coming into Ireland, the screening isn’t working.
"It seems obvious for me what to do, it seems obvious for me to take the New Zealand strategy or else you’re going to be in and out of lockdown for the rest of the year and into 2022.
"There is a way out and it is to seal up your borders and within the country to drive the number down to zero, and you almost had that done by last July.”
Sounds about right to me, both in the original and if you read "Great Britain" for "Ireland."
I'd think it would be in the long term advantage of the Dems if he's not impeached. He'll be one of those gifts that keeps on giving wreaking havoc on the GOP for the next four years.
Dems might want him to keep causing trouble, Republicans might be afraid of confronting their base and hoping he just goes away combines to equal low chance of conviction.
Hopefully they can both rise above those thoughts.
For the GOP the advantage in impeaching Trump lies not only in removing him from their primaries but, more importantly, nullifying the threat of him standing as a 3rd Party candidate.
Trump deserves impeachment but from the political point of view the Dems would be better off if the attempt fails.
On topic I agree with the markets on this and really don't see the upside for Biden in having the Senate focus on the trial of Trump rather than the nominations of his cabinet or any legislation he wants to bring forward in the first 100 days. I also remain concerned that guilty parties who supported all of Trump's nonsense to the very end bar 1 day somehow get a pass because they vote for impeachment which means very little.
Biden should leave this to the criminal courts and the bankruptcy courts. They will sort out Trump soon enough.
It's the principle of the thing though. I'd share your concern about those who backed him all the way getting a pass, but what he did was just plain wrong, in a major way, and it would be better than he is convicted than not, even though for Biden it would be an unnecessary headache.
The process exists for just this kind of situation, if they never use it because during a term things are too partisan and after a term ends they don't want the hassle, the next Trump to come along will know they can do anything they want.
I don't disagree with any of that. If Jan 6th wasn't high crimes and misdemeanors I am really not sure what could be. But I still think that Biden will want this out of the way soonest.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
Haven't you figured out that everything George Osborne said was wrong so you can throw away your 2010 election notes? Austerity was not the answer then, and we can agree it is not the answer now.
2010 was not now. 2010 was over a year after the recession ended. If the recession ends in the Spring then next year or the year after will be time to take stock of the situation and fix what needs fixing.
But 10% deficits, going long-term when you're not in a recession anymore, are not viable or sustainable and lead to exponential growth. That's why you try not to go into recessions having maxed out the deficit already.
If the deficit was, as you say, maxed out, then it cannot be bigger now. But it is so it wasn't. Nor do we have a national credit card. Nor do we have hyper-inflation. Nor is there a bond market strike.
We are only capable of borrowing more now because the printing presses are rolling. Do you have any idea how much QE has been created this year? 🙄
And this is during a recession, not before it or after it.
Are you still seriously incapable of comprehending what exponential growth does to a system? 10% deficits are absolutely catastrophic - and absolutely the result of being so totally negligent and hubristic to the finances as to think busts had been abolished so it was OK to run a 3% deficit GOING INTO the recession.
Learn from history and move on, stop trying to deny that exponential growth is no big deal - you're as bad as Toby Young.
Economics Paper: Part A, q1:
Explain, with reference to the theory of exponential growth, why a 10% deficit is absolutely catastrophic whereas an 8% deficit is not much of a problem?
Hint for candidates: The answer "because 10% is where it went under Gordon Brown!" will be leaving most of the marks on the table.
It is entirely deliberate, for some reason his entirely fake personality of a bumbling idiot means a significant number of people excuse his persistent blunders. He is way more aware of this than the public are.
No doubt. Though if you act a role for enough time, you become what you're acting.
It is entirely deliberate, for some reason his entirely fake personality of a bumbling idiot means a significant number of people excuse his persistent blunders. He is way more aware of this than the public are.
Is one of the sad, often understated things dealing with dementia sufferers.
It is really hard for the families to have to endure. As my friend said, his grandfather may have lost his memories but he's not lost his stubborn streak.
She is spot on. I think it's reasonable to expect a road map from government. I'm amazed at how sanguine many seem to be with the open-ended policy.
They are sanguine because, as pointed out, whenever there is tentative signs of a roadmap the government gets blasted for it. God forbid they mention relaxing by Easter again.
Well they shouldn't "get blasted" for it, that's ridiculous.
What they do deserve to "get blasted" for is incarcerating the public in their own homes without giving them an idea of when they will be released.
