Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Just 19% think the Chancellor’s changes will make them better off – politicalbetting.com

1246710

Comments

  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365
    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    Jonathan said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Driver said:

    PeterM said:

    Jonathan said:

    It's a remarkable achievement in less than two weeks to make people yearn for the stability, competence and political care of Boris Johnson.

    whats remarkable is since Blair each Pm has been worse than the last...from Brown to Cameron to May to Johnson to Truss....at this rate we will soon be led by someone akin to the President in the film idiocracy
    Cameron was better than Brown.
    No.
    Boris was better than Cameron. TMay and Brown
    Cameron was a good PM until Brexit. Second only to Blair, the greatest PM of the last fifty years
    Blair cannot be counted as "great", due to the Iraq War, and also his total inability to change the UK in any significant way, apart from ramping up immigration (which led directly to Brexit, something he fiercely opposed)

    A successful election winner, sure, but as a an actual politician-in-office Blair's record is dire
    Every PM since would give their right arm for a tiny fraction of Blair's record. Not sure Truss is going to get an AAA rating any time soon.
    What record?

    Everything Blair touched has turned to dross

    Remember how Devolution was meant to Kill Scottish Nationalism stone dead?

    Northern Ireland?

    Personally, I quite liked not having an economy in the toilet and being able to be treated quickly at hospital.

    Winning things like the Olympics was good for morale too. My gay friends benefited hugely from his civil reforms.

    Times were better with Blair.
    He inherited a healthy economy - "a golden economic legacy" - and slowly blew it

    He won huge majorities and did kinda nothing


    I agree Northern Ireland is to his credit, tho he built on the hard work of others. Nonetheless that is one place his charm did work some magic

    I regret this failure because Blair had the intelligence and plausibility - and the MPs - to do great things. Something strange stopped him being a Labour version of Thatcher. A truly transformative prime minister. There is no "Blairism", tellingly

    All these years later I'm still not sure what stopped him. Was it really just grumpy Gordon Brown?
    10 years of prosperity, progress and stability. Sounds bloody brilliant. I would settle for that again even if you find that dull.
    I hear you, and yes I would take that too, right now

    But

    1. Blair achieved this on the back of the Tories fixing the economy in the 90s,. and then he slowly but surely undermined it all with massive immigration, forcing through EU Treaties, the Devolution mess leading to Scot Natttery

    and

    2. The great majority of the fucked-up-ness of the world - which makes us both nostalgic - is nothing to do with UK Party Politics. Covid, the Ukraine war, climate change, the menace of AI, Dem Aliens, the rise of aggressive China, none of this is remotely influenced by who is in Number 10

    The world is simply scarier and nastier than it was
  • ChrisChris Posts: 8,435

    All is not lost for the Conservatives. They could still win the next election if they adopt Kremlin referendum voting procedures in the disputed territories.

    A knock on the door by soldiers and a paper tally totted up by said soldiers. It might give the Government the result it requires.

    You're suggesting the Donbas could send MPs to Westminster?
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 18,825
    Personally I would go back to 2000, campaign for Gore in Florida and somehow cause a few flights to be cancelled on 9/11. I'd like to see what that world looked like.
  • Well, well, I spend the afternoon at work, and when I get home to see what pb has to say about the Kwarteng 'thing', what do I find? Leon going on about UFOs again. Coincidence? I think not.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,082

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,460

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    Or an IMF bailout with all of the associated cuts. People have asked what the difference between a Tory government on 2010 and Labour one would have looked like, I think, today, we have an answer. This is what a nation that has lost market credibility looks like.
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 133
    The pound in your pocket is worth exactly the same. Problem is everything just got more expensive. #IPredictARiot
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 18,416
    I wouldn't go back.

    The world always has to go forward. Life, in general, gets better.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 7,236
    edited September 23
    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    This current crop of Tory leaders do not have the memory of what can go wrong, unlike the previous generation. Some of whom had a front row seat.


    It’s an excellent point. Is the current government prepared to learn from past mistakes, or not listen and repeat them?
    Learning from past mistakes would mean not trying to defend an arbitrary exchange rate against another major currency and instead letting the pound fall.
    Arbitrary exchange rates don’t work, but neither does devaluing to prosperity.

    Perhaps not, but as I asked earlier, is there much point to panicking over short fluctuations in the pounds value on the currency markets?
    Don't worry chaps, the budget only caused a small run on the pound.
    I agree with lucky on this, a drop today says what if it’s all recovered with more besides over the next 3 weeks? It’s only long term trends on such markets to pay attention to isn’t it?

    Why don’t we have a monthly feature 23rd of each month, from date of this announcement monthly trend of £ v $ and pound v Euro, Easily settles this argument?
    There is an obvious negative market reaction to this budget today. That's politically significant. It's somewhat churlish to argue otherwise.

    Who knows what will happen in the next month and how future movements will relate to today.
    Movements over the next month will be based on a more calm headed thinking, and emergence of further information - today is just reacting to those around you emotionally reacting. I can see Big G posting Monday lunchtime - it’s all bounced back!

    Wasn’t Nigel Lawson’s mid eighties economic miracle based on a devaluation of the pound over a very long period?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,460

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
  • I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Fiscal responsibility is only going to be attractive once irresponsibility has unambiguously failed. Once the UK is doing the national equivalent of sprawling in the gutter with the remains of a dodgy kebab garnished with flecks of something bodily.

    The saving grace of today is that it might bring that day a bit closer. Not because that day is desirable, but it may be necessary so we can collectively move on.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613
    Jonathan said:

    Personally I would go back to 2000, campaign for Gore in Florida and somehow cause a few flights to be cancelled on 9/11. I'd like to see what that world looked like.

    You can't game it by eeking out a tactical win.

    You'd have to change the fundamentals. That would have been there if Gore had won too.

    Al Quaeda would have still struck, the West would still have been eclipsed etc.

    We might not have fully invaded Iraq but bear in mind Clinton did intervene in Bosnia and Kosovo (as well as Somalia) so we might have done under the Dems anyway.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,082
    MaxPB said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
    Bankers' bonuses. By lots. :)
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 18,416

    Jonathan said:

    So if we had a reset button, which could take the country back to date in the past 30 years we would all press it. We perhaps would not agree on the date we went back to, but we would all press it.

    Things are worse today than they were yesterday. That's a serious political problem that someone needs to fix.

    I would press it and it would take me back to 2016. If I had the chance I would not have voted Brexit in 2016. My mistake, probably the biggest I've made in my life.

    The prospects for this country are looking very bleak.

    Brexit takes us through the reasonably sane governance of Cameron, to the slowly losing connection with reality May, to the flatulent Boris, the tragi-comedy of Boris Mk II, and now the pencils-in-your-nose full on madness of Truss and parody-man Rees-Mogg.

    We could really do with an election right now. Sir Keir, you are our only hope.
    You've clearly not yet had the epiphany moment where you realise that the parlous state of the economy now is due precisely to the wasted years under the so-called 'reasonably sane governance' which you look back on with such affection. Our shit energy security happened then. Money flooded out of the country and shit got sold off willy nilly then. We gold-plated every bit of European drivel then. You can't run a country down like that then, without what we're dealing with now.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365

    I wouldn't go back.

    The world always has to go forward. Life, in general, gets better.

    Unfortunately, that's really not true if you take a broader vision

    Life did not "get better" for most ordinary Europeans when the Roman Empire collapsed. It got considerably worse for about 1200-1300 years

    Life did not "get better" for an awful lot of Africans, Australian aborigines and Native Americans first encountering Europeans

    Life did not "get better" for 1bn Chinese under the new communist party of Mao

    And so on and so forth

    Life HAS got better for quite a lot of humanity since the industrial revolution - ie about the last 200 years

    But this can be seen as the aberration, and the norm is the same old same old
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613
    What about donating Ukraine 250 x Western nukes? That work?

