Howdy, Stranger!

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

The general election betting moves to LAB since the arrival of Truss – politicalbetting.com

2456710

Comments

  • You've just had a dream that you were having sex with Jesus?
    Jesus went for men with bigger feet than Sean.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    And another thing: government is expected to pay for pandemics and fuel crises, how will it not be expected to cover the Cost of Housing crisis this time next year?
  • pingping Posts: 3,805
    edited September 2022

    If Starmer wins a majority even of one he will be one of the greatest LOTOs in history

    Nah.

    He’s mediocre and unthreatening.

    It will be the tories who can take the credit for it. Choosing to go on a right wing corbynite binge, screw the consequences.

    Idiots.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    edited September 2022
    Foxy said:

    The biggest savings come from complete abolition. Everything else is just tinkering.

    There would be additional savings by abolishing the Ministry of defence too.

    Personally, I’m rather proud of the British military at the moment! 🇺🇦

    Defending the territory of any country, is the first responsibility of the State.

    (I’ll agree that many hundreds of the brass hats in Whitehall are not required).
  • DavidL said:

    Too early to say in my opinion. Truss will get credit for having done something about the energy bills and a sense of purpose. We will have a better idea if that is enough in a month.

    And in a month you’ll be saying that it’s too early to say.

    PB was ever thus.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497

    Depending on precisely what average you calculate, half the population will have lifetime health care costs above the current average, and half of all healthcare will become delivered outside the NHS and through a private insurance system. You would effectively turn the UK’s healthcare system into something like the US’s. About half of all healthcare funding in the US is paid for by the state, but their system targets state support at the old and pensioners (and federal employees), whereas your system would target state support at the lucky!
    I advocated an insurance scheme to cover additional. I would suggest that the state itself runs a scheme for this to keep insurers honest and prevent abusive pricing. Many european countries have similar systems which are part insurance and part state funding. It does not have to be like america's lunacy
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    Pagan2 said:

    In practise yes it would be like a tax.

    Sorry but you can't all bang on about pension time bombs, demographic pressure and underfunded services and yet any time someone suggests reducing the things we spend on or trying to save money you are all up in arms.

    We either reduce spending or it all collapses. Yes that means some are going to lose out. Doing nothing is no longer an option.
    May I refer you to my header on the NHS, where I did address these issues, and make some proposals to address them.

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/01/three-score-and-ten-has-the-nhs-reached-the-end-of-its-natural-life/
  • ping said:

    Nah.

    He’s mediocre and unthreatening.

    It will be the tories who can take the credit for it. Choosing to go on a right wing corbynite binge, screw the consequences.

    Idiots.
    Labour members could have voted in RLB. We deserve a lot of credit for that
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830

    Has the fall in the pound helped UK exporters? That is what I would expect, but I haven't seen any of the commenters here mention that, or better yet, provide any numbers.

    I would think it would also help, for example, software developers, who want to work for US firms, while living in the UK.

    There are very few left bar the odd flint knapper
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 5,410
    edited September 2022
    Sandpit said:

    That only holds because the property is seen as an appreciating asset, and usually an investment high;y-leveraged with a mortgage. If that stops being the case, then expect more decisions to be made as you suggest, especially if more higher-paid jobs are available outside London.
    So, following usual PB logic; abolishing the top rate of tax is bad. However, abolishing it in Scotland is good, because otherwise, high earners will emigrate.
    If I were the Scottish Government, I would extend LBTT to cover sales as well as purchases, with a 10% tax on sales of properties over £1 million. If the rich want to move away, fine, but we’ll get our pound of flesh first.
  • The pound is down against the Euro too. QED.
    Not significantly. The pound to Euro variance is within normal to be expected variance ranges. It's the aggressive Fed that are making the moves.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 50,831
    Sandpit said:

    That only holds because the property is seen as an appreciating asset, and usually an investment high;y-leveraged with a mortgage. If that stops being the case, then expect more decisions to be made as you suggest, especially if more higher-paid jobs are available outside London.

    I wonder how many Scottish bankers might choose to move from Edinburgh to Newcastle?
    As the pub landlord has observed, Newcastle is maintained as such a dump precisely to ensure that any Scots coming south are encouraged to turn round and go back home….
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    Pagan2 said:

    In practise yes it would be like a tax.

    Sorry but you can't all bang on about pension time bombs, demographic pressure and underfunded services and yet any time someone suggests reducing the things we spend on or trying to save money you are all up in arms.

    We either reduce spending or it all collapses. Yes that means some are going to lose out. Doing nothing is no longer an option.
    Yes but youre 'taxing' them at 20% on top of income tax on their earnings from ca 14k to ca 59k
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,051
    edited September 2022
    DavidL said:

    Too early to say in my opinion. Truss will get credit for having done something about the energy bills and a sense of purpose. We will have a better idea if that is enough in a month.

    She 'might' get credit.

