YouGov has LAB with a 25% lead amongst women – politicalbetting.com
Comments
-
She believes in it. Admitting your world view is wrong isn't easy, so I think she might double down too.kle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.0 -
When has Liz ever been competent?0
-
Essentially what Arthur Balfour did in 1905-06. He & his ministers resigned and allowed Liberals to form new government, in expectation (allegedly) that Libs would loose subsequent general election.Chris said:
In her position the only sensible thing would be to go to the country and pray for a Labour victory.Leon said:
She is in a bind, howeverMaxPB said:I've gone from indifference to active loathing of Liz Truss. Destroying the nation's economy and not even coming out to defend her actions.
As has been noted, if she comes out and sticks to her fiscal guns, she might kick off the panic again. But if she comes out and reverses policies, she is basically committing career suicide, and she might still kick off more panic
What can she possibly say?
Result was Liberal landslide - and Balfour booted out by electors from his own seat.0 -
- ”We have now got the data set of the dramatic YouGov poll that had Labour with a 17% lead over the Conservatives.”
Interesting choice of sub-sample there Mike.
For punters interested in the Maj market, this is the more interesting subsample:
YOUGOV HAS SNP WITH A 23% LEAD AMONG SCOTS
SNP 44%
SLab 21%
SCon 19%
SLD 5%0 -
That way the MPs could pick the best of a bad bunch, rather than letting members pick the worst.pm215 said:
If you flipped the Tory process around I think that might help without being so much of a non-starter as just removing the membership participation. Have a lots-of-candidates hustings process, give members a ranked-choice ballot, have the top 3 or so go to an MP vote for the final decision.noneoftheabove said:
Yes this has destroyed both our main parties, and is amplified by social media. We probably get one acceptable leader every four or five cycles and they will likely be the ones out of power rather than PMs. It really needs to change but won't. Expect Italian style comedy politics for a while to come.eek said:
When MPs voted for a new party leader - they could vote on the best person for the job,
As soon as members got involved suddenly policy ideas became important as a means of gathering votes. So suddenly a bunch of out of touch loonies can determine Government policy because given a choice of 2 candidates the one that promises most sweeties for them wins...2 -
The video of his eerie laughter at the funeral now seems quite tellingglw said:
Exactly. I sort of buy the argument they are making, but can not understand the timing or the way it has been delivered as a sort of half-a-budget with no spending implications or OBR evaluation. It's bonkers.Leon said:No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all that
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
But I think, surely Kwarteng can see this? What am I missing? Is Kwarteng a genius or maniac? Well I was 50/50 on that question at the end of last week, it's now about 10/90.
Maniac. And now a forlorn footnote in political history1 -
When global inflation and interest rates are rising, and you pump the unfunded deficit up to... 8% of GDP perhaps?, then it doesn't really matter if your promise is for the saintliest investment programme in the world. You still have no idea how to fund the project without eventually running "print GBP", and then investors ask whether the returns in sterling will be worth it.noneoftheabove said:
Of course everyone wants more growth. Massive unfunded tax cuts for the rich when public finances are already dire do not create more growth.moonshine said:I think we’ve reached peak hyperbole. All this “destroyed the economy”. I’ll buy another bottle of champagne in Finland if we hit 6% base rates in the next year. It’s not going to happen. The swap curve is all over the place due to the volatility, that is all.
And all the reasons we’ve discussed over many weeks and months are working to bring down core inflation globally. Not least that the Fed is busy precipitating a global crisis.
Now that is not to say that Truss might have torpedoed her chances at reelection by failing to properly explain her plans and then defend them after the event. But all this “boo hoo the economy has been killed”. I mean really. The wheels are still turning but when you’re at the eye of the storm you can sometimes not appreciate it. Our bond yields don’t carry much of a premium over Treasuries and in a historical context are just reverting to normal. Our currency like all others has lost massive ground to the dollar but broadly has kept pace with peers (euro, yen which needed an intervention this week by the way). Our deficit is mediocre among peers, our debt to gdp relatively good and the impact of the coming energy war likely to impact us less severely than most of Europe.