    Might deter.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,460

    MaxPB said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
    Bankers' bonuses. By lots. :)
    That's revenue negative. So what additional cuts will you make to cover the loss of income from losing bankers bonuses?
  • Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365

    MaxPB said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
    Bankers' bonuses. By lots. :)
    I'm not sure they will do that

    Axing the bonus cap is one of the more sensible policies in this "ambitious" budget. It is quite likely to succeed in raising tax revenue, and will boost the City (that's if all the other stuff doesn't wreck the UK economy)

    Starmer strikes me as a pragmatist, not an ideologue. He won't deliberately curtail tax income for some totemic policy reversal
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 5,082
    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
    Bankers' bonuses. By lots. :)
    That's revenue negative. So what additional cuts will you make to cover the loss of income from losing bankers bonuses?
    It was a joke. Chill.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Fiscal responsibility is only going to be attractive once irresponsibility has unambiguously failed. Once the UK is doing the national equivalent of sprawling in the gutter with the remains of a dodgy kebab garnished with flecks of something bodily.

    If only that option had been available in The Queue.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 7,236
    maxh said:

    Logging onto PB tonight to catch up on the budget stuff, I am struck by the near universality of the sentiment against what the government has announced today. I am used to the middle ground on PB being more right-leaning and Tory-sympathetic than me, so to see you all denouncing this lot as crazies is at least a little bit heartening.

    I wonder what impact this will have on popular opinion? The things that will stand out, I think, are the top rate cut and the bankers' bonuses. Neither strike me as things that will go down well with the public.

    There is a energy help to households package buried beneath this “tax cuts for the rich, not much in it for me” wail from voters - maybe they should have just kept to crisis help today to enjoy poll bouncing kudos on that - the other more controversial elements after conferences, using the conference to sell and get buy in to the tax cutting policy,

    Did they have to do both today, is it political own goal?
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,460

    MaxPB said:

    MaxPB said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
    Bankers' bonuses. By lots. :)
    That's revenue negative. So what additional cuts will you make to cover the loss of income from losing bankers bonuses?
    It was a joke. Chill.
    But eerily similar to what the Labour answer will be, which is why either they won't go for fiscal responsibility or they won't be credible.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Actually it's gotta be Norway, hasn't it?

    They owe us one for WW2

    We could take Norway in a week. Along with that lovely little trust fund they enjoy
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,460
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Actually it's gotta be Norway, hasn't it?

    They owe us one for WW2

    We could take Norway in a week. Along with that lovely little trust fund they enjoy
    Decent amount of gas too.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 46,613

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Conventional forces in Ireland would be easy. We could rip through it in 48 hours.

    But, a "British occupation" would spawn the formations of hundreds of new irregular guerilla cells - aided and abetted by USA "Irish" - so it would quickly become a nightmare with high casualties all round.
  • Jonathan said:

    So if we had a reset button, which could take the country back to date in the past 30 years we would all press it. We perhaps would not agree on the date we went back to, but we would all press it.

    Things are worse today than they were yesterday. That's a serious political problem that someone needs to fix.

    I would press it and it would take me back to 2016. If I had the chance I would not have voted Brexit in 2016. My mistake, probably the biggest I've made in my life.

    The prospects for this country are looking very bleak.

    Brexit takes us through the reasonably sane governance of Cameron, to the slowly losing connection with reality May, to the flatulent Boris, the tragi-comedy of Boris Mk II, and now the pencils-in-your-nose full on madness of Truss and parody-man Rees-Mogg.

    We could really do with an election right now. Sir Keir, you are our only hope.
    You've clearly not yet had the epiphany moment where you realise that the parlous state of the economy now is due precisely to the wasted years under the so-called 'reasonably sane governance' which you look back on with such affection. Our shit energy security happened then. Money flooded out of the country and shit got sold off willy nilly then. We gold-plated every bit of European drivel then. You can't run a country down like that then, without what we're dealing with now.
    Nah. We had people who believed in reality / evidence / the modern world running us.

    Now we've got Rees-Mogg.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365
    MaxPB said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Actually it's gotta be Norway, hasn't it?

    They owe us one for WW2

    We could take Norway in a week. Along with that lovely little trust fund they enjoy
    Decent amount of gas too.
    In any era other than post-WW2, one of the major European powers would now be making the moves on Norway

    They should count themselves lucky they got rich at the right time
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 17,178

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Using a pile of fifty pound notes as kindling in the No.11 wood burner would show greater fiscal responsibility than Krazi Kwarteng has offered today.
  • UnpopularUnpopular Posts: 498
    Leon said:

    I wouldn't go back.

    The world always has to go forward. Life, in general, gets better.

    Unfortunately, that's really not true if you take a broader vision

    Life did not "get better" for most ordinary Europeans when the Roman Empire collapsed. It got considerably worse for about 1200-1300 years

    Life did not "get better" for an awful lot of Africans, Australian aborigines and Native Americans first encountering Europeans

    Life did not "get better" for 1bn Chinese under the new communist party of Mao

    And so on and so forth

    Life HAS got better for quite a lot of humanity since the industrial revolution - ie about the last 200 years

    But this can be seen as the aberration, and the norm is the same old same old
    'If we believe that humanity may transcend tooth and claw, if we believe diverse races and creeds can share this world as peaceably as the orphans share their candlenut tree, if we believe leaders must be just, violence muzzled, power accountable and the riches of the Earth and its Oceans shared equitably, such a world will come to pass. I am not deceived. It is the hardest of worlds to make real. Torturous advances won over generations can be lost by a single stroke of a myopic president's pen or a vainglorious general's sword. A life spent shaping a world I want Jackson to inherit, not one I fear Jackson shall inherit, this strikes me as a life worth the living.'

    From Cloud Atlas. I like to read it, and the rest of the final pages, when I feel how I think you're feeling.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365
    Weird day today

    Grim news for UK PLC. And yet I just got one of the best flint sex toy commissions of my life. Possibly life changing, in fact (but possibly not, yet jolly nice whatever happens)

    It involves lots of visits to Turkey, which is good, as that is maybe the only country in the world with a currency weaker than the £
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    This current crop of Tory leaders do not have the memory of what can go wrong, unlike the previous generation. Some of whom had a front row seat.


    It’s an excellent point. Is the current government prepared to learn from past mistakes, or not listen and repeat them?
    Learning from past mistakes would mean not trying to defend an arbitrary exchange rate against another major currency and instead letting the pound fall.
    Arbitrary exchange rates don’t work, but neither does devaluing to prosperity.

    Perhaps not, but as I asked earlier, is there much point to panicking over short fluctuations in the pounds value on the currency markets?
    Don't worry chaps, the budget only caused a small run on the pound.
    I agree with lucky on this, a drop today says what if it’s all recovered with more besides over the next 3 weeks? It’s only long term trends on such markets to pay attention to isn’t it?

    Why don’t we have a monthly feature 23rd of each month, from date of this announcement monthly trend of £ v $ and pound v Euro, Easily settles this argument?
    There is an obvious negative market reaction to this budget today. That's politically significant. It's somewhat churlish to argue otherwise.

    Who knows what will happen in the next month and how future movements will relate to today.
    Movements over the next month will be based on a more calm headed thinking, and emergence of further information - today is just reacting to those around you emotionally reacting. I can see Big G posting Monday lunchtime - it’s all bounced back!

    Wasn’t Nigel Lawson’s mid eighties economic miracle based on a devaluation of the pound over a very long period?
    I am really not going to do that and if you and others recall, I said the time to judge Truss will be next Spring and even around Coronation time in June

    The market reaction today has been severe, but then it is difficult to assess just how severe with the fall in the euro but as others have said, and it is a fair point, borrowing costs have risen considerably and that has to be a worry

    I am not playing this down, but I remember when 15% interest rates were muted and my business partner was in the US at the time and I told him not to come home !!!!
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 7,236
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Actually it's gotta be Norway, hasn't it?