I understand your argument, but it's not helped by hyperbole. The vast majority of us are not incarcerated in our own homes; there are all sorts of reasons we can go out. I've been out twice so far today (bakers, dog walk), and will have another stroll out later. A typical day, and I'm fairly petrified of catching the virus. I do feel really sorry for those who really can't go out because they are shielding, but they are a relatively small minority.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is that it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
No that's not the point. Last time it was not needed in 2008 because 2008 was during the recession. Who on Earth called for austerity DURING THE RECESSION in 2008?
What you lot seem to forget is that 2010-2018 when austerity finally closed the gap was not during the recession - it was years to a decade after the recession!
The priority right now is to get through the recession out to the other side. Once we're out the other side then difficult choices may be needed. If in 2022/23 we have a 10% deficit then some form of plan or drastic action will absolutely be needed to close it. Hopefully we won't have a 10% deficit this time, despite this recession being far worse, because we weren't so naked going into it.
I'm afraid something does not cease to be a point purely because you have no answer to it. We were screwed then and had to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. We are screwed now and will have to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. As to timing, you should read what I write instead of rushing to argue with it. I'm not suggesting austerity right this minute. That would be crazy. I'm talking about once we've clambered up off the floor. At that point difficult choices will (not may) be needed. Emphasis on tax rises rather than spending cuts this time, I hope, and with those tax rises targeted at the better off.
I'm not ruling out austerity (or other tough choices) being needed in the future.
I explicitly said that if in 2022/23 we still have a 10%+ deficit then yes tough choices like austerity would be needed.
If on the other hand the deficit is just ~7% and falling, with growth of 2.5%+ then that would be much more manageable. A deficit of 7% and 10% are world's apart.
As I said historically the country's deficit has typically oscillated from between breakeven during good times to about 7% immediately post recession, which averages about 3%. The disaster of Brown was taking us to 3% pre-recession blowing it out then to 10% with dramatic compound growth then as a result post-recession.
Since we went into this with just a 1% deficit, quite close to historical norms, that gives much better room for maneuver when we come out.
Is one of the sad, often understated things dealing with dementia sufferers.
It is really hard for the families to have to endure. As my friend said, his grandfather may have lost his memories but he's not lost his stubborn streak.
I shouldn't really make a joke out of it. My grandmother developed dementia at a fairly young age and had to be put into a specialist care home, and my grandfather moved in to be with her (despite being still be able to totally self sufficient). It can be horrific experience for all those close to somebody who develops it.
If someone turned up for a job interview with me looking that...I would not employ them.
If I turned up to your job interview with you looking like that, I wouldn’t want the job
Alternatively, I know that I am literally the only person with the combination of skills you need, so I don't have to make any concessions to manners before making you pay through the nose to employ me. Because you need me, and nobody else will do, and I know it. It's rare, but it can happen.
What happens when the U.K. shuts the border or demands daily testing for the unvaccinated French?
My opinion? This year will produce a vintage French whine.....
And the English varieties are also now very competitive. Sparkling? Not so much.
Well, apart from Best Sparkling Wine Producer at the International Wine and Spirit Competition 2020? I'm talking in the world - ahead of all the French champagne houses. Langham Wine Estate, Dorset. From vines only planted a decade ago.
A post mildly taking the pish out of tedious PB English wine nationalism....gets a tedious PB English wine nationalism post, superb stuff!
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
If Sunak is stupid enough to go for austerity in a few months time, or next year or whatever, then we will be able to handily compare and contrast as Biden turns on the taps in the US. Big infrastructure spending coming.
We're not going to have austerity measures. I actually think the US and UK will begin to silently scrub QE debt to some off the books ledger and then be forgotten about forever.
Given the BoE owns the QE debt what need is there to scrub it?
After the bailout of RBS debt was reported excluding liabilities related to that, quite reasonably - why not just put the BoE debt in the same category?
It is entirely deliberate, for some reason his entirely fake personality of a bumbling idiot means a significant number of people excuse his persistent blunders. He is way more aware of this than the public are.
What happens when the U.K. shuts the border or demands daily testing for the unvaccinated French?
My opinion? This year will produce a vintage French whine.....
And the English varieties are also now very competitive. Sparkling? Not so much.
Well, apart from Best Sparkling Wine Producer at the International Wine and Spirit Competition 2020? I'm talking in the world - ahead of all the French champagne houses. Langham Wine Estate, Dorset. From vines only planted a decade ago.