    The public don't necessarily give credit when a) They didn't much like you in the first place, and b) They expect you to provide assistance.
  • HYUFD said:

    PR would see the Tories govern again, just likely neither Labour nor the Tories would ever win a majority again.

    Instead smaller parties like the LDs, Greens and RefUK and SNP would normally hold the balance of power
    Last poll:

    SNP 46%
    Con 18%

    And it’s the SNP that’s the smaller party.

    PB was ever thus.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    edited September 2022

    Not significantly. The pound to Euro variance is within normal to be expected variance ranges. It's the aggressive Fed that are making the moves.
    Na, it dropped 2% in a few hours.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497
    Foxy said:

    May I refer you to my header on the NHS, where I did address these issues, and make some proposals to address them.

    https://www7.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2018/07/01/three-score-and-ten-has-the-nhs-reached-the-end-of-its-natural-life/
    The you in my post wasn't aimed at you personally but at all of the people who are constantly bemoaning underfunded services etc. Yet reacting in horror when anyone comes up with a proposal to change things. Cf Mays dementia tax
  • kle4 said:

    She 'might' get credit.

    The public don't necessarily give credit when a) They didn't much like you in the first place, and b) They expect you to provide assistance.
    Exactly. Truss and the Tories come in as historically unpopular. And they are doing the opposite of what their new voters want. These are conditions for a Labour landslide IMHO.

    Not predicting that yet. Still Hung Parliament for me
  • I'm not persuaded that Scottish high earners will be tempted to move south of the border because of the attraction of slightly lower taxes.

    By that logic, people would always try to arrange their lives to maximise their income. Yet millions of people still choose to live in London and other parts of the south east, knowing full well that property prices mean that they would have much more disposable income if they lived elsewhere.

    The same people that said devolution, an SNP government, 5p on a can of superlager, differentials in stamp duty, differentials in previous tax rates and differing covid rules would cause a mass exodus from Scotland are now pushing the migration of the wealth creators line; their predictions are gold standard.

    Incidentally afaics those of them who were resident in Scotland are still resident in Scotland.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,051
    ping said:

    Nah.

    He’s mediocre and unthreatening.

    It will be the tories who can take the credit for it. Choosing to go on a right wing corbynite binge, screw the consequences.

    Idiots.
    It's not either or. Even of the Tories self destruct, Labout and Starmer has to be acceptable to people as an alternative. We saw this with Boris being disliked by plenty of people, but the opposition even more disliked.
  • carnforthcarnforth Posts: 5,380

    The pound is near an all time low against the Euro too. And it fell specifically after Kwateng's statement.
    1.12 against an all time low of 1.02. Near-ish, I suppose.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    edited September 2022

    Last poll:

    SNP 46%
    Con 18%

    And it’s the SNP that’s the smaller party.

    PB was ever thus.
    He’s talking about the UK parliament.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,051

    Last poll:

    SNP 46%
    Con 18%

    And it’s the SNP that’s the smaller party.

    PB was ever thus.
    I think that is searching for outrage - in parliamentary terms they are a smaller party, even as they dominant Scotland and are vastly more popular. In the context it was being used about balance of power in the parliament the maximum number of seats they could achieve is relevant.
  • Sandpit said:

    Indeed. Many people discussing the fall in the pound and of the London stock market, as a stick with which to beat the UK government, are missing the international picture. The issue is the strong dollar, against pretty much every other currency at the moment, caused mostly by the over-eagerness of the Fed to raise rates.
    The Americans are pursuing 'beggar thy neighbour' economical policies as they always have. We can't keep following them, so we should stay the course. If a dollar ends up worth 6 pounds, so be it.
  • pigeonpigeon Posts: 5,173
    HYUFD said:

    In theory but in practice none of them are likely to win a majority under FPTP.

    Under PR though the nationalist Sweden Democrats are now kingmakers in Sweden, the nationalist Meloni is likely to become PM in Italy tomorrow and in NZ the Greens or New Zealand First are often kingmakers. In Germany too the Greens are in power and the AfD growing in strength and in Spain the hard left Podemos are kingmakers with the populist right Vox gaining support
    All of the examples that you quote have something important in common: the lunatics haven't completely taken over the asylum. Our system offers completely untrammelled power to any sect that can capture one of the two major parties (the control of each of which is, in turn, in the gift of a very small selectorate of party members who are massively to the left or right of popular opinion.) We came within an ace of systemic capture by the North London branch office of Hamas in 2017; we are now actually under the power of a Reaganomics tribute act, only minus a strong economy or a strong currency to help backstop all their nonsense. This is not going to end well.
  • I'm not persuaded that Scottish high earners will be tempted to move south of the border because of the attraction of slightly lower taxes.

    By that logic, people would always try to arrange their lives to maximise their income. Yet millions of people still choose to live in London and other parts of the south east, knowing full well that property prices mean that they would have much more disposable income if they lived elsewhere.

    I'm sure that for some people it will be a factor, as they will be able to afford a better standard of living if they do so. These sorts of things will always make a difference at the margins, the questions are, how much of a difference, and how wide is the margin?