Truss is actually correct, the problem we have is such appalling growth prospects. Wheels coming off the industrial base on Europe (thanks Putin, honourable mention Schroeder and Merkel), China still in lockdown and having failed to resolve the black hole on its financial system (yuan lowest v dollar than since pre Beijing Olympics). And of course the long standing trade and productivity gap in the Uk.
But rarely can I recall normally sober posters losing their cognitive function so thoroughly.
If we were going to borrow for long term investment, the reaction from markets and commentators would have been different.0 -
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.0 -
Can I claim the Nostrodamus award yet?:
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1561959964998094848?t=NgkbUj4bXN0RvbKpbfX_rQ&s=19
Though I did think the year, rather than the next month.1 -
Massive leads for the SNP isn't news.StuartDickson said:- ”We have now got the data set of the dramatic YouGov poll that had Labour with a 17% lead over the Conservatives.”
Interesting choice of sub-sample there Mike.
For punters interested in the Maj market, this is the more interesting subsample:
YOUGOV HAS SNP WITH A 23% LEAD AMONG SCOTS
SNP 44%
SLab 21%
SCon 19%
SLD 5%0 -
Any geezers on here remember the phrase "voodoo economics"? And who coined it, and why?3
-
And when you are hit with the economic blowback, your internet cheerleaders try to pretend it is a matter of will and courage rather than economic reality.EPG said:
When global inflation and interest rates are rising, and you pump the unfunded deficit up to... 8% of GDP perhaps?, then it doesn't really matter if your promise is for the saintliest investment programme in the world. You still have no idea how to fund the project without eventually running "print GBP", and then investors ask whether the returns in sterling will be worth it.noneoftheabove said:
Of course everyone wants more growth. Massive unfunded tax cuts for the rich when public finances are already dire do not create more growth.moonshine said:I think we’ve reached peak hyperbole. All this “destroyed the economy”. I’ll buy another bottle of champagne in Finland if we hit 6% base rates in the next year. It’s not going to happen. The swap curve is all over the place due to the volatility, that is all.
And all the reasons we’ve discussed over many weeks and months are working to bring down core inflation globally. Not least that the Fed is busy precipitating a global crisis.
Now that is not to say that Truss might have torpedoed her chances at reelection by failing to properly explain her plans and then defend them after the event. But all this “boo hoo the economy has been killed”. I mean really. The wheels are still turning but when you’re at the eye of the storm you can sometimes not appreciate it. Our bond yields don’t carry much of a premium over Treasuries and in a historical context are just reverting to normal. Our currency like all others has lost massive ground to the dollar but broadly has kept pace with peers (euro, yen which needed an intervention this week by the way). Our deficit is mediocre among peers, our debt to gdp relatively good and the impact of the coming energy war likely to impact us less severely than most of Europe.
Truss is actually correct, the problem we have is such appalling growth prospects. Wheels coming off the industrial base on Europe (thanks Putin, honourable mention Schroeder and Merkel), China still in lockdown and having failed to resolve the black hole on its financial system (yuan lowest v dollar than since pre Beijing Olympics). And of course the long standing trade and productivity gap in the Uk.
But rarely can I recall normally sober posters losing their cognitive function so thoroughly.
If we were going to borrow for long term investment, the reaction from markets and commentators would have been different.
Half a league, half a league, half a league onward!0 -
Point is: when the Fed rate is north of 3%, we are "back to normal" as options for investment go, and a lot of the assumptions of the last 10 years no longer hold. There's no such thing as investment opportunities just lying idle any more: if the government needs to do some random project, it's probably because nobody else believes you can get an economic return out of it.0
-
I believe you are largely correct. Add to this that a) there are large vested interests in continuing as we are and b) people who don't like the Tories are going mad in a huge echo chamber. It doesn't mean that things will go back to the relatively benign state we were in, but at least we aren't in a War. Yet.moonshine said:I think we’ve reached peak hyperbole. All this “destroyed the economy”. I’ll buy another bottle of champagne in Finland if we hit 6% base rates in the next year. It’s not going to happen. The swap curve is all over the place due to the volatility, that is all.