A post mildly taking the pish out of tedious PB English wine nationalism....gets a tedious PB English wine nationalism post, superb stuff!
Do I misremember or do you not even drink?
Japanese whisky - the best is better than Scottish. Discuss.....
It is entirely deliberate, for some reason his entirely fake personality of a bumbling idiot means a significant number of people excuse his persistent blunders. He is way more aware of this than the public are.
It buys him the benefit of that irritating and completely wrong gag about not attributing to malice what can be explained by incompetence. Ho ho ho, there's Boris accidentally awarding another PPE contract to a mate, what a card.
If someone turned up for a job interview with me looking that...I would not employ them.
If I turned up to your job interview with you looking like that, I wouldn’t want the job
Alternatively, I know that I am literally the only person with the combination of skills you need, so I don't have to make any concessions to manners before making you pay through the nose to employ me. Because you need me, and nobody else will do, and I know it. It's rare, but it can happen.
There must be a word for an analogy that moves so far from the reality that it describes the precise opposite of it.
Completely and utterly dire economic figures today.
and that was before lock down.
Closer to half a trillion deficit than GBP400bn when all is said and done....???
Letting inflation rip must be the plan. Nothing else makes sense.
What about a century of austerity?
Shouldn't be necessary, thankfully there wasn't the structural deficit going into this recession that there was going into the last one so we're in much better shape ultimately to deal with this despite it being a far, far, far greater shock to the system. The last recession was peanuts compared to this but we went into it naked and exposed.
The structural deficit, if there was one, had sod all to do with the global financial crisis and has nothing to do with this one either.
It absolutely does because the damage of the recession gets added to the damage of the pre-existing deficit.
Recessions on average tend to add 6-7% to the deficit. That's not too bad if you've got a small surplus or rather neutral, the deficit swells to 6-7% and then a couple of years growth sees it come back down. It is an absolute disaster if the deficit was already 3% because then it goes to 10% - and suddenly you've got rapidly expanding exponential growth of your debt that you can't handle.
Have you still not figured out how exponential growth works, even after this past year? Once your problem becomes exponential it needs drastic action to fix it.
Recessions happen, they're a fact of life that can't be avoided. What happened before going into them, how they're handled - and the state of how you come out of them - all that matters.
We can never get into a debt trap like that while interest rates are so low. The Bank of England will simply print enough cash to buy up the extra government debt. Eventually the markets may conceivably panic, but the experience of Japan shows that we have a long way to go before we need to get worried.
That is one of the massive benefits - perhaps the biggest - we have because we stayed out of the euro. And to think some morons still want us to join it.
Last time it was crucial to bring the wrecked public finances under control but this time it isn't - even though they are more wrecked - because interest rates happen to be lower now? Sorry, don't buy it. I diagnose a combo of political bias and wishful thinking. The harsh truth is that either austerity will be required this time or it was not required - was pure political choice - last time. My view is that it was necessary then and will be necessary now. I'm a leftist but I don't believe in MMT.
No that's not the point. Last time it was not needed in 2008 because 2008 was during the recession. Who on Earth called for austerity DURING THE RECESSION in 2008?
What you lot seem to forget is that 2010-2018 when austerity finally closed the gap was not during the recession - it was years to a decade after the recession!
The priority right now is to get through the recession out to the other side. Once we're out the other side then difficult choices may be needed. If in 2022/23 we have a 10% deficit then some form of plan or drastic action will absolutely be needed to close it. Hopefully we won't have a 10% deficit this time, despite this recession being far worse, because we weren't so naked going into it.
I'm afraid something does not cease to be a point purely because you have no answer to it. We were screwed then and had to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. We are screwed now and will have to take some pain afterwards to balance the books. As to timing, you should read what I write instead of rushing to argue with it. I'm not suggesting austerity right this minute. That would be crazy. I'm talking about once we've clambered up off the floor. At that point difficult choices will (not may) be needed. Emphasis on tax rises rather than spending cuts this time, I hope, and with those tax rises targeted at the better off.
I'm going to continue to push my theory that at some point there will be a co-ordinated global write-off of Covid debt. However unprecedented it might be, once world leaders contemplate the consequences of the conventional alternative of a decade of spending cuts and tax rises, they'll go for the option that doesn't result in them being booted out of power and replaced by the kind of demagogues who'll make Donald Trump look like Eisenhower.