    There's a big difference between 10% of high earners deciding to relocate and 0.1% doing so, but I have no doubt that at least some people will consider it. It's perhaps more likely to be part of the consideration when moving in the other direction. Why go through the hassle of moving to a new place, *and* get taxed more highly than staying put where you are? If a London high-flyer has the same job offer, but a choice of relocating to Scotland or Yorkshire, you could see why the lower tax rate would make Yorkshire a more appealing destination than if the difference wasn't there.

    The counter-argument would be that the extra money raised for spending on public services made Scotland a better place to live, and that the lower tax rate for lower-paid people created a more equitable and happier society. If I was in government in Scotland that's the argument I would be working to make true. It's certainly the sort of argument that the current Scottish government makes, but they don't seem to be too focused on making it true, rather than making sure that everyone knows Westminster is to blame when it isn't.
  • The Americans are pursuing 'beggar thy neighbour' economical policies as they always have. We can't keep following them, so we should stay the course. If a dollar ends up worth 6 pounds, so be it.
    How much do the Kremlin pay you?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    IshmaelZ said:

    There are very few left bar the odd flint knapper
    Our itinerant flint knapper does seem to be a net drain on the national finances as he and his commissioners earn their money here but seem to spend their earnings funding foreign hoteliers, sommeliers and restaurants.

  • DavidL said:

    The incompetence of the BoE is really driving me mad. They completely failed to anticipate a fairly obvious rise in inflation, they have failed to protect Sterling by maintaining a sensible interest rate and they have drained liquidity from the bond market by trying to sell off their QE debt when the government is struggling for buyers for the new debt it is issuing.

    Given the security situation a degree of dollar strength is inevitable but the Bank could and should have done more earlier and this week to stop us importing yet more inflation.
    I gave you a like as I three quarters agree with that.

    My issue is that on their own, ceteris paribus, what the Bank are doing ought to be enough. However ceteris isn't paribus, the Fed are being far too aggressive and the Bank need to take that into account. A half a point rise ought to be sufficient, except what the Fed are doing means it's not. And the Bank, acting after the Fed, should have known that!

    America sneezes and Europe catches a cold.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497

    Yes but youre 'taxing' them at 20% on top of income tax on their earnings from ca 14k to ca 59k
    Yes and your point is?

    We have to reduce spending or increase revenue. That means it has to come from somewhere.The employed are already taxed to the point that many in full employment have to use food banks so increasing basic rates is out. There aren't enough higher earners to make a dent in our spending.

    So you tell us where you think the reduction or increased revenue should be found. You are very quick to say "no not there".
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    Pagan2 said:

    The you in my post wasn't aimed at you personally but at all of the people who are constantly bemoaning underfunded services etc. Yet reacting in horror when anyone comes up with a proposal to change things. Cf Mays dementia tax
    I supported her social care proposals in the 2017 GE on here.
  • Foxy said:

    Our itinerant flint knapper does seem to be a net drain on the national finances as he and his commissioners earn their money here but seem to spend their earnings funding foreign hoteliers, sommeliers and restaurants.

    Net drain on electricity more like. Having to keep all of his accounts open
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,051

    I would like to hear Truss say that she has reduced tax to draw in the wealthy from around the world. I have no problems with them coming here so long as they pay our modest taxes. .
    The latter point would seem to prevent the first from taking place. The very rich always moan about their taxes, even when they or their companies manage to avoid paying plenty of it.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061

    The Americans are pursuing 'beggar thy neighbour' economical policies as they always have. We can't keep following them, so we should stay the course. If a dollar ends up worth 6 pounds, so be it.
    The dollar will collapse eventually, the Yanks are due a rude awakening
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,278

    Last poll:

    SNP 46%
    Con 18%

    And it’s the SNP that’s the smaller party.

    PB was ever thus.
    At Westminster yes, Holyrood already has PR
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022

    The Americans are pursuing 'beggar thy neighbour' economical policies as they always have. We can't keep following them, so we should stay the course. If a dollar ends up worth 6 pounds, so be it.
    That would be awesome for me, I get paid in dollars so would be earning about £400k per year! :D
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,068
    Pagan2 said:

    I advocated an insurance scheme to cover additional. I would suggest that the state itself runs a scheme for this to keep insurers honest and prevent abusive pricing. Many european countries have similar systems which are part insurance and part state funding. It does not have to be like america's lunacy
    The thing is, a state-run insurance system that people have to pay into… well, basically, that just takes you back to where we started. You’ve re-labelled a tax into an insurance model… I guess you could call it a national insurance? The big difference is you go from funding healthcare via a progressive tax to funding it via effectively a flat tax.