    They owe us one for WW2

    We could take Norway in a week. Along with that lovely little trust fund they enjoy
    We are not taking Norway.

    We are just protecting them from Putin’s ambitions 😆
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Actually it's gotta be Norway, hasn't it?

    They owe us one for WW2

    We could take Norway in a week. Along with that lovely little trust fund they enjoy
    We are not taking Norway.

    We are just protecting them from Putin’s ambitions 😆
    "Nice little sovereign wealth fund you got there. Be a shame if any RUSSIANS got a hold of it..."
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 4,708
    We’ve had a couple of decades of our governance being determined by the whims of day traders and tomorrow morning’s poll numbers. Hurray that we have a govt that is sweeping that noise to one side and doing things it knows will cause negative headlines because it believes them to be necessary in the long run.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 9,641

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    The Irish Navy is roughly as undermanned as the Royal Navy, but the whole partisan warfare thing would cause issues.

    If we surprise the French we might be able to emulate the Napoleonic War successes and boost the size of our fleet by seizing some French warships. Then we'd only need to press gang some of the new P&O sailors to crew them with.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 18,825

    Jonathan said:

    Personally I would go back to 2000, campaign for Gore in Florida and somehow cause a few flights to be cancelled on 9/11. I'd like to see what that world looked like.

    You can't game it by eeking out a tactical win.

    You'd have to change the fundamentals. That would have been there if Gore had won too.

    Al Quaeda would have still struck, the West would still have been eclipsed etc.

    We might not have fully invaded Iraq but bear in mind Clinton did intervene in Bosnia and Kosovo (as well as Somalia) so we might have done under the Dems anyway.
    One person could make a difference in Florida that would have swung that election. Averting 9/11 or at least part of it would be possible. All of the shit that followed can be traced to that.

    If not possible, I might ask the producer of The Apprentice not to book Donald Trump, introduce girls to a young Mark Zuckerberg, get Steve Jobs to get himself checked out sooner and somehow got Angus Deyton to have a quiet night in, thus denying Boris his beak on HIGNFY.

  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,460
    moonshine said:

    We’ve had a couple of decades of our governance being determined by the whims of day traders and tomorrow morning’s poll numbers. Hurray that we have a govt that is sweeping that noise to one side and doing things it knows will cause negative headlines because it believes them to be necessary in the long run.

    They'll tell themselves that when we have the first bond sale failure in the next few weeks. We stuck it to those bond traders!
  • RattersRatters Posts: 414
    edited September 23
    I think there's a very real risk the government triggers a debt crisis.

    Here's the difference with 2020:

    - The Bank of England is now selling gilts in the billions, not buying them

    - UK pension schemes have already bought pretty much all the gilts they need, often using leverage to do so. They are no longer a significant marginal buyer.

    - Overseas investors tempted by the yield will need a premium over the US market given the currency risk of a country with a fiscally irresponsible government, sky high inflation and large current account deficit

    - Long dated government real yields are 3% pa higher than they were back then as a borrowing cost

    The outlook really isn't great.
  • ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 7,236

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    This current crop of Tory leaders do not have the memory of what can go wrong, unlike the previous generation. Some of whom had a front row seat.


    It’s an excellent point. Is the current government prepared to learn from past mistakes, or not listen and repeat them?
    Learning from past mistakes would mean not trying to defend an arbitrary exchange rate against another major currency and instead letting the pound fall.
    Arbitrary exchange rates don’t work, but neither does devaluing to prosperity.

    Perhaps not, but as I asked earlier, is there much point to panicking over short fluctuations in the pounds value on the currency markets?
    Don't worry chaps, the budget only caused a small run on the pound.
    I agree with lucky on this, a drop today says what if it’s all recovered with more besides over the next 3 weeks? It’s only long term trends on such markets to pay attention to isn’t it?

    Why don’t we have a monthly feature 23rd of each month, from date of this announcement monthly trend of £ v $ and pound v Euro, Easily settles this argument?
    There is an obvious negative market reaction to this budget today. That's politically significant. It's somewhat churlish to argue otherwise.

    Who knows what will happen in the next month and how future movements will relate to today.
    Movements over the next month will be based on a more calm headed thinking, and emergence of further information - today is just reacting to those around you emotionally reacting. I can see Big G posting Monday lunchtime - it’s all bounced back!

    Wasn’t Nigel Lawson’s mid eighties economic miracle based on a devaluation of the pound over a very long period?
    I am really not going to do that and if you and others recall, I said the time to judge Truss will be next Spring and even around Coronation time in June

    The market reaction today has been severe, but then it is difficult to assess just how severe with the fall in the euro but as others have said, and it is a fair point, borrowing costs have risen considerably and that has to be a worry

    I am not playing this down, but I remember when 15% interest rates were muted and my business partner was in the US at the time and I told him not to come home !!!!
    “What’s going on.”
    “Don’t come back”.

    😆

    Isn’t the 15% interest rate thing just a bit of a myth? It only went up to 15% for mere hours, not a sustained period of time?

    There’s an argument Black Wednesday is not where the Tories lost an election, they could still have turned it round without all the Europe splits and infighting?
  • ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    The one saving grace, this is going to be joyful watching you wriggle over the next few months.
  • Leon said:

    I wouldn't go back.

    The world always has to go forward. Life, in general, gets better.

    Unfortunately, that's really not true if you take a broader vision

    Life did not "get better" for most ordinary Europeans when the Roman Empire collapsed. It got considerably worse for about 1200-1300 years

    Life did not "get better" for an awful lot of Africans, Australian aborigines and Native Americans first encountering Europeans

    Life did not "get better" for 1bn Chinese under the new communist party of Mao

    And so on and so forth

    Life HAS got better for quite a lot of humanity since the industrial revolution - ie about the last 200 years

    But this can be seen as the aberration, and the norm is the same old same old
    That's probably getting close to the heart of the matter.

    We've casually assumed that the world (or our bit of it) will just carry on getting richer. The reason that it's OK for present-us to borrow money is that future-us will be rich enough to pay it back.

    And that makes sense; each year humanity knows more and can do things more efficiently. But at some point, our expectations of the future got ahead of reality.

    Hence 2008. And the grumpy reaction which caused 2016. And the "we will become rich enough to flick some vees" that also caused 2016 and its aftermath.

    And the assumption that if the country isn't getting richer, it's because someone bad (New Labour, immigrants, Europe, Greens, Rishi) is cheating us out of our deserved inheritance.

    What's the least painful national failure that might cause the UK electorate to just not be so greedy?
  • MaxPB said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
    Bankers' bonuses. By lots. :)
    And how would you pay for the reduced taxation that would cost? :)
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 18,416

    Jonathan said:

    So if we had a reset button, which could take the country back to date in the past 30 years we would all press it. We perhaps would not agree on the date we went back to, but we would all press it.

    Things are worse today than they were yesterday. That's a serious political problem that someone needs to fix.

    I would press it and it would take me back to 2016. If I had the chance I would not have voted Brexit in 2016. My mistake, probably the biggest I've made in my life.

    The prospects for this country are looking very bleak.

    Brexit takes us through the reasonably sane governance of Cameron, to the slowly losing connection with reality May, to the flatulent Boris, the tragi-comedy of Boris Mk II, and now the pencils-in-your-nose full on madness of Truss and parody-man Rees-Mogg.

    We could really do with an election right now. Sir Keir, you are our only hope.
    You've clearly not yet had the epiphany moment where you realise that the parlous state of the economy now is due precisely to the wasted years under the so-called 'reasonably sane governance' which you look back on with such affection. Our shit energy security happened then. Money flooded out of the country and shit got sold off willy nilly then. We gold-plated every bit of European drivel then. You can't run a country down like that then, without what we're dealing with now.
    Nah. We had people who believed in reality / evidence / the modern world running us.

