You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You can't be sure of that. The EU was never an unlimited pool of labour and strong growth in the new member states was always going to reduce the high initial level of migration, if not send it into reverse.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point was to separate ourselves politically from the EU.
Just imagine how much oxygen would be taken up by EU issues if were were still part of it and everything Ursula von der Leyen said became a domestic issue for us. Instead all the main parties are focused on ideas about how to solve the problems faced by Britain today.
Being abroad I must have missed that last bit?
It has to be said that driving across North Carolina all day doesn't offer that much by way of anything interesting to look at.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
If cutting taxes on the rich is always and everywhere a bad idea, then it creates a ratchet effect where they can only ever go up. Krugman didn't think the top rate of income tax in Britain was too low under Blair.
He's criticising the idea that it will boost the economy. And that it will likely make the fiscal position worse as seen in the market reaction and lack of official figures provided in support.
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
I don't think the Waitrose staff are more attentive, rather the intrinsic products are different from Asda. In finance the product is regulated to within an inch of its life - very little variation in the mass market - but you can always go to Coutts.
Coutts recently had to warn their customers to turn off apple auto-update since they can’t keep their app up to date:
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
I don't think the Waitrose staff are more attentive, rather the intrinsic products are different from Asda. In finance the product is regulated to within an inch of its life - very little variation in the mass market - but you can always go to Coutts.
Coutts recently had to warn their customers to turn off apple auto-update since they can’t keep their app up to date:
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
Yebbut Kwarteng's fiscal event is not mainly tax cuts for the rich, per PK.
It's not: but I would personally have removed the 45% tax band when the economy was booming, not when it was struggling.
Off topic: the next time you’re whinging at Vanilla, could you ask them to fix the annoying behaviour where clicking reply permanently puts the post into the reply box, even if you delete it - reload the page and there it is again! Clicking reply on another post appends rather than replaces it. Infuriating, as illustrated by the double quotation above.
(Oh, and the sideways/upside down photo regression too :-)
Though interestingly on the main site it does not.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You can't be sure of that. The EU was never an unlimited pool of labour and strong growth in the new member states was always going to reduce the high initial level of migration, if not send it into reverse.
Well the evidence suggests we weren't short of them before we left the EU
As I recall until your Damascene conversion or bump on the head, you were one of the posters who realised the impact on UK Plc, kicking out the unwanted EU workers would create.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
Yebbut Kwarteng's fiscal event is not mainly tax cuts for the rich, per PK.
It's not: but I would personally have removed the 45% tax band when the economy was booming, not when it was struggling.
Off topic: the next time you’re whinging at Vanilla, could you ask them to fix the annoying behaviour where clicking reply permanently puts the post into the reply box, even if you delete it - reload the page and there it is again! Clicking reply on another post appends rather than replaces it. Infuriating, as illustrated by the double quotation above.
(Oh, and the sideways/upside down photo regression too :-)
Though interestingly on the main site it does not.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point was to separate ourselves politically from the EU.
Just imagine how much oxygen would be taken up by EU issues if were were still part of it and everything Ursula von der Leyen said became a domestic issue for us. Instead all the main parties are focused on ideas about how to solve the problems faced by Britain today.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You can't be sure of that. The EU was never an unlimited pool of labour and strong growth in the new member states was always going to reduce the high initial level of migration, if not send it into reverse.
Well the evidence suggests we weren't short of them before we left the EU
As I recall until your Damascene conversion or bump on the head, you were one of the posters who realised the impact on UK Plc, kicking out the unwanted EU workers would create.
There are worker shortages all over the place. May be Brexit exacerbated it - I don’t know - but you can’t blame it for an issue that is hitting multiple countries
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point was to separate ourselves politically from the EU.
Just imagine how much oxygen would be taken up by EU issues if were were still part of it and everything Ursula von der Leyen said became a domestic issue for us. Instead all the main parties are focused on ideas about how to solve the problems faced by Britain today.
Being abroad I must have missed that last bit?
It has to be said that driving across North Carolina all day doesn't offer that much by way of anything interesting to look at.
Pine forest and hog farms, billboards for Cracker Barrel and South of the Border as I remember it.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
A bonfire of workers rights and protections you mean.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
There she was, just a waiting at the church -
Got to love the old Music Hall political numbers
Just an old lie that Boris knocked about a bit
My old man said he’s a Kwarteng fan
My guess is that he regrets not being bold enough and listening too much to Sunak.
The guy he brought in as a patsy when his adviser fell out with Javid? Yes, I'm sure he just found it too difficult to overcome the junior minister he promoted who was virtually known before then.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You can't be sure of that. The EU was never an unlimited pool of labour and strong growth in the new member states was always going to reduce the high initial level of migration, if not send it into reverse.