    But, sure, let’s look at some European models. In the UK, the state currently pays about 79% of all healthcare costs. Our nearest neighbour is France. The French state pays about 75% of all healthcare costs. It’s a similar figure in Germany, 77%. Switching to one of these European models doesn’t match what you proposed or deliver the savings you want.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    Sandpit said:

    That would be awesome for me, I get paid in dollars so would be earning about £400k per year! :D
    You might even be able to buy a few pints in central London with that kind of money.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,546
    Pagan2 said:

    The you in my post wasn't aimed at you personally but at all of the people who are constantly bemoaning underfunded services etc. Yet reacting in horror when anyone comes up with a proposal to change things. Cf Mays dementia tax
    Agreed about the dementia tax. And keep coming with the proposals - they're much more constructive than much of what is posted on here, even if they're robustly challenged.

    Thing is, right now, the most obvious proposal to change things is simply cancel what the government has announced. Wind back 48 hours, we had cheaper debt and less of it, and therefore very significantly better funded public services, for a given level of deficit.

    If you're insisting on gentle nibbles rather than voracious gulps, let's at least not feed the elephant up so its even bigger. (This isn't directed at you specifically - you haven't as far as I can see argued for the governmeent's economic idiocy).
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 126,278
    pigeon said:

    All of the examples that you quote have something important in common: the lunatics haven't completely taken over the asylum. Our system offers completely untrammelled power to any sect that can capture one of the two major parties (the control of each of which is, in turn, in the gift of a very small selectorate of party members who are massively to the left or right of popular opinion.) We came within an ace of systemic capture by the North London branch office of Hamas in 2017; we are now actually under the power of a Reaganomics tribute act, only minus a strong economy or a strong currency to help backstop all their nonsense. This is not going to end well.
    Yes but Corbyn still failed to win under FPTP in 2017 and on current polls Truss would be unlikely to win in 2024 either.

    PR however would give both a better chance of forming a government in a coalition, even without the small chance of a majority under FPTP
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    edited September 2022
    maxh said:

    Agreed about the dementia tax. And keep coming with the proposals - they're much more constructive than much of what is posted on here, even if they're robustly challenged.

    Thing is, right now, the most obvious proposal to change things is simply cancel what the government has announced. Wind back 48 hours, we had cheaper debt and less of it, and therefore very significantly better funded public services, for a given level of deficit.

    If you're insisting on gentle nibbles rather than voracious gulps, let's at least not feed the elephant up so its even bigger. (This isn't directed at you specifically - you haven't as far as I can see argued for the governmeent's economic idiocy).
    Agreed entirely with your first point. The level of debate generally (not here, but in the country at large) is so pitifully low now. I think the response to May's proposal summed that up quite nicely.
  • We paid around 11k for two rounds of IVF. Happily the second was sucessful and I’m now terrified about next year! (And very excited).
    Congratulations matey
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 44,613
    Foxy said:

    Our itinerant flint knapper does seem to be a net drain on the national finances as he and his commissioners earn their money here but seem to spend their earnings funding foreign hoteliers, sommeliers and restaurants.

    He did spend money in Newport, Kirkwall and Wick to be quite fair. Don't know if he ever got to Northumberland and Tweeddale.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497

    The thing is, a state-run insurance system that people have to pay into… well, basically, that just takes you back to where we started. You’ve re-labelled a tax into an insurance model… I guess you could call it a national insurance? The big difference is you go from funding healthcare via a progressive tax to funding it via effectively a flat tax.

    But, sure, let’s look at some European models. In the UK, the state currently pays about 79% of all healthcare costs. Our nearest neighbour is France. The French state pays about 75% of all healthcare costs. It’s a similar figure in Germany, 77%. Switching to one of these European models doesn’t match what you proposed or deliver the savings you want.
    I didn't say the state run scheme was mandatory. I suggested a state run scheme be run so that insurance companies offering similar schemes couldn't run riot.

    Also those stats on europe while they look comparable may not be. Does for example the french system or the german system do all the procedures the nhs does for free or do they go you want procedure x sorry need to go private for that. I don't know that answer so am speculating
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,068

    Not significantly. The pound to Euro variance is within normal to be expected variance ranges. It's the aggressive Fed that are making the moves.
    The pound was never remotely this low before Brexit. There has been something of a rollercoaster since Brexit, but the Euro has sunk very significantly this month, way lower than it’s been for the last year.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    RobD said:

    You might even be able to buy a few pints in central London with that kind of money.
    I paid £12.50 for a pint in my local last night. :o

    The sandpit is going to be a very expensive place for Europeans on holidays this winter.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497

    We paid around 11k for two rounds of IVF. Happily the second was sucessful and I’m now terrified about next year! (And very excited).
    Congratulations a child is a hugely rewarding investment of time and money
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    Sandpit said:

    I paid £12.50 for a pint in my local last night. :o

    The sandpit is going to be a very expensive place for Europeans on holidays this winter.
    With inflation it's already £12.60 tonight. Get them in quick. ;)
  • RobD said:

    Na, it dropped 2% in a few hours.
    Yes it "dropped" to one cent higher than it was this time last year.