And all the reasons we’ve discussed over many weeks and months are working to bring down core inflation globally. Not least that the Fed is busy precipitating a global crisis.
Now that is not to say that Truss might have torpedoed her chances at reelection by failing to properly explain her plans and then defend them after the event. But all this “boo hoo the economy has been killed”. I mean really. The wheels are still turning but when you’re at the eye of the storm you can sometimes not appreciate it. Our bond yields don’t carry much of a premium over Treasuries and in a historical context are just reverting to normal. Our currency like all others has lost massive ground to the dollar but broadly has kept pace with peers (euro, yen which needed an intervention this week by the way). Our deficit is mediocre among peers, our debt to gdp relatively good and the impact of the coming energy war likely to impact us less severely than most of Europe.
Truss is actually correct, the problem we have is such appalling growth prospects. Wheels coming off the industrial base on Europe (thanks Putin, honourable mention Schroeder and Merkel), China still in lockdown and having failed to resolve the black hole on its financial system (yuan lowest v dollar than since pre Beijing Olympics). And of course the long standing trade and productivity gap in the Uk.
But rarely can I recall normally sober posters losing their cognitive function so thoroughly.0 -
George Bush about Reagan in the 1980 primaries?SeaShantyIrish2 said:Any geezers on here remember the phrase "voodoo economics"? And who coined it, and why?
0 -
There is also the fallacy that something (low Corporation tax will create investment) will work even though we've had 12 years of low Corporation Tax and literally the one thing it hasn't triggered in investment - it's just created short term profiteering..WillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.10 -
Still can't see it myself, for the reason given.
Rishi Sunak does have a chance of being leader of the opposition now. Personally I’d find that more interesting than Santa Monica, but sometimes the frustration these people have in “waiting” — as their friends get made CEOs — makes them hard to read.
https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1575115516997472256?cxt=HHwWgMC47fTN99srAAAA0 -
MPs did choose Truss for the runoff. They could have had the members vote of Sunak vs Mordaunt.glw said:
That way the MPs could pick the best of a bad bunch, rather than letting members pick the worst.pm215 said:
If you flipped the Tory process around I think that might help without being so much of a non-starter as just removing the membership participation. Have a lots-of-candidates hustings process, give members a ranked-choice ballot, have the top 3 or so go to an MP vote for the final decision.noneoftheabove said:
Yes this has destroyed both our main parties, and is amplified by social media. We probably get one acceptable leader every four or five cycles and they will likely be the ones out of power rather than PMs. It really needs to change but won't. Expect Italian style comedy politics for a while to come.eek said:
When MPs voted for a new party leader - they could vote on the best person for the job,
As soon as members got involved suddenly policy ideas became important as a means of gathering votes. So suddenly a bunch of out of touch loonies can determine Government policy because given a choice of 2 candidates the one that promises most sweeties for them wins...1 -
Bush about Reagan's plans.SeaShantyIrish2 said:Any geezers on here remember the phrase "voodoo economics"? And who coined it, and why?
0 -
It's also the Putin effect in miniature. Doing something so bold and dramatic means you can't row it back without destroying your credibility. So you continue to double down, hoping that with the right roll of the dice you will be able to win back your losses.rkrkrk said:
She believes in it. Admitting your world view is wrong isn't easy, so I think she might double down too.kle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.0 -
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
0 -
Yes, reducing taxes on profits creates more profits. If you want more investment then cut taxes on investment.eek said:
There is also the fallacy that something (low Corporation tax will create investment) will work even though we've had 12 years of low Corporation Tax and literally the one thing it hasn't triggered in investment - it's just created short term profiteering..WillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.0 -
That Yougov poll gives a Labour Government a decent majority while the SNP get 51 seats...StuartDickson said:- ”We have now got the data set of the dramatic YouGov poll that had Labour with a 17% lead over the Conservatives.”
Interesting choice of sub-sample there Mike.