Well the evidence suggests we weren't short of them before we left the EU
As I recall until your Damascene conversion or bump on the head, you were one of the posters who realised the impact on UK Plc, kicking out the unwanted EU workers would create.
There are worker shortages all over the place. May be Brexit exacerbated it - I don’t know - but you can’t blame it for an issue that is hitting multiple countries
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
I don't have much confidence that the Truss/Kwazi approach would have worked out even in the most favourable circs, those being a newly elected government with five years to run and a mandate to do what it's doing.
In the actual reality of a new PM arriving half way through a term and exercising an economic handbrake turn with no mandate whatsoever, and the press already speculating whether she'll be around in a year's time, I cannot see any of these high rolling spenders or investors having much confidence that this regime has sufficient longevity to influence their residency or investment decisions before 2024/5?
Yes, that does seem a concern. Since I do not understand economics anyway (though frankly I don't see how economists do either, they can just explain how they don't understand it better) I can only give impressions of how policies seem, but hope that the optimists are right, but from a point of view of whether said policies will encourage or give confidence to specific people, this just doesn't seem the time or atmosphere that it would, even if they are right and these are good ideas.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
There she was, just a waiting at the church -
Got to love the old Music Hall political numbers
Just an old lie that Boris knocked about a bit
My old man said he’s a Kwarteng fan
My guess is that he regrets not being bold enough and listening too much to Sunak.
The guy he brought in as a patsy when his adviser fell out with Javid? Yes, I'm sure he just found it too difficult to overcome the junior minister he promoted who was virtually known before then.
He certainly seemed to set an awful lot of store by Sunak. Remember when Sunak resigned and Boris replaced him with Zahawi, it was said he was delighted that he'd have a Chancellor focused on growing the economy again. I don't get how Sunak got so powerful all of a sudden either.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Because they are EU worker protection rules and you are retired?
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
A bonfire of workers rights and protections you mean.
I believe JRM has long had a desire to give the Statute of Labourers 1351 another go.
Paul Mason @paulmasonnews · 26m Starmer tells Labour delegates trickledown economics is a "pisstake" - says (with justification) the party feels confident and ready for an election ...
I think 2023 GE. Dangerous to leave it the full 5 years.
Possibly, but if you are 20 points behind there must be a temptation to wait to see if something, anything, turns up.
Both John Major (1997) and Gordon Brown (2010) paid a very heavy price for that Micawberish approach.
There she was, just a waiting at the church -
Got to love the old Music Hall political numbers
Just an old lie that Boris knocked about a bit
My old man said he’s a Kwarteng fan
My guess is that he regrets not being bold enough and listening too much to Sunak.
The guy he brought in as a patsy when his adviser fell out with Javid? Yes, I'm sure he just found it too difficult to overcome the junior minister he promoted who was virtually known before then.
He certainly seemed to set an awful lot of store by Sunak. Remember when Sunak resigned and Boris replaced him with Zahawi, it was said he was delighted that he'd have a Chancellor focused on growing the economy again. I don't get how Sunak got so powerful all of a sudden either.
Nice that he's gone though.
I think it is more plausible that Sunak worked under the direction Boris gave him, and once Sunak was gone Boris pivoted to why the new guy was the bees knees. Like most such pivots it went too far, as it would beg the question why he didn't sack or move Sunak ages ago.
A lot of PMs seem to act like their Chancellors do things without them knowing. Small stuff? I can buy that. Obstruction? Possibly. But major policy direction in budgets and so on? Not plausible when they try that, to me anyway.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
A bonfire of workers rights and protections you mean.
Yes the tax cuts are just smoke and mirrors to grab the headlines. The real plan is a bonfire of protections and regulations. Libertarianism rather than conservatism.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Because they are EU worker protection rules and you are retired?
If eradicating them is unpopular then Truss will pay the price
A majority of people like tax cuts for themselves and not for other people?
Abolishing the top rate has gone down very badly. And that is why Labour have played this to perfection
When it comes to the top rate my basic sense of fairness just feels like 50% is too high, people shouldn't lose half. That may be economically unsound as a reason, but that is my gut. Other than that ;eve;, I could be persuaded that lowering from the current can in fact raise overall collection to a degree, but given the surrounding policy suggestions, and the law providing innumberable ways for the actually rich to dodge paying for things, the motivation seems suspect.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
A bonfire of workers rights and protections you mean.
Yes the tax cuts are just smoke and mirrors to grab the headlines. The real plan is a bonfire of protections and regulations. Libertarianism rather than conservatism.
Pretending radical changes are conservative strikes me as the essence of Conservatism.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
Tory commentators wetting themselves as the party marches even further from the centre ground where elections are won.
Keep it up kids.
e.g.