    The pound and euro are bouncing around in normal variance ranges seen in recent years. It's the dollar that has moved significantly.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,729
    RobD said:

    Agreed entirely with your first point. The level of debate generally (not here, but in the country at large) is so pitifully low now. I think the response to May's proposal summed that up quite nicely.
    I don't think it's about the level of debate. I think the average person believes they can force the average taxpayer to pay for everything - once medicine and education, now energy, next probably food - and any deviation from this will lead to screams of rage.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,546
    Pagan2 said:

    Yes and your point is?

    We have to reduce or increase revenue. That means it has to come from somewhere.The employed are already taxed to the point that many in full employment have to use food banks so increasing basic rates is out. There aren't enough higher earners to make a dent in our spending.

    So you tell us where you think the reduction or increased revenue should be found. You are very quick to say "no not there".
    The employed are already taxed mortgaged and billed to the point that many in full employment have to use food banks...

    Fixed it for ya. The current cost of living crisis is in no way generated by marginal rates of taxation. Taxation levels aren't the fundamental problem here, the way our economy has been skewed by the weird brand of capitalism we currently subscribe to, so that house prices and rental costs are unaffordable is.

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    carnforth said:

    1.12 against an all time low of 1.02. Near-ish, I suppose.
    GBP briefly dipped below €1.00 on the night of 30/31 Dec 2008.

    I know, because I was the duty IT manager for a major UK bank, one of whose systems went tits up at the idea of £ < € and started offering free money to other companies' automatic trading systems. We had to shut it down sharpish in the early hours but not before we'd lost several £m.

    By the time we fixed the system the £ was back up above the € again of course.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,068
    Pagan2 said:

    Yes and your point is?

    We have to reduce spending or increase revenue. That means it has to come from somewhere.The employed are already taxed to the point that many in full employment have to use food banks so increasing basic rates is out. There aren't enough higher earners to make a dent in our spending.

    So you tell us where you think the reduction or increased revenue should be found. You are very quick to say "no not there".
    If those in employment are using food banks, is that because they are taxed too much or paid too little?

    Tax rates in the UK are lower than in most of our European neighbours. We could comfortably be taxed more. Sure, one should target those taxes appropriately. Maybe people who are in no danger of needing a food bank, say those earning over £150,000, could pay a bit more in tax.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497
    maxh said:

    Agreed about the dementia tax. And keep coming with the proposals - they're much more constructive than much of what is posted on here, even if they're robustly challenged.

    Thing is, right now, the most obvious proposal to change things is simply cancel what the government has announced. Wind back 48 hours, we had cheaper debt and less of it, and therefore very significantly better funded public services, for a given level of deficit.

    If you're insisting on gentle nibbles rather than voracious gulps, let's at least not feed the elephant up so its even bigger. (This isn't directed at you specifically - you haven't as far as I can see argued for the governmeent's economic idiocy).
    I am staying clear about the debate on the last budget and trying to take a broader view. I start at the point of what I want

    a) Well funded services that we do continue
    b) People not having so much money taken from them to fund the services the state offers that they struggle
    c) not kicking debt down the road to our children and grandchildren
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    edited September 2022

    We paid around 11k for two rounds of IVF. Happily the second was sucessful and I’m now terrified about next year! (And very excited).
    Congratulations!

    Fox jr2 was via self funded IVF. £1200 per cycle at that time, but nothing like the psychological cost. It is a very gruelling process emotionally.

    I don't regret it at all, but the costs since birth have been substantially more!

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    edited September 2022

    How much do the Kremlin pay you?
    Nah, not @Luckyguy1983. He may be an idiot but he's not a 'useful idiot' ;-)
  • The same people that said devolution, an SNP government, 5p on a can of superlager, differentials in stamp duty, differentials in previous tax rates and differing covid rules would cause a mass exodus from Scotland are now pushing the migration of the wealth creators line; their predictions are gold standard.

    Incidentally afaics those of them who were resident in Scotland are still resident in Scotland.
    I remember when the SNP were proposing a flat rate income tax (3% or 4% - can't remember) to replace the council tax. Scottish Labour complained that high earners would leave Scotland.
    They used Fred Goodwin as an example. If only ...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    edited September 2022

    GBP briefly dipped below €1.00 on the night of 30/31 Dec 2008.

    I know, because I was the duty IT manager for a major UK bank, one of whose systems went tits up at the idea of £ < € and started offering free money to other companies' automatic trading systems. We had to shut it down sharpish in the early hours but not before we'd lost several £m.

    By the time we fixed the system the £ was back up above the € again of course.
    Ouch!

    I was duty IT manager for a hospitality retailer in Europe, on the night the Euro went live on 1st Jan 2002.

    I wonder how many systems got caught out on that mad day in 2020, when the US oil price went negative?
  • If those in employment are using food banks, is that because they are taxed too much or paid too little?