    Now we've got Rees-Mogg.
    That's meaningless. You must realise that. This situation developed over decades. It wouldn't matter if the Cameronites were still in power - it wouldn't even matter if we were still in the EU (we'd just have less options as to what to do about it). Sell off, rip off, don't give a shit Britain is Cameron and Osborne's Britain.
  • ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    The one saving grace, this is going to be joyful watching you wriggle over the next few months.
    It may be but the wider implications for labour if it fails are not going to be good news if they win in 24
  • ChrisChris Posts: 8,435

    ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    I suppose people who believe the Earth is flat can fall back on much the same argument.
  • Jonathan said:

    Jonathan said:

    Personally I would go back to 2000, campaign for Gore in Florida and somehow cause a few flights to be cancelled on 9/11. I'd like to see what that world looked like.

    You can't game it by eeking out a tactical win.

    You'd have to change the fundamentals. That would have been there if Gore had won too.

    Al Quaeda would have still struck, the West would still have been eclipsed etc.

    We might not have fully invaded Iraq but bear in mind Clinton did intervene in Bosnia and Kosovo (as well as Somalia) so we might have done under the Dems anyway.
    One person could make a difference in Florida that would have swung that election. Averting 9/11 or at least part of it would be possible. All of the shit that followed can be traced to that.

    If not possible, I might ask the producer of The Apprentice not to book Donald Trump, introduce girls to a young Mark Zuckerberg, get Steve Jobs to get himself checked out sooner and somehow got Angus Deyton to have a quiet night in, thus denying Boris his beak on HIGNFY.

    The other what if is the one that happens in Conservative Campaign HQ in 2014/5

    KEEN ADVISER: If we really go for Lib Dem seats, we could get a majority for ourselves.

    DAVE C: Naaah. Not doing that.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 7,236
    Chris said:

    ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    I suppose people who believe the Earth is flat can fall back on much the same argument.
    So you are proposing a “no win no fee tax” on economists?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 71,912
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Actually it's gotta be Norway, hasn't it?

    They owe us one for WW2

    We could take Norway in a week. Along with that lovely little trust fund they enjoy
    Equinox has a 40% stake in Dogger Bank. They're setting themselves up rather nicely for the long term.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 9,641

    Leon said:

    I wouldn't go back.

    The world always has to go forward. Life, in general, gets better.

    Unfortunately, that's really not true if you take a broader vision

    Life did not "get better" for most ordinary Europeans when the Roman Empire collapsed. It got considerably worse for about 1200-1300 years

    Life did not "get better" for an awful lot of Africans, Australian aborigines and Native Americans first encountering Europeans

    Life did not "get better" for 1bn Chinese under the new communist party of Mao

    And so on and so forth

    Life HAS got better for quite a lot of humanity since the industrial revolution - ie about the last 200 years

    But this can be seen as the aberration, and the norm is the same old same old
    That's probably getting close to the heart of the matter.

    We've casually assumed that the world (or our bit of it) will just carry on getting richer. The reason that it's OK for present-us to borrow money is that future-us will be rich enough to pay it back.

    And that makes sense; each year humanity knows more and can do things more efficiently. But at some point, our expectations of the future got ahead of reality.

    Hence 2008. And the grumpy reaction which caused 2016. And the "we will become rich enough to flick some vees" that also caused 2016 and its aftermath.

    And the assumption that if the country isn't getting richer, it's because someone bad (New Labour, immigrants, Europe, Greens, Rishi) is cheating us out of our deserved inheritance.

    What's the least painful national failure that might cause the UK electorate to just not be so greedy?
    The problem with this line of thinking is twofold.

    Firstly, things have to get pretty bad to cause any sort of reckoning, and the damage that would be done to intangibles are much harder to repair than the direct financial impact. It's damage that would persist for generations.

    Secondly, there's no guarantee that the public would learn the right lesson from national failure. They might simply double down and blame it on the woke, aliens, Europeans, etc, and things could continue to get worse.

    The only way out is for enough people - politicians, voters, business leaders, etc - to care more about the collective good, the national interest, than for their own narrow personal interest, or at least to identify the latter with the former. That might be easier to encourage now than after a traumatic national failure.
  • Jonathan said:

    So if we had a reset button, which could take the country back to date in the past 30 years we would all press it. We perhaps would not agree on the date we went back to, but we would all press it.

    Things are worse today than they were yesterday. That's a serious political problem that someone needs to fix.

    I would press it and it would take me back to 2016. If I had the chance I would not have voted Brexit in 2016. My mistake, probably the biggest I've made in my life.

    The prospects for this country are looking very bleak.

    Brexit takes us through the reasonably sane governance of Cameron, to the slowly losing connection with reality May, to the flatulent Boris, the tragi-comedy of Boris Mk II, and now the pencils-in-your-nose full on madness of Truss and parody-man Rees-Mogg.

    We could really do with an election right now. Sir Keir, you are our only hope.
    You've clearly not yet had the epiphany moment where you realise that the parlous state of the economy now is due precisely to the wasted years under the so-called 'reasonably sane governance' which you look back on with such affection. Our shit energy security happened then. Money flooded out of the country and shit got sold off willy nilly then. We gold-plated every bit of European drivel then. You can't run a country down like that then, without what we're dealing with now.
    Nah. We had people who believed in reality / evidence / the modern world running us.

    Now we've got Rees-Mogg.
    That's meaningless. You must realise that. This situation developed over decades. It wouldn't matter if the Cameronites were still in power - it wouldn't even matter if we were still in the EU (we'd just have less options as to what to do about it). Sell off, rip off, don't give a shit Britain is Cameron and Osborne's Britain.
    No the Cameronites were correlated with reasonably good governance. We are a middling power with huge structural problems - a long-tail of very poorly educated individuals, terrible demographics in terms of health, a welfare system that is totally dysfunctional and creates dysfunctional people, an older class of individuals who are hateful towards the young with their voting behaviour and the way they influence policy.

    The Labour party had found a model for the UK that was roughly working, Cameron continued it. Then Brexit. The rest will be history, bad history.

    No decent thinkers, particularly from the right, can try and fix the problem because Brexit is a big part of the problem. So the lunatics come in and things like fracking, as an example, gets put up as a serious solution to one of the problems we are facing. I appreciate, that excites you, but in the nicest possible way, if you are excited about something, it's probably because we are going in the wrong direction.
  • Ratters said:

    I think there's a very real risk the government triggers a debt crisis.

    Here's the difference with 2020:

    - The Bank of England is now selling gilts in the billions, not buying them

    - UK pension schemes have already bought pretty much all the gilts they need, often using leverage to do so. They are no longer a significant marginal buyer.

    - Overseas investors tempted by the yield will need a premium over the US market given the currency risk of a country with a fiscally irresponsible government, sky high inflation and large current account deficit

    - Long dated government real yields are 3% pa higher than they were back then as a borrowing cost

    The outlook really isn't great.

    Stop talking down Britain. What are you, a commuinist?
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,740
    edited September 23
    Early Evening All :)

    Finished work to hear the wonderful news (apparently) I will now be so much better off thanks to Kwarteng's Budget - if only some other Conservative Chancellor since 2010 had done this (or perhaps not).

    Perhaps the best news of the day is the continuing slump in oil prices (Brent (the oil, not David) below $86 a barrel so pump prices for now likely to continue falling which is always good for Conservative poll ratings although with oil priced in dollars and sterling approaching parity with the greenback perhaps not so good.

    We now await the other side of the equation - the expenditure side. To what extent will the shortfall in revenue (only temporary of course before the growth turbo kicks in) be met from borrowing and how much from public spending cuts?

    Rising interest rates (and mortgage rates) cut into the Kwarteng Dividend as does that annoying old bugbear, inflation. If my train/bus fares go up 10% in January, whither (or wither) my tax windfall?

    I am concerned the falling oil price reflects a general global economic slowdown - whether too little demand or too much supply, I don't know. It may be a short-term stimulus might be a good idea - it has been before - but if we are at capacity (as we certainly are in terms of employment) we may be pouring petrol on a perfectly good fire.