Andrew Pierce @toryboypierce · 6h Cant remember last time a Tory #KwasiBudget got such strong praise and equally strong criticism from the Left. Its first proper Tory #Budget2023 in decades
They won elections with non-Tory budgets it seems.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
Looks like PR is going to be a big issue at Labour conference.
As a fan of (some kind of) PR, I am somewhat surprised that they are picking this moment to go big on it.
It will pass easily, unless blocked by some sort of stitch-up. That doesn't make it mandatory for the manifesto, but I'm sure there will be encouraging noises about it and in practice it's likely to be a result of a confidence and supply deal with the LDs, perhaps introduced in stages with local authorities first.
You didn't read "more foreign workers" on the side of a bus did you?
What was the point of Brexit?
The point is we can recruit from across the world and immigration has fallen down the list of concerns
An open door policy is fine by me. I am not sure that was true of every Leave voter- although I could of course be wrong.
I did vote remain by the way but this is needed and Truss is right to increase immigration where we have labour shortages
The reality is of course without Brexit we wouldn't be short of imported workers, and as I recall one of the key drivers for VoteLeave, including Farage's poster campaign was too many European immigrants. The poster of course didn't suggest we would need to replace these workers with workers from farther afield.
So we can import a raft of "skilled" workers from overseas, but I can no longer retire to France, as I previously could, without being hindered by red tape.
You can't be sure of that. The EU was never an unlimited pool of labour and strong growth in the new member states was always going to reduce the high initial level of migration, if not send it into reverse.
Well the evidence suggests we weren't short of them before we left the EU
As I recall until your Damascene conversion or bump on the head, you were one of the posters who realised the impact on UK Plc, kicking out the unwanted EU workers would create.
There are worker shortages all over the place. May be Brexit exacerbated it - I don’t know - but you can’t blame it for an issue that is hitting multiple countries
I can, and I will.
Of course you can. Whether you should is another matter.
I’m surprised that an intelligent poster like you is so eager to avoid nuance
That list - sorting out @MaxPB’s pinch points seems more sensible than just cutting tax rates
It'll give me a £5000 bonus if implemented - will make a nice top-up to the Labour campaign fund.
£ will open even lower on Monday am after that article. Further income tax cuts funded by debt? Jeez.
This is Peron economics.
Not sure about the £
Truss is playing poker with Bailey. I think he’ll fold. The £ could be bottoming out.
I recon it’s 50/50 BoE emergency meeting in the next month. Maybe much sooner. I expect, at least, some very hawkish language which will probably shore up the £.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
Looks like PR is going to be a big issue at Labour conference.
As a fan of (some kind of) PR, I am somewhat surprised that they are picking this moment to go big on it.
It will pass easily, unless blocked by some sort of stitch-up. That doesn't make it mandatory for the manifesto, but I'm sure there will be encouraging noises about it and in practice it's likely to be a result of a confidence and supply deal with the LDs, perhaps introduced in stages with local authorities first.
The challenge that everyone forgets is that the AV referendum set a precedent on voting reform. Also a lot of Lab MPs would lose their seats by switching to PR.
That list - sorting out @MaxPB’s pinch points seems more sensible than just cutting tax rates
It'll give me a £5000 bonus if implemented - will make a nice top-up to the Labour campaign fund.
£ will open even lower on Monday am after that article. Further income tax cuts funded by debt? Jeez.
This is Peron economics.
The Telegraph tomorrow is reporting a swath of tax changes including benefitting doctors pension schemes, child care, and to change visa requirements for agriculture and health sectors
Looks as if there is going to be a whirlwind of policies many of which will be popular
Tory commentators wetting themselves as the party marches even further from the centre ground where elections are won.
Keep it up kids.
e.g.
Andrew Pierce @toryboypierce · 6h Cant remember last time a Tory #KwasiBudget got such strong praise and equally strong criticism from the Left. Its first proper Tory #Budget2023 in decades
They won elections with non-Tory budgets it seems.
I have no idea what he means to be honest. Although he is not alone. Loads of similar comments.
A Tory budget is whatever the Tory party delivers on the day.
As one wag pointed out on twitter: tory budgets have been austerity, net zero, ditch green crap, pivot to china, ditch china, level up by spending tons of infrastructure and now slash the state and taxes - all in 10 years.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
In a way it's slightly bizarre given the political pause over the last few weeks that we would expect the public to have come to a definitive view on Truss. I don't think they like to give a verdict on a new prime minister too quickly. What I'm certainly not detecting is much enthusiasm.
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
Didn’t @Charles, formerly of this parish, work for a rather better type of bank?