Would be wonderful but I doubt it. If that trick could be pulled off on this scale without mishap it would turn the world of government spending and macroeconomics on its head. If "print and write off" avoids paying the bills for a global pandemic, why should countries not act in concert (maybe via a Global Bank) and do the same without a pandemic? There is so much we would love to spend money on in this world. Utopia beckons.
Is one of the sad, often understated things dealing with dementia sufferers.
It is really hard for the families to have to endure. As my friend said, his grandfather may have lost his memories but he's not lost his stubborn streak.
I shouldn't really make a joke out of it. My grandmother developed dementia at a fairly young age and had to be put into a specialist care home, and my grandfather moved in to be with her (despite being still be able to totally self sufficient). It can be horrific experience for all those close to somebody who develops it.
In fairness to TSE I didn't read it as a joke but a perfectly serious comment. Some personality traits remain (or reappear) when the memories etc. have gone, I am told.
All entirely predictable, but still upsetting to see it coming to pass. It's not like we have so many strong export businesses in this country that we can afford to throw them under a bus like this.
Seriously, I see the logic, but wonder about 1. the moral hazard; 2. what qualifies as being a smoker; and 3. how is it going to be implemented.
For example, who is a smoker? Is it someone who smoked for 30 years and quit 2 years ago? Is it someone who has been smoking for 3 months and continues to do so? How is this going to be verified?
That's a bit odd. An enthusiastic smoker friend has pointed me towards research suggesting that nicotine was quite an effective prophylactic and it did seem to be correct. He was even suggesting nicotine patches should be getting distributed on the NHS, not entirely for the comic effect. Of course once they actually caught the lurgy things became slightly less optimal.
Lockdowns don't 'work' in any normal sense of the word, as they destroy human lives.
Obviously R will fall if you lock people in their homes, prevent them seeing any friends or relations, close all pubs, theatres and anything vaguely fun and fine people for drinking tea with their mates in open spaces.
Lockdowns are a necessary evil at the moment.
What we need to do is calculate is what part of this effect is down to early vaccination effect coming into the data.
A silly question. In the article about production, it says that even down to the glass vials, it requires a particular chemical to make the glass (which basically all comes from one place) and specialist manufacturing process to make them suitable, of which there are only a few companies that are able to do this.
Well the vaccine minster has said categorically it isn't true.... everybody is getting less next week due to supply issues. The media reports were based on they were told a reduction was coming and then wrote a story it is because our region has done so well. Unless the minster is lying on record, they have put 2 and 2 together and got 5.
The government for the past 2 weeks have consistently said supply remains a huge issue of this whole process.
The joy of that exchange is that the YP editor is clear that ministers HAVE lied on record and thus can be treated accordingly when assessing reliable sources.
If the policy is to divert resources where best needed then just say so.
Interesting stat from the Guernsey arrival COVID screening - 56% of positive tests have been found on arrival, 37% have been identified from arrival to day 12 - and 7% have been identified on the day 13 test (mandatory, unless you want to spend 21 days in self-isolation). Which rather calls into question this (mooted/agreed?) UK plan of "release from quarantine on negative Day 5 test." Also under discussion starting to charge arrivals for testing (£25/go, two required) for the selfish sods travellers, TBC.
What happens when the U.K. shuts the border or demands daily testing for the unvaccinated French?
My opinion? This year will produce a vintage French whine.....
And the English varieties are also now very competitive. Sparkling? Not so much.
Well, apart from Best Sparkling Wine Producer at the International Wine and Spirit Competition 2020? I'm talking in the world - ahead of all the French champagne houses. Langham Wine Estate, Dorset. From vines only planted a decade ago.
A post mildly taking the pish out of tedious PB English wine nationalism....gets a tedious PB English wine nationalism post, superb stuff!
Do I misremember or do you not even drink?
Japanese whisky - the best is better than Scottish. Discuss.....
Dunno, it's something about which not much bothered. My father was and most of my friends are serious whisky drinkers, nowadays I'm just an occasionally horrified observer.
I'm sure it's lovely with a bit of Stilton on an artisanal oatcake, as long as you're not lactose intolerant.
Comments
One other point if you are in a charitable mood - you could make your gifts out of the parental estate itself. This would save 40% IHT if that is being incurred. Also, one of the problems of doing probate is small holdings of shares - esp. old privatisation allocations - which are disproportionately expensive to sell off and process. You could transfer them to Sharegift and they will sell them (efficiently, with other like gifts of small holdings) and send the dosh to trhe charity you designate. Sharegift get given lots of shares without any charity being named, so when they send the money from your shares to the charity you name, they add on a share of the unallocated money - so the charity you want gets even more.