    Tax rates in the UK are lower than in most of our European neighbours. We could comfortably be taxed more. Sure, one should target those taxes appropriately. Maybe people who are in no danger of needing a food bank, say those earning over £150,000, could pay a bit more in tax.
    Taxed too much.

    Real tax rates are not that low in this country. In fact until yesterday they'd never been higher in 74 years.
  • All of Labour’s talking points have gone into the public. An art of media work means only one person is behind this.

    Alastair Campbell
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,211

    Nah, not @Luckyguy1983. He may be an idiot but he's not a 'useful idiot' ;-)
    He certainly isn’t. :)
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited September 2022
    Pagan2 said:

    Yes and your point is?

    We have to reduce spending or increase revenue. That means it has to come from somewhere.The employed are already taxed to the point that many in full employment have to use food banks so increasing basic rates is out. There aren't enough higher earners to make a dent in our spending.

    So you tell us where you think the reduction or increased revenue should be found. You are very quick to say "no not there".
    Im happy to look at things like NI/Income tax consolidation so pensioners pay, maybe giving them a 15 k or so PA. Rather than smashing pensioners on modest incomes over the head with a cudgel. And vastly cut back what is covered on the NHS. Drastically reduce degree course uptake and put students on a lifetime income tax addition for each year or part year completed in return for free tuition and a maintenance grant. Start there.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,211
    I thought Putin was supposed to be an avid student of WWII ?

    The Russian president has rejected requests from commanders in the field that they be allowed to retreat from Kherson, a vital city in Ukraine’s south.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/23/us/politics/putin-ukraine.html?smid=tw-share
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099

    Yes it "dropped" to one cent higher than it was this time last year.

    The pound and euro are bouncing around in normal variance ranges seen in recent years. It's the dollar that has moved significantly.
    I think that's right, rumours of GBP's terminal decline have been greatly exaggerated.

    But let's see how it fares over the next few months.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    Pagan2 said:

    I am staying clear about the debate on the last budget and trying to take a broader view. I start at the point of what I want

    a) Well funded services that we do continue
    b) People not having so much money taken from them to fund the services the state offers that they struggle
    c) not kicking debt down the road to our children and grandchildren
    I am with you on the third.

    Paying £87 billion in interest on the national debt is only going to be increasing in the next few years as interest rates spiral ever upwards.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,546
    Pagan2 said:

    I am staying clear about the debate on the last budget and trying to take a broader view. I start at the point of what I want

    a) Well funded services that we do continue
    b) People not having so much money taken from them to fund the services the state offers that they struggle
    c) not kicking debt down the road to our children and grandchildren
    Entirely agree with the overall sentiment, and its worth pursuing 'out there' solutions, at least in theory.

    I disagree with (b) though. I don't think that people are struggling because of the levels of taxation. It's possible the economy as a whole is hampered, but individual struggles are affected much more by other things than taxation (above all else, costs of renting/buying a house).
  • Liz Truss has another problem. Because she’s a bit odd and not very warm, along with her Chancellor she finds it hard to sell this budget as being anything other than a rich person giveaway.

    Their rebuttals have been utterly pathetic. Like Seumus Milne levels of bad. Labour has played them like a fiddle
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,051
    Nigelb said:

    I thought Putin was supposed to be an avid student of WWII ?

    The Russian president has rejected requests from commanders in the field that they be allowed to retreat from Kherson, a vital city in Ukraine’s south.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/23/us/politics/putin-ukraine.html?smid=tw-share

    He probably only noticed the bits about 'massive casualties' and 'Soviet victory'
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    Carnyx said:

    He did spend money in Newport, Kirkwall and Wick to be quite fair. Don't know if he ever got to Northumberland and Tweeddale.
    Don't forget his sterling (!) efforts to prop up the Penarth economy during Covid wave 1!
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,284
    .

    Yes it "dropped" to one cent higher than it was this time last year.

    The pound and euro are bouncing around in normal variance ranges seen in recent years. It's the dollar that has moved significantly.
    Fair enough, but it was one of the biggest gains/losses (depending on your perspective) in many years on a single day, rather than a gradual drift. Exactly as happened with the USD, only that was on top of the slow strengthening of the dollar in recent years.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 13,068
    Pagan2 said:

    I didn't say the state run scheme was mandatory. I suggested a state run scheme be run so that insurance companies offering similar schemes couldn't run riot.

    Also those stats on europe while they look comparable may not be. Does for example the french system or the german system do all the procedures the nhs does for free or do they go you want procedure x sorry need to go private for that. I don't know that answer so am speculating
    I’m sure there are particular idiosyncrasies to each of those systems so they fund certain procedures in different ways, but the total spend is the total spend. While organised somewhat differently, our European neighbours have state-funded healthcare systems that cost them, more or less, what the NHS costs us. You’re right about “nibbles”, as discussed earlier, and if there are savings to be found and we can find them through making international comparisons, we should do that.

    But you were suggesting something far more drastic, which is why I feel it’s fair enough to describe it abolishing the NHS.