The PB cliche is “late of this parish” so you survive, but only just
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Understood, but I was thinking of an area near where my parents live - the upper Eden valley in Cumbria. Water flows down the Eden from Kirkby Stephen through Appleby. There are raised river banks and drained pasture above Appleby - if that could be allowed to flood in extremis, it might prevent the type of flooding suffered a few years ago when the town flood defences were overtopped. It's not a dredging issue there, it's the basic geography of the area.
Looks like PR is going to be a big issue at Labour conference.
As a fan of (some kind of) PR, I am somewhat surprised that they are picking this moment to go big on it.
It will pass easily, unless blocked by some sort of stitch-up. That doesn't make it mandatory for the manifesto, but I'm sure there will be encouraging noises about it and in practice it's likely to be a result of a confidence and supply deal with the LDs, perhaps introduced in stages with local authorities first.
The challenge that everyone forgets is that the AV referendum set a precedent on voting reform. Also a lot of Lab MPs would lose their seats by switching to PR.
It didn't set a precedent at all.
It would make it more challenging to argue changing the voting system without a referendum, but it set no precedent that you could not.
The government has also recently decided to change the voting system for mayoralties. I see reference to them referring to this as a manifesto committment, though I'm not sure if it specifically was (they did mention continuing to support FPTP generically), so even if it was, that says manifesto commitment would be sufficient. If it was argued that it would only be sufficient for smaller votes, well, the example would still allow them to bring it in for Locals.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I note your Europhiliac bias
Surely it’s possible to agree with the general priorities of the CAP whilst being unwilling to be a massive net contributor to it?
There was nothing to admire about the CAP, either in its aims, its planning or its execution. It was disastrous for food security, for the environment and for farming in Britain.
Gove's plans would have transformed British farming for the better and would have increased food security. Yet again this fuckwitted Government is only interested in helping their big business friends and fucking the rest of us.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I note your Europhiliac bias
We will have to see what happens.
I am not actually against rewarding public good, but rewarding the diminution of food production is *absolutely unacceptable*, and I'd favour anything, including CAP, over that.
That list - sorting out @MaxPB’s pinch points seems more sensible than just cutting tax rates
It'll give me a £5000 bonus if implemented - will make a nice top-up to the Labour campaign fund.
£ will open even lower on Monday am after that article. Further income tax cuts funded by debt? Jeez.
This is Peron economics.
The Telegraph tomorrow is reporting a swath of tax changes including benefitting doctors pension schemes, child care, and to change visa requirements for agriculture and health sectors
Looks as if there is going to be a whirlwind of policies many of which will be popular
Can you give us chapter and verse on why the Tories are leading in a hypothetical poll at some undefined point in the future?
That list - sorting out @MaxPB’s pinch points seems more sensible than just cutting tax rates
It'll give me a £5000 bonus if implemented - will make a nice top-up to the Labour campaign fund.
£ will open even lower on Monday am after that article. Further income tax cuts funded by debt? Jeez.
This is Peron economics.
The Telegraph tomorrow is reporting a swath of tax changes including benefitting doctors pension schemes, child care, and to change visa requirements for agriculture and health sectors
Looks as if there is going to be a whirlwind of policies many of which will be popular
Can you give us chapter and verse on why the Tories are leading in a hypothetical poll at some undefined point in the future?
I have no idea whether or if they will lead in the polls but if you follow my posts I have been consistent in saying next Spring and possibly around the coronation will be the time to start paying attention to them
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Your enthusiasms are puzzlingly random and lacking in nuance; dredging everything is no more help than covering it in rock dust for reasons explained for example at
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Your enthusiasms are puzzlingly random and lacking in nuance; dredging everything is no more help than covering it in rock dust for reasons explained for example at
I am sure we did dredging the Somerset levels the last time we discussed this. I seem to remember the detail of the attempted rebuttal read more like a confirmation that dredging was exactly what was needed.
Looks like PR is going to be a big issue at Labour conference.
As a fan of (some kind of) PR, I am somewhat surprised that they are picking this moment to go big on it.
It will pass easily, unless blocked by some sort of stitch-up. That doesn't make it mandatory for the manifesto, but I'm sure there will be encouraging noises about it and in practice it's likely to be a result of a confidence and supply deal with the LDs, perhaps introduced in stages with local authorities first.
The challenge that everyone forgets is that the AV referendum set a precedent on voting reform. Also a lot of Lab MPs would lose their seats by switching to PR.
It didn't set a precedent at all.
It would make it more challenging to argue changing the voting system without a referendum, but it set no precedent that you could not.
The government has also recently decided to change the voting system for mayoralties. I see reference to them referring to this as a manifesto committment, though I'm not sure if it specifically was (they did mention continuing to support FPTP generically), so even if it was, that says manifesto commitment would be sufficient. If it was argued that it would only be sufficient for smaller votes, well, the example would still allow them to bring it in for Locals.
The Liberals would be well advised to go for local election reform first as a staging post.