For punters interested in the Maj market, this is the more interesting subsample:
YOUGOV HAS SNP WITH A 23% LEAD AMONG SCOTS
SNP 44%
SLab 21%
SCon 19%
SLD 5%0 -
Well yes the MPs cocked that up as well.Foxy said:
MPs did choose Truss for the runoff. They could have had the members vote of Sunak vs Mordaunt.glw said:
That way the MPs could pick the best of a bad bunch, rather than letting members pick the worst.pm215 said:
If you flipped the Tory process around I think that might help without being so much of a non-starter as just removing the membership participation. Have a lots-of-candidates hustings process, give members a ranked-choice ballot, have the top 3 or so go to an MP vote for the final decision.noneoftheabove said:
Yes this has destroyed both our main parties, and is amplified by social media. We probably get one acceptable leader every four or five cycles and they will likely be the ones out of power rather than PMs. It really needs to change but won't. Expect Italian style comedy politics for a while to come.eek said:
When MPs voted for a new party leader - they could vote on the best person for the job,
As soon as members got involved suddenly policy ideas became important as a means of gathering votes. So suddenly a bunch of out of touch loonies can determine Government policy because given a choice of 2 candidates the one that promises most sweeties for them wins...1 -
Close - 1980 primaries.BlancheLivermore said:
George Bush about Reagan in the 82 primaries?SeaShantyIrish2 said:Any geezers on here remember the phrase "voodoo economics"? And who coined it, and why?
BTW, Bush the Elder's concerns (which he managed to curb just enough to be offered & accept VP nomination that year) were shortly echoed in (slightly) more restrained language, by President Reagan's own Budget Director, David Stockman.1 -
Which was what Sunak was offering.WillG said:
Yes, reducing taxes on profits creates more profits. If you want more investment then cut taxes on investment.eek said:
There is also the fallacy that something (low Corporation tax will create investment) will work even though we've had 12 years of low Corporation Tax and literally the one thing it hasn't triggered in investment - it's just created short term profiteering..WillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Low Corporation Tax won't result in investment - and you need investment if you want productivity increases...0 -
"I just write, but my university social circle includes prospective CEOs" is quite the humblebrag.kle4 said:Still can't see it myself, for the reason given.
Rishi Sunak does have a chance of being leader of the opposition now. Personally I’d find that more interesting than Santa Monica, but sometimes the frustration these people have in “waiting” — as their friends get made CEOs — makes them hard to read.
https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1575115516997472256?cxt=HHwWgMC47fTN99srAAAA0 -
I corrected my post just before I saw yours. I think he "corrected" himself in 1982 as VPSeaShantyIrish2 said:
Close - 1980 primaries.BlancheLivermore said:
George Bush about Reagan in the 82 primaries?SeaShantyIrish2 said:Any geezers on here remember the phrase "voodoo economics"? And who coined it, and why?
BTW, Bush the Elder's concerns (which he managed to curb just enough to be offered & accept VP nomination that year) were shortly echoed in (slightly) more restrained language, by President Reagan's own Budget Director, David Stockman.0 -
No, but it is very relevant for the fast-moving Maj market.kle4 said:
Massive leads for the SNP isn't news.StuartDickson said:- ”We have now got the data set of the dramatic YouGov poll that had Labour with a 17% lead over the Conservatives.”
Interesting choice of sub-sample there Mike.
For punters interested in the Maj market, this is the more interesting subsample:
YOUGOV HAS SNP WITH A 23% LEAD AMONG SCOTS
SNP 44%
SLab 21%
SCon 19%
SLD 5%
Politics + betting. Remember?
1 -
Lots of which is covered in one of the finest books on politics out there: "What It Takes: The Way to the White House" by Cramer.SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Close - 1980 primaries.BlancheLivermore said:
George Bush about Reagan in the 82 primaries?SeaShantyIrish2 said:Any geezers on here remember the phrase "voodoo economics"? And who coined it, and why?