    How does growth manifest itself? More disposable income? More consumption, presumably on imports which ends badly with a devalued currency. Where is the spare labour capacity in London and the South East (excepting the vaguely menacing exhortations of some individuals about people going back to work)?

    Shortage of labour equals wage inflation which somebody told me the other night was a good thing. I was also told a long time ago one man's wage increase was another man's price increase. Fine - we all have more money, we can chew up more of the Kwarteng Dividend on import-led consumption.

    Off we all go on the economic greyhound track chasing the inflationary lure which we can never quite catch.

    Meanwhile, borrowing rises (no worries as inflation will take care of it apparently), interest rates rise and whatever benefit we get from Kwarteng is eaten up and spat out by inflation.

    I once compared Gordon Brown's spending plans to force feeding a banquet to a starving man, Kwasi Kwarteng's effort today is akin to offering Mr Creosote a second wafer-thin mint.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,998
    Has there ever been a budget mini or maxi which has been more trashed on it's day of conception and delivery than this one?

    Even it's backers notably Rocco Forte are saying all the wrong things. 'Rich people have to be encouraged because they're the people who understand wealth'. (I paraphrase) 'Chambermaids and barmen don't'

    Are the rumours true that Sir Graham Brady will be counting letters again soon?

    I wouldn't be surprised!

    Today has been hilarious!

    (Weren't Rachel Reeves and Lisa Nandy good!)
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,561
    edited September 23
    Good day for oil today.

    WTI down to $79
    Brent crude down to $86

    Who was it that was predicting $140 a barrel.

    If Russia is selling at a substantial discount I'd question how long they can stay solvent.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 53,782
    Ratters said:

    I think there's a very real risk the government triggers a debt crisis.

    Here's the difference with 2020:

    - The Bank of England is now selling gilts in the billions, not buying them

    - UK pension schemes have already bought pretty much all the gilts they need, often using leverage to do so. They are no longer a significant marginal buyer.

    - Overseas investors tempted by the yield will need a premium over the US market given the currency risk of a country with a fiscally irresponsible government, sky high inflation and large current account deficit

    - Long dated government real yields are 3% pa higher than they were back then as a borrowing cost

    The outlook really isn't great.

    Understatement.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 7,236

    MaxPB said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    No they won't because they need to talk about spending cuts. What will Labour cut and by how much?
    Bankers' bonuses. By lots. :)
    And how would you pay for the reduced taxation that would cost? :)
    This unapologetic 45% to 40% cut costs the treasury how much? Is set to bring in how much by pep pilling our capitalism?
    Go on, amaze us with some high numbers.

    Meanwhile, it has become the main take out and headline of this budget, it’s defining how the budget and new look government now being thought of by voters. It’s the only thing in voters heads now about how this new government thinks and operates.

    There was compelling reason to announce this one today, was there?
  • Is Kwarteng on downers? This interview with Chris Mason:

    MASON: Do you think the economy is in recession?

    KWARTENG: Technically, the Bank of England said that there was a recession, I think it’ll be shallow and I hope that we can rebound and grow

    MASON: So you’re acknowledging that there is going to be a recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not acknowledging that, no no I said that there is technically a recession. We’ve had two quarters of very little, negative growth and I think these measures are gonna help us drive growth.

    MASON: A recession is a recession and you’re saying we’re in recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not saying we’re in recession, I’m referring to what the Bank has said. And I think we’re gonna drive growth with these policies

    MASON: What’s the difference between a technical recession and a recession?

    KWARTENG: There’s a big difference. Technically, the economists say two consecutive quarters, but I think we’re going to grow the economy, that’s what we’re doing, that’s what we’re focused on.
  • And:

    The chief secretary to the Treasury has also dismissed warnings that the pound could fall to parity with the US dollar as “absurd”.

    Chris Philp was asked whether the government would have to resign in this scenario, which economists have warned is possible after the chancellor’s tax-cutting mini-budget.

    He told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “I’m not gonna get into frankly slightly absurd hypothetical speculation.

    “We only came into office two and a half weeks ago.

    “We’ve got a job to do … We’re going to make this country an economic success.”

    Philp, who has been a government minister for several years, was earlier ridiculed after claiming Kwasi Kwarteng’s announcement had pushed up the value of the pound, moments before it dived to a 37-year low.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 102,905
    Not a great start for Kwasi and Liz's first mini budget then, most voters clearly think the changes will mainly benefit the wealthy. However we will see if it kickstarts growth and reduces the deficit as they intend

    'Conservative voters on the measures Kwasi Kwarteng announced today

    60% say it will leave people like them no better off
    58% say they will benefit wealthier people more than poorer people
    40% say will not be effective at growing the economy (only 32% think they will be effective)'

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1573338767879962625?s=20&t=e_Bhssrw7ZOhSvlRrQSpmA

    'Do you think the changes the Chancellor announced this week will generally benefit wealthier people more, poorer people more, or benefit both equally?

    Wealthier people: 63%
    Poorer people: 3%
    Both equally: 9%'

    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1573329167693008896?s=20&t=e_Bhssrw7ZOhSvlRrQSpmA

  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,369
    edited September 23
    People have had it with the Tories. Whatever they do they're heading for defeat at the next election... They've taken everyone for fools one too many times I'm afraid.

    However there's a big difference between a 1974 defeat and a 1997 defeat. Removing the cap on bankers bonuses when regular people won't be able to afford to heat their homes this winter might just cast the Tories into oblivion for a decade...
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 102,905
    Meanwhile Truss becomes the first G20 leader after Donald Trump to say Jerusalem should be Israel's capital

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-63006670
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 30,664
    Have to get my mind off the ghastly ghastly tories so I'm watching Roger's farewell to tennis. Just 20 mins in and already the mood lifts. Has any genius in history in any field ever been such a balanced lovely person?
  • Is Kwarteng on downers? This interview with Chris Mason:

    MASON: Do you think the economy is in recession?

    KWARTENG: Technically, the Bank of England said that there was a recession, I think it’ll be shallow and I hope that we can rebound and grow

    MASON: So you’re acknowledging that there is going to be a recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not acknowledging that, no no I said that there is technically a recession. We’ve had two quarters of very little, negative growth and I think these measures are gonna help us drive growth.

    MASON: A recession is a recession and you’re saying we’re in recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not saying we’re in recession, I’m referring to what the Bank has said. And I think we’re gonna drive growth with these policies

    MASON: What’s the difference between a technical recession and a recession?

    KWARTENG: There’s a big difference. Technically, the economists say two consecutive quarters, but I think we’re going to grow the economy, that’s what we’re doing, that’s what we’re focused on.

    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365
    kinabalu said:

    Have to get my mind off the ghastly ghastly tories so I'm watching Roger's farewell to tennis. Just 20 mins in and already the mood lifts. Has any genius in history in any field ever been such a balanced lovely person?

    He is entirely banal. Affable, but banal


    With an exquisite tennis talent, of course
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 53,782

    And:

    The chief secretary to the Treasury has also dismissed warnings that the pound could fall to parity with the US dollar as “absurd”.

    Chris Philp was asked whether the government would have to resign in this scenario, which economists have warned is possible after the chancellor’s tax-cutting mini-budget.

    He told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “I’m not gonna get into frankly slightly absurd hypothetical speculation.

    “We only came into office two and a half weeks ago.

    “We’ve got a job to do … We’re going to make this country an economic success.”

    Philp, who has been a government minister for several years, was earlier ridiculed after claiming Kwasi Kwarteng’s announcement had pushed up the value of the pound, moments before it dived to a 37-year low.

    The head clown may have gone, but the clown show continues.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 427


    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.