  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,664
    Foxy said:

    Good idea, it frees up all those teachers to work in financial services, and all those children to go down the mines, up chimneys and pick cabbages

    So having disbanded the armed forces and schools, we should have enough to fund the £87 billion due in interest on the national debt this year.

    We will need further savings as next year the amount payable will be higher.
    Abolish NHS, close it down entirely. And stop paying all state pensions. That should do the trick.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432

    Liz Truss has another problem. Because she’s a bit odd and not very warm, along with her Chancellor she finds it hard to sell this budget as being anything other than a rich person giveaway.

    Their rebuttals have been utterly pathetic. Like Seumus Milne levels of bad. Labour has played them like a fiddle

    They aren't trying to sell this as anything other than a rich person's giveaway. It isn't something that they seem embarrassed by.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497

    If those in employment are using food banks, is that because they are taxed too much or paid too little?

    Tax rates in the UK are lower than in most of our European neighbours. We could comfortably be taxed more. Sure, one should target those taxes appropriately. Maybe people who are in no danger of needing a food bank, say those earning over £150,000, could pay a bit more in tax.
    Even if you whacked 10% extra tax on them the amount it would make is negligble you have to be in the top 1% to earn that much and thats about 350,000 people even if they paid an average of 50k extra tax you are talking a mere 17.5 billion which is a drop in the ocean
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 75,211

    Liz Truss has another problem. Because she’s a bit odd and not very warm, along with her Chancellor she finds it hard to sell this budget as being anything other than a rich person giveaway.

    Their rebuttals have been utterly pathetic. Like Seumus Milne levels of bad. Labour has played them like a fiddle

    Doesn’t help that the Chief Sec to the Treasury appears to be an idiot.
  • HYUFD said:

    Yes but Corbyn still failed to win under FPTP in 2017 and on current polls Truss would be unlikely to win in 2024 either.

    PR however would give both a better chance of forming a government in a coalition, even without the small chance of a majority under FPTP
    Corbyn or Truss would never have been elected party leader in a system where parties have to hold some appeal to other groups in order to form a government. If they were somehow elected then people would vote for a similar or breakaway party because there wouldn’t be wasted votes.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 98,051
    Foxy said:

    They aren't trying to sell this as anything other than a rich person's giveaway. It isn't something that they seem embarrassed by.
    It'll be fine, once every single person is above average in wealth.
  • Nigelb said:

    Doesn’t help that the Chief Sec to the Treasury appears to be an idiot.
    That’s the team Truss has put together. They are either rubbish or being advised very poorly.
  • Stereodog said:

    Corbyn or Truss would never have been elected party leader in a system where parties have to hold some appeal to other groups in order to form a government. If they were somehow elected then people would vote for a similar or breakaway party because there wouldn’t be wasted votes.
    If I were Labour leader I’d abolish the membership vote altogether.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    edited September 2022
    O/T

    Went to the Brian Cox 'Horizons' show last night. Very good. Seems like it's an interesting time for astrophysics as our understanding of black holes raises more and more questions about the nature of the universe.

    Interestingly for all you alien hunters, Cox sounds decidedly more hesitant about the certainty of other intelligent life than he did when I went to a talk of his about 10 years ago.

    'The human brain might be the only only thing in existence capable of giving meaning to the universe'. (I paraphrase)

    Recommended if you happen to get chance to go to the show.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 37,081
    Can the pound reach parity versus the dollar?

    It’s now a one-in-four chance, according to Bloomberg's pricing model https://trib.al/JGqt8wL https://twitter.com/BloombergUK/status/1573665689419894784/photo/1
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 56,022
    Nigelb said:

    I thought Putin was supposed to be an avid student of WWII ?

    The Russian president has rejected requests from commanders in the field that they be allowed to retreat from Kherson, a vital city in Ukraine’s south.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/23/us/politics/putin-ukraine.html?smid=tw-share

    Everyone on the ground in Kherson, knows that the enemy can’t possibly hold on to the city for any length of time, as the defenders have the advantage of range and can effectively target the very limited number of supply routes across the Deniper river.

    The only questions remaining, are how many troops get killed or captured, and whether the Ukranians can get their kit intact or destroyed.

    The commanders want to be allowed to destroy equipment and retreat in an ordered manner - Putin wants them to fight to the inevitable end.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 18,056
    edited September 2022
    Foxy said:

    They aren't trying to sell this as anything other than a rich person's giveaway. It isn't something that they seem embarrassed by.
    They believe this stuff has a very good chance of working. The grimly fascinating bit will be if these prophecies of plenty don't come true.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 13,664
    Pagan2 said:

    I am staying clear about the debate on the last budget and trying to take a broader view. I start at the point of what I want

    a) Well funded services that we do continue
    b) People not having so much money taken from them to fund the services the state offers that they struggle
    c) not kicking debt down the road to our children and grandchildren
    It remains true that you can pick a maximum of any two out of these three: Decent public services, manageable taxes, sound public finances.