BTW, Bush the Elder's concerns (which he managed to curb just enough to be offered & accept VP nomination that year) were shortly echoed in (slightly) more restrained language, by President Reagan's own Budget Director, David Stockman.0 -
So the bank will have bought Truss a bit of time to reconsider, as Jim O' Neil says. What she will do now, if I know her, is instead think that that's a good reason to carry on just as before and double down.
That could be a very bad mistake, and it may be much worse within a few days or weeks. The IMF and the US certainly don't think it's over, and will make their voices heard again, I expect.1 -
Stuart will be gutted.eek said:
That Yougov poll gives a Labour Government a decent majority while the SNP get 51 seats...StuartDickson said:- ”We have now got the data set of the dramatic YouGov poll that had Labour with a 17% lead over the Conservatives.”
Interesting choice of sub-sample there Mike.
For punters interested in the Maj market, this is the more interesting subsample:
YOUGOV HAS SNP WITH A 23% LEAD AMONG SCOTS
SNP 44%
SLab 21%
SCon 19%
SLD 5%0 -
Hurricane Ian Updates - NYT
As a midday darkness fell on central Florida, and the rain grew heavy, the interstate traffic near Ocala, Fla., settled into a standard pattern recognizable to hurricane veterans: a trickle of cars and SUVs headed north, out of the storm's path, while endless convoys of power trucks, utility trailers and cherry-pickers headed south.
The cafeteria is packed at Middleton High School in East Tampa, a shelter where hundreds of people have taken refuge. People are lugging suitcases and bags as they register for beds and scarf down pizza provided by the shelter. A few dozen people are still outside, sitting at tables and watching gusts blow through the mossy trees in the high school’s courtyard.
0 -
Hurricane Ian sounds like a pussy. They should have called it Hurricane IvanSeaShantyIrish2 said:Hurricane Ian Updates - NYT
As a midday darkness fell on central Florida, and the rain grew heavy, the interstate traffic near Ocala, Fla., settled into a standard pattern recognizable to hurricane veterans: a trickle of cars and SUVs headed north, out of the storm's path, while endless convoys of power trucks, utility trailers and cherry-pickers headed south.
The cafeteria is packed at Middleton High School in East Tampa, a shelter where hundreds of people have taken refuge. People are lugging suitcases and bags as they register for beds and scarf down pizza provided by the shelter. A few dozen people are still outside, sitting at tables and watching gusts blow through the mossy trees in the high school’s courtyard.
edit - or Ivana!2 -
I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?
ETA: Ah. Someone else who is better at this sort of thing than me has had roughly the same idea. Don't know if this makes me feel better or worse.3 -
Labour need to bring in AV as soon as they come to power.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?
That may be unavoidable anyway if the Lib Dems are required to allow a Government to be formed...1 -
Uni pensions USS scheme statement on gilts chaos:
USS statement on Gilt markets
https://www.uss.co.uk/news-and-views/latest-news/2022/09/09282022_uss-statement-on-gilt-markets0 -
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?1 -
Didn't stop Boris or Truss...MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?0 -
It stopped Corbyn.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Didn't stop Boris or Truss...MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?0 -
STV, but definitely not AV. The Tories tried that one, and it was rejected.eek said:
Labour need to bring in AV as soon as they come to power.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?
That may be unavoidable anyway if the Lib Dems are required to allow a Government to be formed...3 -
If I'm reading the table right only 54% of LibDem voters in 2019 are still backing the party? Small sample though and doesn't feel accurate.dixiedean said:Find that 13% lead amongst 50-64 the most significant figure.
0 -
Perhaps Piers Morgan will come to the rescue and save us all?Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?
ETA: Ah. Someone else who is better at this sort of thing than me has had roughly the same idea. Don't know if this makes me feel better or worse.0 -
AV protects against a populist extremist far better than FPTP.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Didn't stop Boris or Truss...MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?1 -
And in India, FPTP didn't stop Modi.MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?0 -
Didn't save the police from a Home Secretary who instructs them to downplay racism.MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?0 -
Feels plausible to me. Think I voted for them last time around given a choice of Boris v Corbyn, might have gone green. The LDs are so quiet and anonymous nowadays a decent chunk of their vote is going to be a very transient protest vote that could easily go elsewhere under different circumstances (or if in a different seat and voting tactically).paulyork64 said:
If I'm reading the table right only 54% of LibDem voters in 2019 are still backing the party? Small sample though and doesn't feel accurate.dixiedean said:Find that 13% lead amongst 50-64 the most significant figure.