    Yeah, that's a tedious series of gotcha questions fielded appallingly badly. Tells us nothing except that Kwarteng badly needs to practice his interview technique and that the BBC need to try harder as well...
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,015
    NIESR: "We now forecast that the energy support guarantee, together with the tax cuts announced today, will lead to positive GDP growth in the fourth quarter of this year, shortening the recession and raising annual GDP growth to around 2% over 23-24."

    https://www.niesr.ac.uk/publications/independent-assessment-mini-budget
  • boulayboulay Posts: 1,754

    ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    I’ve had to think about how to word what I am going to write for obvious reasons but I wanted to convey a snapshot of how this approach by the gov was seen in advance of today and give a hint of how it will be seen.

    On Monday I was contacted by a counterparty who I deal with who represents, for ease of the story and other good reasons, a sovereign wealth fund. He was offering my client a few billion in Gilts in a private sale at a very healthy discount.

    They obviously didn’t want to sell on open market as it would have consequences so the sizeable discount was offered to protect the value as best as possible.

    He made it clear his client believed the UK was going to crash.

    I didn’t think for one second that my client would take the offer because they are working on the same considerations - I passed it on as I am obliged too and received the answer I expected to say “thanks but no thanks”.

    I wish I could provide on here the details to prove and demonstrate how much of a haircut the seller was willing to take on Monday but I think if they did sell then they will be happy in the medium term.

    So your bullishness and happiness about today might turn out to be well founded and the gamble pays off but it has massive consequences and at the moment there are plenty outside the UK who don’t think it will.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,369
    Roger said:



    Even it's backers notably Rocco Forte are saying all the wrong things. 'Rich people have to be encouraged because they're the people who understand wealth'. (I paraphrase) 'Chambermaids and barmen don't'

    Given what you've posted on here over the years I'd have thought you would entirely with the sentiment Rog. :D
  • EPGEPG Posts: 4,676
    Well there will be a mighty interest rate impact from today even if there's no currency crisis, so if one didn't get some of the goodies I imagine one will end up worse off.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 34,507
    In other news:

    I counted 25 ambulances trying to unload outside my Hospitals casualty at 1800. The NI charge was supposed to pay to fix this. Where is the money coming from?

    Today's plan is the economic equivalent of solving the above problem by building a bigger carpark.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 26,365
    boulay said:

    ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    I’ve had to think about how to word what I am going to write for obvious reasons but I wanted to convey a snapshot of how this approach by the gov was seen in advance of today and give a hint of how it will be seen.

    On Monday I was contacted by a counterparty who I deal with who represents, for ease of the story and other good reasons, a sovereign wealth fund. He was offering my client a few billion in Gilts in a private sale at a very healthy discount.

    They obviously didn’t want to sell on open market as it would have consequences so the sizeable discount was offered to protect the value as best as possible.

    He made it clear his client believed the UK was going to crash.

    I didn’t think for one second that my client would take the offer because they are working on the same considerations - I passed it on as I am obliged too and received the answer I expected to say “thanks but no thanks”.

    I wish I could provide on here the details to prove and demonstrate how much of a haircut the seller was willing to take on Monday but I think if they did sell then they will be happy in the medium term.

    So your bullishness and happiness about today might turn out to be well founded and the gamble pays off but it has massive consequences and at the moment there are plenty outside the UK who don’t think it will.
    OK that's not ideal
  • stodgestodge Posts: 10,740
    Some interesting and vaguely relevant polling from YouGov:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/129959565/josie-pagani-what-voters-want-is-fairness-and-government-action

    Income taxed less, wealth taxed more. The Chancellor has the equation half right (or half wrong) and the public mood, perhaps exacerbated by the pandemic experience, is for fairness and money spent on resolving real issues rather than vanity projects.

    If I were advising Starmer or Davey, I'd tell them to go strong on this notion of fairness.
  • pm215 said:


    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.

    Yeah, that's a tedious series of gotcha questions fielded appallingly badly. Tells us nothing except that Kwarteng badly needs to practice his interview technique and that the BBC need to try harder as well...
    Yes agree. The sad thing is that Mason used to be the economics correspondent so presumably he knows a bit about economics.

    Maybe just like LuckyGuy's thesis for Kwarteng, Mason doesn't really believe in his (political) questions and is now over compensating by being a tit. Surely everyone now agrees that 'gotcha' style debate and analysis is just the absolute pits and helps no-one.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 23,517

    NIESR: "We now forecast that the energy support guarantee, together with the tax cuts announced today, will lead to positive GDP growth in the fourth quarter of this year, shortening the recession and raising annual GDP growth to around 2% over 23-24."

    https://www.niesr.ac.uk/publications/independent-assessment-mini-budget

    Would be brutally amusing if this works just well enough to see the Tories win a majority of less than 10.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,561
    edited September 23

    And:

    The chief secretary to the Treasury has also dismissed warnings that the pound could fall to parity with the US dollar as “absurd”.

    Chris Philp was asked whether the government would have to resign in this scenario, which economists have warned is possible after the chancellor’s tax-cutting mini-budget.

    He told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “I’m not gonna get into frankly slightly absurd hypothetical speculation.

    “We only came into office two and a half weeks ago.

    “We’ve got a job to do … We’re going to make this country an economic success.”

    Philp, who has been a government minister for several years, was earlier ridiculed after claiming Kwasi Kwarteng’s announcement had pushed up the value of the pound, moments before it dived to a 37-year low.

    I think we need to stop this '37 year low' nonsense. The pound did very briefly fall to near parity with the dollar under that previous economic goddess Thatcher during the winter of 84-85 which now feels like an anomaly. The current weakness goes back 6 years and is to my mind feels unprecedented.

    Could a government handle the ignominy of the pound being worth less than the dollar?
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,015
    boulay said:

    ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    I’ve had to think about how to word what I am going to write for obvious reasons but I wanted to convey a snapshot of how this approach by the gov was seen in advance of today and give a hint of how it will be seen.

    On Monday I was contacted by a counterparty who I deal with who represents, for ease of the story and other good reasons, a sovereign wealth fund. He was offering my client a few billion in Gilts in a private sale at a very healthy discount.

    They obviously didn’t want to sell on open market as it would have consequences so the sizeable discount was offered to protect the value as best as possible.

    He made it clear his client believed the UK was going to crash.

    I didn’t think for one second that my client would take the offer because they are working on the same considerations - I passed it on as I am obliged too and received the answer I expected to say “thanks but no thanks”.

    I wish I could provide on here the details to prove and demonstrate how much of a haircut the seller was willing to take on Monday but I think if they did sell then they will be happy in the medium term.

    So your bullishness and happiness about today might turn out to be well founded and the gamble pays off but it has massive consequences and at the moment there are plenty outside the UK who don’t think it will.
    There's a danger in conflating someone's narrow judgment about the direction of gilts with a broad judgment on the overall economy. It's possible that they are right and also that the policy is correct.
  • Pro_RataPro_Rata Posts: 3,636
    I said I was going to leave the Italian election alone after yesterday's summing up, but I didn't figure on the craziest day of the campaign.

    The right coalition, having ploughed their separate campaigns came back together for the big triple header Berlusconi, Meloni. Salvini rally (and that Moderate bloke too). Sheffield had nothing on it.

    Berlusconi waxed on about how Putin had planned to put "respectable people" in charge in Kiev. He spent the whole rest of the day strenuously emphasising his credentials as a pro-,European, pro- Atlantic party leader.

    Wtaf was that? A simple gaffe? the Janus face of someone who was once a close Putin friend slipping? A dead cat? A Trumpist ploy to get the left to fulminate hopelessly for a couple more days yet? Whatever, it was a horror show.

    Meanwhile Van Der Leyen has been sounding the, by now standard, EU warnings when potentially non salonsfehig types get near to power. Basically, if you go down the Orbanism route, we can do stuff. Salvini's reply (having recently taken a Budapest trip to fellate Orban, once the Moscow trip had proved
    impossible), drew up his best Liz Truss cheese diction. Ver - go -gna - ti (shame on you) and resign.