Labour manifesto should have one line saying we will review the process for electing local government. Perhaps as a bigger review over remit and funding and tax raising powers etc etc.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Understood, but I was thinking of an area near where my parents live - the upper Eden valley in Cumbria. Water flows down the Eden from Kirkby Stephen through Appleby. There are raised river banks and drained pasture above Appleby - if that could be allowed to flood in extremis, it might prevent the type of flooding suffered a few years ago when the town flood defences were overtopped. It's not a dredging issue there, it's the basic geography of the area.
It seems very likely that that would help, but how long is it since that River was dredged? If the riverbed is sitting too high; it's going to flood.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
Yebbut Kwarteng's fiscal event is not mainly tax cuts for the rich, per PK.
It's not: but I would personally have removed the 45% tax band when the economy was booming, not when it was struggling.
Because what - politics?
This is a time when people on low incomes are getting hammered by rising commodities prices. I don't think it's great messaging to benefit people like me with a tax cut, when someone on £25,000/year is seeing their disposable income drop 15-20%.
Seems like the evidence is a focus group of 7 people and that's enough evidence to suggest a growing Labour lead is actually wrong and the Tories are popular
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Understood, but I was thinking of an area near where my parents live - the upper Eden valley in Cumbria. Water flows down the Eden from Kirkby Stephen through Appleby. There are raised river banks and drained pasture above Appleby - if that could be allowed to flood in extremis, it might prevent the type of flooding suffered a few years ago when the town flood defences were overtopped. It's not a dredging issue there, it's the basic geography of the area.
It seems very likely that that would help, but how long is it since that River was dredged? If the riverbed is sitting too high; it's going to flood.
How much extra capacity does dredging add to the river vs how much extra capacity does the river need in a flooding situation.
The answer is invariably not enough. And that is ignoring choke points like bridges etc.
Seems like the evidence is a focus group of 7 people and that's enough evidence to suggest a growing Labour lead is actually wrong and the Tories are popular
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Understood, but I was thinking of an area near where my parents live - the upper Eden valley in Cumbria. Water flows down the Eden from Kirkby Stephen through Appleby. There are raised river banks and drained pasture above Appleby - if that could be allowed to flood in extremis, it might prevent the type of flooding suffered a few years ago when the town flood defences were overtopped. It's not a dredging issue there, it's the basic geography of the area.
It seems very likely that that would help, but how long is it since that River was dredged? If the riverbed is sitting too high; it's going to flood.
Jesus. The Eden is a SPATE river. Spate rivers are effectively self-scouring. It is sluggish, low elevation difference rivers in levels and fens which benefit from dredging.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Understood, but I was thinking of an area near where my parents live - the upper Eden valley in Cumbria. Water flows down the Eden from Kirkby Stephen through Appleby. There are raised river banks and drained pasture above Appleby - if that could be allowed to flood in extremis, it might prevent the type of flooding suffered a few years ago when the town flood defences were overtopped. It's not a dredging issue there, it's the basic geography of the area.
It seems very likely that that would help, but how long is it since that River was dredged? If the riverbed is sitting too high; it's going to flood.
How much extra capacity does dredging add to the river vs how much extra capacity does the river need in a flooding situation.
The answer is invariably not enough. At that is ignoring choke points like bridges etc.
The answer is clearly not 'invariably' not enough. The answer is 'Sometimes enough, sometimes not enough, always helpful' - hence dredging being part of our arsenal against flooding for hundreds of years. Only to be made almost impossible as part of European regulations.
Dizzy Lizzy, Krazi Kwarteng and their gang of swivel eyed loons are the real deal, right wing nut jobs.
The public didn't vote for this, the majority of Tory MPs don't want it and yet they've got two years to do as they please and fuck everything up on every possible front.
Unless, unless...
Come on Tories, you can still undo the mess before it is too late. Get rid of these Libertarian extremists and return us to regular Conservatism. I may not agree with it, but it would be a thousand times better than what we have in store at the moment.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Your enthusiasms are puzzlingly random and lacking in nuance; dredging everything is no more help than covering it in rock dust for reasons explained for example at
I am sure we did dredging the Somerset levels the last time we discussed this. I seem to remember the detail of the attempted rebuttal read more like a confirmation that dredging was exactly what was needed.
I don't remember discussing it, but there's masses of discussion on the internet specifically about the levels explicitly rebutting the Yay dredge it! approach
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
Yebbut Kwarteng's fiscal event is not mainly tax cuts for the rich, per PK.
It's not: but I would personally have removed the 45% tax band when the economy was booming, not when it was struggling.
Because what - politics?
This is a time when people on low incomes are getting hammered by rising commodities prices. I don't think it's great messaging to benefit people like me with a tax cut, when someone on £25,000/year is seeing their disposable income drop 15-20%.