0 -
I'm not sure that's true - doesn't it lead both to more frequent hung parliaments and bugger landslides, with fewer modest majorities?WillG said:
AV protects against a populist extremist far better than FPTP.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Didn't stop Boris or Truss...MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?0 -
Can Rory come back and be Mayor of London?0
-
-
I was reading the other day that the highest Labour for pre-97 was an 11 point lead on best for the economy.Leon said:"Compare these two polls, conducted two weeks apart. Two weeks ago, the Tories had a 15-point lead on which party voters most trust to grow the economy. In a fortnight, that’s turned into a 32-point lead for Labour."
https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1575172668613074947?s=20&t=2bd9RagQhYdggng36dGN8Q0 -
Manic? or maniac? You're normally very precise in your wording.Leon said:
The video of his eerie laughter at the funeral now seems quite tellingglw said:
Exactly. I sort of buy the argument they are making, but can not understand the timing or the way it has been delivered as a sort of half-a-budget with no spending implications or OBR evaluation. It's bonkers.Leon said:No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all that
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
But I think, surely Kwarteng can see this? What am I missing? Is Kwarteng a genius or maniac? Well I was 50/50 on that question at the end of last week, it's now about 10/90.
Maniac. And now a forlorn footnote in political history0 -
Yeah there was thingy and whatshisname.kle4 said:
We've got way more unknown PMs than that.SeaShantyIrish2 said:Andrew Bonar Law = the Unknown Prime Minister (1922-23)
Liz Truss - the Unseen Prime Minister (2022 - )2 -
Hung ... bugger .. modest moral majorities. Don't we have that already?Driver said:
I'm not sure that's true - doesn't it lead both to more frequent hung parliaments and bugger landslides, with fewer modest majorities?WillG said:
AV protects against a populist extremist far better than FPTP.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Didn't stop Boris or Truss...MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?1 -
And neither did Boris.Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
4 -
If YouGov was using its 2015 methodology Labour would be about 30 points ahead right nowAlistair said:
I was reading the other day that the highest Labour for pre-97 was an 11 point lead on best for the economy.Leon said:"Compare these two polls, conducted two weeks apart. Two weeks ago, the Tories had a 15-point lead on which party voters most trust to grow the economy. In a fortnight, that’s turned into a 32-point lead for Labour."
https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1575172668613074947?s=20&t=2bd9RagQhYdggng36dGN8Q0 -
Would like to laugh. But cannot.BlancheLivermore said:
Hurricane Ian sounds like a pussy. They should have called it Hurricane IvanSeaShantyIrish2 said:Hurricane Ian Updates - NYT
As a midday darkness fell on central Florida, and the rain grew heavy, the interstate traffic near Ocala, Fla., settled into a standard pattern recognizable to hurricane veterans: a trickle of cars and SUVs headed north, out of the storm's path, while endless convoys of power trucks, utility trailers and cherry-pickers headed south.
The cafeteria is packed at Middleton High School in East Tampa, a shelter where hundreds of people have taken refuge. People are lugging suitcases and bags as they register for beds and scarf down pizza provided by the shelter. A few dozen people are still outside, sitting at tables and watching gusts blow through the mossy trees in the high school’s courtyard.
edit - or Ivana!
Cause I remember friend of mine telling me of his experiences, back in 1969, recovering bodies along the Gulf Coast in the aftermath of Hurricane Camille.