    And who, among all this, was not reported to have made a complete arse of herself? That's right.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 53,782
    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    ping said:

    Genuine question for @BartholomewRoberts

    Are you disappointed in the reception to this budget among journos, with the markets and on PB? Oh, and the think tanks etc? Oh and the polling in the header.

    I mean, stuff like the IFS judgement must sting, surely?

    "364 economists can't be wrong"

    I'm glad declinist orthodoxy is being challenged.
    I’ve had to think about how to word what I am going to write for obvious reasons but I wanted to convey a snapshot of how this approach by the gov was seen in advance of today and give a hint of how it will be seen.

    On Monday I was contacted by a counterparty who I deal with who represents, for ease of the story and other good reasons, a sovereign wealth fund. He was offering my client a few billion in Gilts in a private sale at a very healthy discount.

    They obviously didn’t want to sell on open market as it would have consequences so the sizeable discount was offered to protect the value as best as possible.

    He made it clear his client believed the UK was going to crash.

    I didn’t think for one second that my client would take the offer because they are working on the same considerations - I passed it on as I am obliged too and received the answer I expected to say “thanks but no thanks”.

    I wish I could provide on here the details to prove and demonstrate how much of a haircut the seller was willing to take on Monday but I think if they did sell then they will be happy in the medium term.

    So your bullishness and happiness about today might turn out to be well founded and the gamble pays off but it has massive consequences and at the moment there are plenty outside the UK who don’t think it will.
    OK that's not ideal
    Sub-optimal.

  • EPGEPG Posts: 4,676

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Conventional forces in Ireland would be easy. We could rip through it in 48 hours.

    But, a "British occupation" would spawn the formations of hundreds of new irregular guerilla cells - aided and abetted by USA "Irish" - so it would quickly become a nightmare with high casualties all round.
    Ireland's strategic last resort is more or less to facilitate UK armed forces to (re-)occupy the country against the Russians or Robot-Japanese or whomever.
  • Is Kwarteng on downers? This interview with Chris Mason:

    MASON: Do you think the economy is in recession?

    KWARTENG: Technically, the Bank of England said that there was a recession, I think it’ll be shallow and I hope that we can rebound and grow

    MASON: So you’re acknowledging that there is going to be a recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not acknowledging that, no no I said that there is technically a recession. We’ve had two quarters of very little, negative growth and I think these measures are gonna help us drive growth.

    MASON: A recession is a recession and you’re saying we’re in recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not saying we’re in recession, I’m referring to what the Bank has said. And I think we’re gonna drive growth with these policies

    MASON: What’s the difference between a technical recession and a recession?

    KWARTENG: There’s a big difference. Technically, the economists say two consecutive quarters, but I think we’re going to grow the economy, that’s what we’re doing, that’s what we’re focused on.

    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.
    Its an illuminating exchange. The UK is in a recession. That the CofE can't accept that is a Big Problem. Denial of reality means that your analysis is wrong and your policies are wrong.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 102,905
    edited September 23
    stodge said:

    Some interesting and vaguely relevant polling from YouGov:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/129959565/josie-pagani-what-voters-want-is-fairness-and-government-action

    Income taxed less, wealth taxed more. The Chancellor has the equation half right (or half wrong) and the public mood, perhaps exacerbated by the pandemic experience, is for fairness and money spent on resolving real issues rather than vanity projects.

    If I were advising Starmer or Davey, I'd tell them to go strong on this notion of fairness.

    There isn't much support for taxing elderly widows in big houses more but slashing taxes for bankers even further than Kwarteng did today and an inheritance tax rise would be deeply unpopular
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 53,782
    Foxy said:

    In other news:

    I counted 25 ambulances trying to unload outside my Hospitals casualty at 1800. The NI charge was supposed to pay to fix this. Where is the money coming from?

    Today's plan is the economic equivalent of solving the above problem by building a bigger carpark.

    Coffey says she is putting £500m into social care now to reduce massive rates of bed blocking.

    Any idea whether this will help in Leicester? Is it just more spin?

  • Is Kwarteng on downers? This interview with Chris Mason:

    MASON: Do you think the economy is in recession?

    KWARTENG: Technically, the Bank of England said that there was a recession, I think it’ll be shallow and I hope that we can rebound and grow

    MASON: So you’re acknowledging that there is going to be a recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not acknowledging that, no no I said that there is technically a recession. We’ve had two quarters of very little, negative growth and I think these measures are gonna help us drive growth.

    MASON: A recession is a recession and you’re saying we’re in recession

    KWARTENG: I’m not saying we’re in recession, I’m referring to what the Bank has said. And I think we’re gonna drive growth with these policies

    MASON: What’s the difference between a technical recession and a recession?

    KWARTENG: There’s a big difference. Technically, the economists say two consecutive quarters, but I think we’re going to grow the economy, that’s what we’re doing, that’s what we’re focused on.

    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.
    Its an illuminating exchange. The UK is in a recession. That the CofE can't accept that is a Big Problem. Denial of reality means that your analysis is wrong and your policies are wrong.
    Don't agree. It's just boring knockabout. There are dozens of questions more interesting and useful that should have been asked.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 79,015
    Scott_xP said:

    I wonder if there are any ashen faces inside the IEA or TPA, as with some Vote Leave types in 2016, now they realise their somewhat quixotic personal theories are about to be implemented by an actual government.
    https://twitter.com/peterwalker99/status/1573322949209251841

    Economic theorists of all flavours seem no better at prediction than fortune tellers or entrail readers. Given the incredible diversity of opinion on offer there's clearly no single objective preferred economic path to take, so the various lobby groups who always propose the same things appear to be little more than ideological hacks dressing up their preferences with the false appearance of analysis and models that can show whatever they want them to show. Like pundits of any type they will never being repeatedly wrong slow them down, so all we can do is hope that by pure chance this set of ideological hacks is right this time and the other hacks wrong.
  • glwglw Posts: 8,519
    edited September 23
    dixiedean said:

    NIESR: "We now forecast that the energy support guarantee, together with the tax cuts announced today, will lead to positive GDP growth in the fourth quarter of this year, shortening the recession and raising annual GDP growth to around 2% over 23-24."

    https://www.niesr.ac.uk/publications/independent-assessment-mini-budget

    Would be brutally amusing if this works just well enough to see the Tories win a majority of less than 10.
    It will be absolutely bloody hilarious if it works. Genuinely laugh out loud stuff. Record levels of egg on face if it works.

    I've no idea. I mean I get it, but I can't help thinking "but right now?" So either the whole government has gone raving mad, or I'm missing something.

    I will be delighted to have my scepticism disproved.
  • pm215 said:


    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.

    Yeah, that's a tedious series of gotcha questions fielded appallingly badly. Tells us nothing except that Kwarteng badly needs to practice his interview technique and that the BBC need to try harder as well...
    Yes agree. The sad thing is that Mason used to be the economics correspondent so presumably he knows a bit about economics.

    Maybe just like LuckyGuy's thesis for Kwarteng, Mason doesn't really believe in his (political) questions and is now over compensating by being a tit. Surely everyone now agrees that 'gotcha' style debate and analysis is just the absolute pits and helps no-one.
    Are we in recession yes or no? That shouldn't be even a question or a topic to debate. Except that the man doing crazy economic things is in denial. Which is absolutely a story. And explains why @boulay has clients who expect UK PLC to sink.
  • And:

    The chief secretary to the Treasury has also dismissed warnings that the pound could fall to parity with the US dollar as “absurd”.

    Chris Philp was asked whether the government would have to resign in this scenario, which economists have warned is possible after the chancellor’s tax-cutting mini-budget.

    He told BBC Radio 4’s PM programme: “I’m not gonna get into frankly slightly absurd hypothetical speculation.

    “We only came into office two and a half weeks ago.

    “We’ve got a job to do … We’re going to make this country an economic success.”

    Philp, who has been a government minister for several years, was earlier ridiculed after claiming Kwasi Kwarteng’s announcement had pushed up the value of the pound, moments before it dived to a 37-year low.