    Currently government scores Zero out of three.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432

    I’m sure there are particular idiosyncrasies to each of those systems so they fund certain procedures in different ways, but the total spend is the total spend. While organised somewhat differently, our European neighbours have state-funded healthcare systems that cost them, more or less, what the NHS costs us. You’re right about “nibbles”, as discussed earlier, and if there are savings to be found and we can find them through making international comparisons, we should do that.

    But you were suggesting something far more drastic, which is why I feel it’s fair enough to describe it abolishing the NHS.

    Health care, whether funded by state, insurance or self funded is essentially redistributive as the people paying most will be healthy and working and those needing it sick and not working. It is long term illnesses that are most expensive, so there isn't a lot of churn between earners and recipients, though there always a few.

    If taxes are cut but we wind up having to pay out for health insurance, private schools, security or pensions then the result is the same. There is no more money in the pocket, just different bills.
  • algarkirk said:

    Abolish NHS, close it down entirely. And stop paying all state pensions. That should do the trick.

    Don't give them ideas.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497
    maxh said:

    Entirely agree with the overall sentiment, and its worth pursuing 'out there' solutions, at least in theory.

    I disagree with (b) though. I don't think that people are struggling because of the levels of taxation. It's possible the economy as a whole is hampered, but individual struggles are affected much more by other things than taxation (above all else, costs of renting/buying a house).
    Yes I agree that housing is a major cause of poverty in the country. However not much we can do about that without building more houses and we know how problematic that gets.

    The lever we do have however is how much money we leave in peoples pockets

    renting a room costs anything from 100 to 200 a week. someone earning 20k a year is taking home 328 a week so is left with only 228 to 128 a week out of which they will have to pay transport, fuel, and food. If we hadn't taken 45£ out of their pocket in tax and ni they would be better able to cope
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    https://twitter.com/davidmwessel/status/1573643572036894720?t=JnhreV7rz4v7bBC0b6dHLw&s=19

    The crises ahead this winter are going to catch a great many unawares
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 35,099
    Nigelb said:

    I thought Putin was supposed to be an avid student of WWII ?

    The Russian president has rejected requests from commanders in the field that they be allowed to retreat from Kherson, a vital city in Ukraine’s south.
    https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/23/us/politics/putin-ukraine.html?smid=tw-share

    Damn and blast "12ft has been disabled for this site"
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 10,497
    algarkirk said:

    It remains true that you can pick a maximum of any two out of these three: Decent public services, manageable taxes, sound public finances.

    Currently government scores Zero out of three.

    My point a) is predicated on a reduction in the services the state offers and just funding well the ones we continue, not carrying on doing everything we do now
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 50,432
    Pagan2 said:

    Yes I agree that housing is a major cause of poverty in the country. However not much we can do about that without building more houses and we know how problematic that gets.

    The lever we do have however is how much money we leave in peoples pockets

    renting a room costs anything from 100 to 200 a week. someone earning 20k a year is taking home 328 a week so is left with only 228 to 128 a week out of which they will have to pay transport, fuel, and food. If we hadn't taken 45£ out of their pocket in tax and ni they would be better able to cope
    They wouldn't be better off if that £45 went on health insurance or private pension contribution.
  • Omnium said:

    This comment is doubly unfathomable.
    It's a tool to get around paywalls.

    Here you go, no paywall: https://archive.ph/5s25K
  • When do we think it's going to start getting properly cold? I see a few 15 degree high days coming up but they're few and far between.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 11,313

    It's a tool to get around paywalls.

    Here you go, no paywall: https://archive.ph/5s25K
    I really must work on my jokes.
    Fathom = 6 ft
  • Pagan2 said:

    Yes I agree that housing is a major cause of poverty in the country. However not much we can do about that without building more houses and we know how problematic that gets.

    The lever we do have however is how much money we leave in peoples pockets

    renting a room costs anything from 100 to 200 a week. someone earning 20k a year is taking home 328 a week so is left with only 228 to 128 a week out of which they will have to pay transport, fuel, and food. If we hadn't taken 45£ out of their pocket in tax and ni they would be better able to cope
    I suspect that doesn't matter.

    Certainly in London, the supply-demand curve has reached the point where the market rent for anything half habitable is "wherever you can afford plus a bit".

    So if you put £45 more in people's pockets by cutting taxes, it will go directly onto rents.

    If I'm right, cutting the state to cut tax will just transfer even more cash to landlords.
  • wooliedyedwooliedyed Posts: 10,061
    edited September 2022

    When do we think it's going to start getting properly cold? I see a few 15 degree high days coming up but they're few and far between.

    Its already cold enough that heating set to minimum levels will start kicking in at times. Proper cold any time from November?
  • Its already cold enough that heating set to minimum levels will start kicking in at times. Proper cold any time from November?
    My heating isn't yet on at all.
  • Omnium said:

    I really must work on my jokes.
    Fathom = 6 ft
    Oh, haha
This discussion has been closed.