But that's missing the point. They genuinely believe this is a growth strategy and the tax cuts will pay for themselves.
In an odd sort of way I suppose you have to admire a government that focuses on doing the 'right' thing whether or not it is popular. Will probably turn out to be the wrong thing though.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Understood, but I was thinking of an area near where my parents live - the upper Eden valley in Cumbria. Water flows down the Eden from Kirkby Stephen through Appleby. There are raised river banks and drained pasture above Appleby - if that could be allowed to flood in extremis, it might prevent the type of flooding suffered a few years ago when the town flood defences were overtopped. It's not a dredging issue there, it's the basic geography of the area.
It seems very likely that that would help, but how long is it since that River was dredged? If the riverbed is sitting too high; it's going to flood.
High energy input rivers like those in the Lake District or the Pennines etc have been formed through the natural maximum flow of the river when it is in spate. This cuts the river down to its natural depth over a long period of time. This is then maintained each year during the periods of high flow which scour it out. There is an equilibrium formed. The river is cut and maintained by the high flow and is therefore deep enough to cope with that flow. There can be exceptional periods which exceed that flow and, on those occasions, there will be flooding out of the river course.
What has happened is that we have changed the input into the rivers by changing the upland landscape so it does not hold and release water in the way it once did and we have canalised and channelled the lower reaches so that the water collects and flows faster. This is fine if you canalise it right to the sea but we never do that, we only canalise it through the areas we want to try to prevent flooding on. All that does is move the flooding further downstream. We see similar effects when we build sea defences to prevent land erosion and all we do is move that erosion further along the coast to somewhere we have not defended.
Dredging rivers where I live in Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire - lowland areas is a good idea. But far better to improve the water retention further up the rivers to better control the amount of flow reaching us.
But as investors pass judgment on Mr. Kwarteng’s Friday announcement, they might consider the stakes. Britain has become the most important economic experiment in the developed world because Ms. Truss is the only leader willing to abandon a stale Keynesian policy consensus that has produced stagflation everywhere. Read the plans for yourselves rather than heeding the jeremiads of economists who haven’t been able to offer any better ideas for how to revive an economy.
Yebbut Kwarteng's fiscal event is not mainly tax cuts for the rich, per PK.
It's not: but I would personally have removed the 45% tax band when the economy was booming, not when it was struggling.
Because what - politics?
This is a time when people on low incomes are getting hammered by rising commodities prices. I don't think it's great messaging to benefit people like me with a tax cut, when someone on £25,000/year is seeing their disposable income drop 15-20%.
But that's missing the point. They genuinely believe this is a growth strategy and the tax cuts will pay for themselves.
In an odd sort of way I suppose you have to admire a government that focuses on doing the 'right' thing whether or not it is popular. Will probably turn out to be the wrong thing though.
Do they?
I know they are saying that but the maths don’t add up, and they must surely be aware of that, even if they don’t want the public to know it.
You are about to see a raft of policies that eradicate EU rules and are part of the growth agenda
I have no regrets on Brexit
Curiously, the Truss government seems poised to abandon the "public money for public goods" Defra agenda which Gove introduced, and return to the EU system of simply dishing out money in proportion to the size of the farm. An example of "the EU knows best"?
It's great news that the Government is focusing on food security and the scary rewilding agenda may be getting the shaft.
I hope that there will be some additional funds made available for specific public goods though - for example, paying farmers to install systems to let some of their land near rivers be flooded if it helps reduce flooding of villages and towns downstream. And pay them for the area of land and production impact. It would be a lot cheaper than other alternatives.
How much flooding will there be though if we actually dredge? That's what's so exciting about this Government - they actually seem determined to get shit done. They might dredge the rivers again. They might build reservoirs again. I mean they've got two years before they face what looks like an electoral firing squad, and my goodness they are tunnelling their little hearts out planning their escape, and bloody good luck to them.
Your enthusiasms are puzzlingly random and lacking in nuance; dredging everything is no more help than covering it in rock dust for reasons explained for example at
I am sure we did dredging the Somerset levels the last time we discussed this. I seem to remember the detail of the attempted rebuttal read more like a confirmation that dredging was exactly what was needed.
I don't remember discussing it, but there's masses of discussion on the internet specifically about the levels explicitly rebutting the Yay dredge it! approach
You should read some of your own sources. They're really very weak. The British Ecological Society, The River Restoration Trust, George Twatty Monbiot in the Guardian - I mean really. And the one piece of fundamental research (I do remember it now) about dredging the Somerset levels actually agrees that it's a good idea.