As for Hurricane Ian, it is FAR from done with Florida AND other states . . .1 -
The barriers to entry are too high under FPTP. I would suggest that what is also stopping this movement from occurring is censorship and restrictions on speech. If you are a 'far right' party you cannot start talking about the 'the replacement of white european civilisation' that Zemmour for instance tapped in to in France because it is just illegal, such a group will be end up being censored on social media and even potentially proscribed as a 'terrorist group'. In the same way that you cannot find Zemmour's speeches on youtube now, they will disappear. Even though lots of people believe this narrative I don't think it can ever find a coherant political expression the way it did at the time of Brexit.MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?0 -
Someone on Twitter planting doubts about Rishi's commitment to dear old blighty? Dirty business, politics.kle4 said:Still can't see it myself, for the reason given.
Rishi Sunak does have a chance of being leader of the opposition now. Personally I’d find that more interesting than Santa Monica, but sometimes the frustration these people have in “waiting” — as their friends get made CEOs — makes them hard to read.
https://twitter.com/b_judah/status/1575115516997472256?cxt=HHwWgMC47fTN99srAAAA0 -
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.0 -
If only they'd picked a more sensible hour to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway, they'd have had some more time to stick two fingers up at everyone looking on in horror before they crashed.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all that
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately0 -
I hadn't noticed this one:
John Rentoul
@JohnRentoul
·
2h
The “reversal” also includes cancelling the extension of 1.25% NICs to workers over state pension age from 20230 -
You see that cartoon dog? Sat in the room on fire with its mug, saying "this is fine"?moonshine said:I think we’ve reached peak hyperbole. All this “destroyed the economy”. I’ll buy another bottle of champagne in Finland if we hit 6% base rates in the next year. It’s not going to happen. The swap curve is all over the place due to the volatility, that is all.
And all the reasons we’ve discussed over many weeks and months are working to bring down core inflation globally. Not least that the Fed is busy precipitating a global crisis.
Now that is not to say that Truss might have torpedoed her chances at reelection by failing to properly explain her plans and then defend them after the event. But all this “boo hoo the economy has been killed”. I mean really. The wheels are still turning but when you’re at the eye of the storm you can sometimes not appreciate it. Our bond yields don’t carry much of a premium over Treasuries and in a historical context are just reverting to normal. Our currency like all others has lost massive ground to the dollar but broadly has kept pace with peers (euro, yen which needed an intervention this week by the way). Our deficit is mediocre among peers, our debt to gdp relatively good and the impact of the coming energy war likely to impact us less severely than most of Europe.
Truss is actually correct, the problem we have is such appalling growth prospects. Wheels coming off the industrial base on Europe (thanks Putin, honourable mention Schroeder and Merkel), China still in lockdown and having failed to resolve the black hole on its financial system (yuan lowest v dollar than since pre Beijing Olympics). And of course the long standing trade and productivity gap in the Uk.
But rarely can I recall normally sober posters losing their cognitive function so thoroughly.
That's you that is.2 -
-
Have you seen the reports of the chief secretary now asking for govt departments to identify cuts?williamglenn said:
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.
She won’t survive. There is no way out of this, and she won’t recover from the damage she’s done. The pensions news today was the final nail1 -
Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus poll for C4 News:
45% Lab
28% Con
and also:
14% Budget good idea
Just announced by Gary Gibbon live on TV.
0 -
You see that cartoon chicken? Running around saying that "the sky is falling"?RochdalePioneers said:
You see that cartoon dog? Sat in the room on fire with its mug, saying "this is fine"?moonshine said:I think we’ve reached peak hyperbole. All this “destroyed the economy”. I’ll buy another bottle of champagne in Finland if we hit 6% base rates in the next year. It’s not going to happen. The swap curve is all over the place due to the volatility, that is all.
And all the reasons we’ve discussed over many weeks and months are working to bring down core inflation globally. Not least that the Fed is busy precipitating a global crisis.
Now that is not to say that Truss might have torpedoed her chances at reelection by failing to properly explain her plans and then defend them after the event. But all this “boo hoo the economy has been killed”. I mean really. The wheels are still turning but when you’re at the eye of the storm you can sometimes not appreciate it. Our bond yields don’t carry much of a premium over Treasuries and in a historical context are just reverting to normal. Our currency like all others has lost massive ground to the dollar but broadly has kept pace with peers (euro, yen which needed an intervention this week by the way). Our deficit is mediocre among peers, our debt to gdp relatively good and the impact of the coming energy war likely to impact us less severely than most of Europe.