    I think we need to stop this '37 year low' nonsense. The pound did very briefly fall to near parity with the dollar under that previous economic goddess Thatcher during the winter of 84-85 which now feels like an anomaly. The current weakness goes back 6 years and is to my mind feels unprecedented.

    Could a government handle the ignominy of the pound being worth less than the dollar?
    "Honey, I shrunk the quids."

    We'll be laughing all the way to the (food) bank.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,015
    Pro_Rata said:

    I said I was going to leave the Italian election alone after yesterday's summing up, but I didn't figure on the craziest day of the campaign.

    The right coalition, having ploughed their separate campaigns came back together for the big triple header Berlusconi, Meloni. Salvini rally (and that Moderate bloke too). Sheffield had nothing on it.

    Berlusconi waxed on about how Putin had planned to put "respectable people" in charge in Kiev. He spent the whole rest of the day strenuously emphasising his credentials as a pro-,European, pro- Atlantic party leader.

    Wtaf was that? A simple gaffe? the Janus face of someone who was once a close Putin friend slipping? A dead cat? A Trumpist ploy to get the left to fulminate hopelessly for a couple more days yet? Whatever, it was a horror show.

    Meanwhile Van Der Leyen has been sounding the, by now standard, EU warnings when potentially non salonsfehig types get near to power. Basically, if you go down the Orbanism route, we can do stuff. Salvini's reply (having recently taken a Budapest trip to fellate Orban, once the Moscow trip had proved
    impossible), drew up his best Liz Truss cheese diction. Ver - go -gna - ti (shame on you) and resign.

    And who, among all this, was not reported to have made a complete arse of herself? That's right.

    I suppose Salvini and Berlusconi feel they need to draw attention to themselves, but their combined vote will be less than Meloni's party.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 35,460

    NIESR: "We now forecast that the energy support guarantee, together with the tax cuts announced today, will lead to positive GDP growth in the fourth quarter of this year, shortening the recession and raising annual GDP growth to around 2% over 23-24."

    https://www.niesr.ac.uk/publications/independent-assessment-mini-budget

    Which is fine, realistically we need 6 years of 2% over trend growth to just get back to the absolute tax take we have today. I don't see how this will give us 3.5-4% annual growth rates. We're betting the house on this but we've probably backed the wrong horse. I have no ideological issue with cutting taxes to stimulate growth, the taxes that have been cut are not going to deliver the extra growth because it doesn't deliver business investment and that's where the UK economy has been struggling for 15 years. The personal tax burden is actually not bad compared to our competitor nations, it's the business investment environment. This splurge does absolutely nothing to fix it.
  • DriverDriver Posts: 914

    pm215 said:


    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.

    Yeah, that's a tedious series of gotcha questions fielded appallingly badly. Tells us nothing except that Kwarteng badly needs to practice his interview technique and that the BBC need to try harder as well...
    Yes agree. The sad thing is that Mason used to be the economics correspondent so presumably he knows a bit about economics.

    Maybe just like LuckyGuy's thesis for Kwarteng, Mason doesn't really believe in his (political) questions and is now over compensating by being a tit. Surely everyone now agrees that 'gotcha' style debate and analysis is just the absolute pits and helps no-one.
    Not at all sure that follows, tbh.
  • pm215 said:


    What a terrible exchange. Hopefully Mason went onto to discuss more useful things like why has Kwarteng decided a tax-cut from 45% to 40% is a priority for growth, setting aside that it is ludicrously regressive.

    Yeah, that's a tedious series of gotcha questions fielded appallingly badly. Tells us nothing except that Kwarteng badly needs to practice his interview technique and that the BBC need to try harder as well...
    Yes agree. The sad thing is that Mason used to be the economics correspondent so presumably he knows a bit about economics.

    Maybe just like LuckyGuy's thesis for Kwarteng, Mason doesn't really believe in his (political) questions and is now over compensating by being a tit. Surely everyone now agrees that 'gotcha' style debate and analysis is just the absolute pits and helps no-one.
    Are we in recession yes or no? That shouldn't be even a question or a topic to debate. Except that the man doing crazy economic things is in denial. Which is absolutely a story. And explains why @boulay has clients who expect UK PLC to sink.
    Who cares what some lagged and pretty arbitrary indicator reveals? I care about the fact that moving forwards, the policies Kwarteng has selected, are pretty clearly going to move us further into the shit. Ask about that perhaps, not what happened 6-months ago.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 79,015

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    It leaves a massive space for Labour to outflank the Tories on a fiscal responsibility platform.
    Yes, and I think Starmer and Reeves will do just that.
    All they have to do is not seem excessively radical and theyll have far more largest to be radical than Corbyn could, and recession and economic pain, the fault of Trusd or not, will do the rest.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 4,820
    edited September 23
    HYUFD said:

    stodge said:

    Some interesting and vaguely relevant polling from YouGov:

    https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/129959565/josie-pagani-what-voters-want-is-fairness-and-government-action

    Income taxed less, wealth taxed more. The Chancellor has the equation half right (or half wrong) and the public mood, perhaps exacerbated by the pandemic experience, is for fairness and money spent on resolving real issues rather than vanity projects.

    If I were advising Starmer or Davey, I'd tell them to go strong on this notion of fairness.

    There isn't much support for taxing elderly widows in big houses more but slashing taxes for bankers even further than Kwarteng did today and an inheritance tax rise would be deeply unpopular
    Never believe any polls about anything. Ask Sir Humphrey Appleby.... about it .
    The only information of value is votes in an election.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,261

    Leon said:

    I think the most worrying thing about the dire outlook for the public finances is that all the huge spending pressures (which Kwarteng almost completely ignored) haven't gone away. Departmental spending plans, already under very severe pressure, are going to be further kiboshed by inflation. Defence spending, already looking low given Ukraine, is going to be further kiboshed by the fall in sterling relative to the US dollar. The energy-cost crisis is probably not going to disappear by the end of the current, eye-wateringly expensive, programme of Truss handouts. The NHS backlog, despite Therese Coffey's new targets, is not going to solve itself. Measures to mitigate the social care crisis are not going to be cheap.

    Will the government really be able to ignore all this and leave spending plans unchanged? I don't think so. So I rather fear that today's fiscal incontinence is not the end of the matter. Those spending pressures are going to come up against Truss ideology, and the result of that can only be yet more irresponsible borrowing,

    We may have to invade somewhere, like Putin, to distract the voters

    Start with Ireland?
    Ireland might be a bit of a stretch, given the state of our armed forces. I'd go for unveiling @HYUFD's plans for sending the tanks into Scotland and installing a puppet regime there.
    Conventional forces in Ireland would be easy. We could rip through it in 48 hours.

    But, a "British occupation" would spawn the formations of hundreds of new irregular guerilla cells - aided and abetted by USA "Irish" - so it would quickly become a nightmare with high casualties all round.
    The invading is usually the easy bit.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 42,015
    MaxPB said:

    NIESR: "We now forecast that the energy support guarantee, together with the tax cuts announced today, will lead to positive GDP growth in the fourth quarter of this year, shortening the recession and raising annual GDP growth to around 2% over 23-24."

    https://www.niesr.ac.uk/publications/independent-assessment-mini-budget

    Which is fine, realistically we need 6 years of 2% over trend growth to just get back to the absolute tax take we have today. I don't see how this will give us 3.5-4% annual growth rates. We're betting the house on this but we've probably backed the wrong horse. I have no ideological issue with cutting taxes to stimulate growth, the taxes that have been cut are not going to deliver the extra growth because it doesn't deliver business investment and that's where the UK economy has been struggling for 15 years. The personal tax burden is actually not bad compared to our competitor nations, it's the business investment environment. This splurge does absolutely nothing to fix it.
    I'm sure this isn't the full extent of the policy announcements that Truss has up her sleeve. It's probably best to wait another week before judging her approach to UK plc.
Sign In or Register to comment.