The trouble with all these 'fact checks' is, we're not dredging, and we are getting flooding. Dredge the rivers sensibly, as we used to, and see how much flooding we're left with, and then let's deal with that. It's like insisting how uneconomical fracking is, but fracking is banned. Or admonishing people for wasting too much water when our population has gone up, and we've effectively banned the building of new infrastructure like reservoirs.
Seems like the evidence is a focus group of 7 people and that's enough evidence to suggest a growing Labour lead is actually wrong and the Tories are popular
Have there been new VI polls since Friday?
Yes with Opinium. Labour +1 and Truss and Starmer now tied on best PM. I believe they were the only outlet to have her ahead
One thing that bemuses me in this country is how, for a service economy allegedly, we are really quite poor at service. I have dealt with 3 financial institutions in the past 3 days and have, literally, spent nearly 7 hours just trying to get through and matters actioned. You can get lots of responses on Twitter and endless apologies etc but there is a complete failure to understand that you actually need people who are available and able to understand and deal with a problem. Same for telephone companies and insurance companies I've dealt with this year.
I am a bit spoiled because growing up where I did in Naples we got the sort of old-fashioned service now largely seen in historical dramas. It it was not that long ago, though.
Far too many service providers have just dumped their responsibilities onto their customers so that we are effectively working for free for them. It is infuriating for customers and horrible for those working for them because they then have to deal with annoyed customers with little power to change things for the better. And yet sitting in a motorway cafe right now writing this, the lady serving behind the counter has been the epitome of friendliness and efficiency. So it can be done.
Online service is great most of the time but we forget the need for effective personal contact for when things go wrong or help is needed at our peril. And that is why people (ok me) can get so infuriated: it's not just the waste of time but the determination of institutions to put us at a distance and dismiss us rather than reach out and help. It is inhuman and impersonal. It is the exact opposite of what customer service and problem-solving should be.
Poor service due to cheap service, which equals higher profits, which equals bigger management bonuses. The ills of Britain summarised.
I suppose the questions are (a) how many people are willing to pay more for the extra customer service and (b) if the pool of customers the "high-service" firm ends up with is profitable or if it gives them a lot of bespoke problems.
The success of Ryanair suggests that people prioritise cost over service.
It would be good to have the choice of cost over service. When shopping, there is the choice of Waitrose or Booths versus Asda or Morrisons. In financial services, it seems to be only Asda service at Waitrose prices.
Didn’t @Charles, formerly of this parish, work for a rather better type of bank?
The PB cliche is “late of this parish” so you survive, but only just
Seems like the evidence is a focus group of 7 people and that's enough evidence to suggest a growing Labour lead is actually wrong and the Tories are popular
Have there been new VI polls since Friday?
Yes with Opinium. Labour +1 and Truss and Starmer now tied on best PM. I believe they were the only outlet to have her ahead
As I said in an earlier post, I expect a hawkish statement from Bailey, very soon. Perhaps even an emergency meeting.
Truss and Kwarteng are happy to let Sterling depreciate. They believe in the markets and that they are over reacting.
Will the markets test the government to see if they are willing to pay premium rates on debt?
The Sterling denominated debt is being inflated away.
The existing debt or rather the non indexed 75% of it, is. The whole cunning scheme involves borrowing a fuckton more, at crippling interest rates, to pay for inflated bills, so that doesn't really help, does it?
As I said in an earlier post, I expect a hawkish statement from Bailey, very soon. Perhaps even an emergency meeting.
Truss and Kwarteng are happy to let Sterling depreciate. They believe in the markets and that they are over reacting.
Will the markets test the government to see if they are willing to pay premium rates on debt?
The Sterling denominated debt is being inflated away.
The existing debt or rather the non indexed 75% of it, is. The whole cunning scheme involves borrowing a fuckton more, at crippling interest rates, to pay for inflated bills, so that doesn't really help, does it?
Why did governments in Britain and elsewhere start issuing inflation-linked government bonds. Could they not sell enough ordinary ones? Apologies if this is a terribly naive question.
As I said in an earlier post, I expect a hawkish statement from Bailey, very soon. Perhaps even an emergency meeting.
Truss and Kwarteng are happy to let Sterling depreciate. They believe in the markets and that they are over reacting.
Will the markets test the government to see if they are willing to pay premium rates on debt?
Foreign exchange markets always overshoot. That's one of the few clear and generally agreed points in that particular part of economics, though because the proof is rather technical it hasn't penetrated the public mind and probably won't.
Comments
It has to be said that driving across North Carolina all day doesn't offer that much by way of anything interesting to look at.
I have no regrets on Brexit
As I recall until your Damascene conversion or bump on the head, you were one of the posters who realised the impact on UK Plc, kicking out the unwanted EU workers would create.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1573766954028077057?t=bE-l6A0arVbA8xzKZdz1hg&s=19
Focus group voted 5 Con, 3 Lab in 2019
Now they split 6 Con 2 Lab.