This is also a good way to give shares that you yourself hold.
Sheep and lamb applies.
Say they announce x% and y% then by the review greater than x% falls are happening (Good), but lower than y% space capacity has been achieved (Bad) - or vice-versa.
You'd have some screaming that the x% has been achieved so end lockdown now, others screaming that y% has not been achieved so lockdown must be maintained - and whatever decision is taken would be excoriated with the media jumping on the bandwagon of whichever of x% of y% is in contravention of the decision made.
The reality is its complicated and a holistic view of the data will be needed. There aren't arbitrary thresholds (except R>1 is awful).
What I love is freedom, and I believe the best way to achieve and preserve that freedon is the democratic mixed economy nation state.
I have no truck whatsoever with Qanon, the great reset, Lin Wood or Sidney Powell. For the record.
And this is during a recession, not before it or after it.
Are you still seriously incapable of comprehending what exponential growth does to a system? 10% deficits are absolutely catastrophic - and absolutely the result of being so totally negligent and hubristic to the finances as to think busts had been abolished so it was OK to run a 3% deficit GOING INTO the recession.
Learn from history and move on, stop trying to deny that exponential growth is no big deal - you're as bad as Toby Young.
Unfortunately for the public it means not knowing and that's a horrible mental state for a huge number of people, myself included. I'm in a position where I have more knowledge on it than most because of the job that I do and from understanding the mathematical dynamics of viral replication models. For people who aren't studied in such things there is no way to even take a guess other than hoping that by Easter it's better.
That's the deadline for rolling out the 4 critical priority group vaccines, with the results of the review to be announced the following week.
Imagine if we'd gone into this with Brown's structural deficit rather than having closed that. Horrific thought. 😱
One thing that can be made clear though is that the restrictions will be eased gradually, through regular reviews with enough time between them to assess the impact of previous steps.
The government would put up Gove, and make sure she quickly went right back in her box. “I’m not sure what your question is trying to achieve, but maybe your personal experience shows that you lot should be publicising the rules clearly, rather than trying to find edge-cases and loopholes in them?”
One issue though is we are getting the lowest hanging fruit with the vaccine right now - which is good because we need it the most now. From February second doses will be beginning for people and all 14 million who've already got their vaccine will be requiring their booster shot in the next phase of rollout - so we really need to be upping daily vaccinations eventually to >600k per day in weekdays to have an ongoing major impact.
What you lot seem to forget is that 2010-2018 when austerity finally closed the gap was not during the recession - it was years to a decade after the recession!
The priority right now is to get through the recession out to the other side. Once we're out the other side then difficult choices may be needed. If in 2022/23 we have a 10% deficit then some form of plan or drastic action will absolutely be needed to close it. Hopefully we won't have a 10% deficit this time, despite this recession being far worse, because we weren't so naked going into it.
https://english.elpais.com/spanish_news/2021-01-22/covid-19-vaccine-doses-going-to-waste-in-some-of-spains-regions-due-to-unsuitable-syringes.html?utm_source=Facebook&ssm=FB_CM_EN&fbclid=IwAR35KiVRJV_Q7mmTlMzb-YZeWMD6mmmlXHwH2D5l5Kz_Al92W7addReg-6Q#Echobox=1611316940
The economy will roar back once the virus is gone.
After the financial crisis that wasn't the case at all.
Look at the media.
If you’re paying yourself PAYE out of a personal services limited company & doing freelance work on the side in the same line of work then I have a strong feeling the HMRC would regard this as deliberately splitting up a single line of business in order to avoid the VAT threshold & get very unhappy were they ever to spot it.
On the other hand, my understanding is that if you were (say) working in IT on a PAYE basis for a large firm & doing IT work on the side then there’s no way these two businesses could be conflated & so the VAT threshold would apply solely to the freelance work. The VAT threshold is technically a per business thing, not a per person thing.
But as I say, this is really a question for your accountant.
Is he high-functioning dyspractic or something?
https://twitter.com/alexdymoke/status/1352379284392972292?s=21
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-latin-america-55757085
https://www.wtae.com/article/pennsylvania-adopts-new-cdc-guidelines-putting-smokers-in-group-1a-to-get-covid-19-vaccine/35284195
Seriously, I see the logic, but wonder about 1. the moral hazard; 2. what qualifies as being a smoker; and 3. how is it going to be implemented.
For example, who is a smoker?
Is it someone who smoked for 30 years and quit 2 years ago?
Is it someone who has been smoking for 3 months and continues to do so?
How is this going to be verified?
Thanks.
People seem to think we need to address these things in the order of a parliament, or a decade, or a generation, but it doesn't really seem like we do. This isn't a minor correction for an over-egged pudding. It's part of a multi-generational shift.
One (which I don't think is original) is the "Boris is keeping it real. He's not like all those sculpted, buttoned-up politician types." thing. The other (which I haven't seen commented on as much) is that he's doing the thing that seriously elite people are at risk of doing. The "Don't you know who I am? If I want to dress like a scarecrow, I damn well will. Because I'm a Johnson, dontchaknow, and I'm in charge." Eccentricity as a power play- are you going to dare call him out on it? JRM is the other obvious example of it in the current political scene.
Trust me- spotting dickish power plays is another of those surprising things that teachers have to get good at.
"Ireland will be in and out of lockdown until 2022 unless we adopt a zero Covid policy, top microbiologist James McInerney has said.
The Head of School of Life Science in the University of Nottingham said Ireland almost had zero Covid cases in July, but the only way to get back to this is to adopt the same policy as New Zealand.
Speaking on RTÉ’s Morning Ireland, he said: “Moving from one place to another is the major cause of spread of this infection.
"I don’t wish to point out the obvious but Ireland is an island and it can be sealed. For lots of people who are coming into Ireland, the screening isn’t working.
"It seems obvious for me what to do, it seems obvious for me to take the New Zealand strategy or else you’re going to be in and out of lockdown for the rest of the year and into 2022.
"There is a way out and it is to seal up your borders and within the country to drive the number down to zero, and you almost had that done by last July.”
Sounds about right to me, both in the original and if you read "Great Britain" for "Ireland."
Trump deserves impeachment but from the political point of view the Dems would be better off if the attempt fails.
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1352611533679898627
https://twitter.com/DrAmirKhanGP/status/1352283730589720578?s=20
Explain, with reference to the theory of exponential growth, why a 10% deficit is absolutely catastrophic whereas an 8% deficit is not much of a problem?
Hint for candidates: The answer "because 10% is where it went under Gordon Brown!" will be leaving most of the marks on the table.
Though if you act a role for enough time, you become what you're acting.
Fackin' doctors...
It is really hard for the families to have to endure. As my friend said, his grandfather may have lost his memories but he's not lost his stubborn streak.
From his formula for R, using cases -
Using hospitalisation data
The announcement on the cancellation of the Olympics should come soon, all that is left there to negotiate the awarding of 2032 to Tokyo.
I explicitly said that if in 2022/23 we still have a 10%+ deficit then yes tough choices like austerity would be needed.
If on the other hand the deficit is just ~7% and falling, with growth of 2.5%+ then that would be much more manageable. A deficit of 7% and 10% are world's apart.
As I said historically the country's deficit has typically oscillated from between breakeven during good times to about 7% immediately post recession, which averages about 3%. The disaster of Brown was taking us to 3% pre-recession blowing it out then to 10% with dramatic compound growth then as a result post-recession.
Since we went into this with just a 1% deficit, quite close to historical norms, that gives much better room for maneuver when we come out.
Do I misremember or do you not even drink?
After the bailout of RBS debt was reported excluding liabilities related to that, quite reasonably - why not just put the BoE debt in the same category?
Manchester City midfielder Kevin de Bruyne will be sidelined for between four to six weeks with a hamstring injury, says manager Pep Guardiola.
https://blog.jonasneubert.com/2021/01/10/exploring-the-supply-chain-of-the-pfizer-biontech-and-moderna-covid-19-vaccines/
https://reaction.life/jeremy-vine-my-boris-story/
Obviously R will fall if you lock people in their homes, prevent them seeing any friends or relations, close all pubs, theatres and anything vaguely fun and fine people for drinking tea with their mates in open spaces.
Lockdowns are a necessary evil at the moment.
What we need to do is calculate is what part of this effect is down to early vaccination effect coming into the data.
Is it not possible to recycle these?
If the policy is to divert resources where best needed then just say so.
I'm sure it's lovely with a bit of Stilton on an artisanal oatcake, as long as you're not lactose intolerant.