Edit. Rentoul is right. Not good for Starmer.
Nice that he's gone though.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/24/brexit-bonus-farmers-poised-to-scrap
A lot of PMs seem to act like their Chancellors do things without them knowing. Small stuff? I can buy that. Obstruction? Possibly. But major policy direction in budgets and so on? Not plausible when they try that, to me anyway.
This is Peron economics.
Polling is what matters and that has swung more to Labour even with Opinium. This budget has been a disaster.
I've however lost more money
Expect a fudge of some sort.
I’m surprised that an intelligent poster like you is so eager to avoid nuance
Truss is playing poker with Bailey. I think he’ll fold. The £ could be bottoming out.
I recon it’s 50/50 BoE emergency meeting in the next month. Maybe much sooner. I expect, at least, some very hawkish language which will probably shore up the £.
Looks as if there is going to be a whirlwind of policies many of which will be popular
A Tory budget is whatever the Tory party delivers on the day.
As one wag pointed out on twitter: tory budgets have been austerity, net zero, ditch green crap, pivot to china, ditch china, level up by spending tons of infrastructure and now slash the state and taxes - all in 10 years.
It may be an anomaly but aren’t you a bit curious as to why?
It would make it more challenging to argue changing the voting system without a referendum, but it set no precedent that you could not.
The government has also recently decided to change the voting system for mayoralties. I see reference to them referring to this as a manifesto committment, though I'm not sure if it specifically was (they did mention continuing to support FPTP generically), so even if it was, that says manifesto commitment would be sufficient. If it was argued that it would only be sufficient for smaller votes, well, the example would still allow them to bring it in for Locals.
Gove's plans would have transformed British farming for the better and would have increased food security. Yet again this fuckwitted Government is only interested in helping their big business friends and fucking the rest of us.
I am not actually against rewarding public good, but rewarding the diminution of food production is *absolutely unacceptable*, and I'd favour anything, including CAP, over that.
It does seem there is a general opinion that the public have not seen enough of Truss so far and are willing to give her a while longer
Anyway, time to bid you all a good night's rest
Good night
https://www.ciwem.org/news/floods-and-dredging-reality
It was an extraordinary flight and really demonstrated just how vast Russia is
Labour manifesto should have one line saying we will review the process for electing local government. Perhaps as a bigger review over remit and funding and tax raising powers etc etc.
The answer is invariably not enough. And that is ignoring choke points like bridges etc.
The public didn't vote for this, the majority of Tory MPs don't want it and yet they've got two years to do as they please and fuck everything up on every possible front.
Unless, unless...
Come on Tories, you can still undo the mess before it is too late. Get rid of these Libertarian extremists and return us to regular Conservatism. I may not agree with it, but it would be a thousand times better than what we have in store at the moment.
https://twitter.com/jnordvig/status/1573640347732811776?s=20&t=x-ziUdEAhneoNlgTxsw1FQ
The whole thread is interesting.
As I said in an earlier post, I expect a hawkish statement from Bailey, very soon. Perhaps even an emergency meeting.
https://www.therrc.co.uk/news/floods-and-dredging-reality-check
https://www.britishecologicalsociety.org/is-dredging-a-sustainable-solution-for-managing-uk-floods/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/30/dredging-rivers-floods-somerset-levels-david-cameron-farmers
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frwa.2021.628829/full
And so on.
"Now some REAL cheer for savers" headline ?
Maybe just an announcement of a slowing of QT. No interest meeting needed for that?
In an odd sort of way I suppose you have to admire a government that focuses on doing the 'right' thing whether or not it is popular. Will probably turn out to be the wrong thing though.
What has happened is that we have changed the input into the rivers by changing the upland landscape so it does not hold and release water in the way it once did and we have canalised and channelled the lower reaches so that the water collects and flows faster. This is fine if you canalise it right to the sea but we never do that, we only canalise it through the areas we want to try to prevent flooding on. All that does is move the flooding further downstream. We see similar effects when we build sea defences to prevent land erosion and all we do is move that erosion further along the coast to somewhere we have not defended.
Dredging rivers where I live in Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire - lowland areas is a good idea. But far better to improve the water retention further up the rivers to better control the amount of flow reaching us.
I know they are saying that but the maths don’t add up, and they must surely be aware of that, even if they don’t want the public to know it.
The trouble with all these 'fact checks' is, we're not dredging, and we are getting flooding. Dredge the rivers sensibly, as we used to, and see how much flooding we're left with, and then let's deal with that. It's like insisting how uneconomical fracking is, but fracking is banned. Or admonishing people for wasting too much water when our population has gone up, and we've effectively banned the building of new infrastructure like reservoirs.
Will the markets test the government to see if they are willing to pay premium rates on debt?