Truss is actually correct, the problem we have is such appalling growth prospects. Wheels coming off the industrial base on Europe (thanks Putin, honourable mention Schroeder and Merkel), China still in lockdown and having failed to resolve the black hole on its financial system (yuan lowest v dollar than since pre Beijing Olympics). And of course the long standing trade and productivity gap in the Uk.
But rarely can I recall normally sober posters losing their cognitive function so thoroughly.
That's you that is.
That's you that is.3 -
20 point lead, coming soon.Sunil_Prasannan said:Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus poll for C4 News:
45% Lab
28% Con
and also:
14% Budget good idea
Just announced by Gary Gibbon live on TV.1 -
Ch4 News 'Rishi Sunak not going to the Party conference because he wants Liz Truss to have her moment'
I think we can all drink to that7 -
STV does, AV doesn't.Driver said:
I'm not sure that's true - doesn't it lead both to more frequent hung parliaments and bugger landslides, with fewer modest majorities?WillG said:
AV protects against a populist extremist far better than FPTP.Sunil_Prasannan said:
Didn't stop Boris or Truss...MaxPB said:
FPTP. It's our ultimate insurance policy against a Le Pen or Orban taking over.Stuartinromford said:I don't want to usurp anyone's role as bedwetter-in-chief, but I have had a bad premonition.
The next few years are going to be rubbish. Some Conservative nonentity is going to have to clean the worst of the mess for two years, then Starmer takes over. Things might gradually improve, but it won't be fun.
In other countries, that's the sort of situation where you get a really nasty populist party. "Neither old party has stood up for you against those global elites. They've made you suffer and it's all a hoax..." Maybe Farage, more likely someone younger, slicker, more professional.
How does that not happen?0 -
Perhaps she could just fucking think what’s in the interest of the country rather than what’s in her own interest and resignLeon said:
She is in a bind, howeverMaxPB said:I've gone from indifference to active loathing of Liz Truss. Destroying the nation's economy and not even coming out to defend her actions.
As has been noted, if she comes out and sticks to her fiscal guns, she might kick off the panic again. But if she comes out and reverses policies, she is basically committing career suicide, and she might still kick off more panic
What can she possibly say?
Of course she is largely to blame for her own problems, but I can see the dilemma0 -
The fundamental issue here is having a situation in which MPs do not choose the Prime minister. It was bad enough with Corbyn leading a parliamentary party that didn't want him. At least that was opposition. But Truss needs to be removed as PM. The backbenches could easily bring her down in a confidence vote or by sending their letters to Mr Brady. A vote of no confidence would likely mean Starmer being given a chance or a general election. Replacing her as Tory leader means having another Tory election going to the members' vote if any Tory MP refuses to back a coronation. This is simply ridiculous.0
-
Webcam from US Southernmost Point (continental US anyway) in Key West, Florida, at some remove from storm:
https://southernmostpointwebcam.com/0 -
Couple of observations while I sit here with a pint of John Smiths - £3.10, read it and weep southerners - in the local.
People I’ve seen today and folk in this boozer who never, ever, ever talk about politics are sitting around muttering darkly about how fucked the economy is and these bastards have managed it in a couple of days. We’re all fucked.
I saw someone I know in passing earlier, friend of a friend of a friend kind of thing. She’s from Russia. Told me all the Ukrainian fascists need to be killed. She can’t believe the world are helping these Ukrainian criminals. It’s going to lead to WW3. We’re all fucked.
No wonder I’m having an impromptu pint.0 -
Sorry was only half meant as a joke - I'm not sure if it's true, but have heard that female named hurricanes are more deadly than male named ones due to people not being too scared of, say, "Hurricane Harriet"SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Would like to laugh. But cannot.BlancheLivermore said:
Hurricane Ian sounds like a pussy. They should have called it Hurricane IvanSeaShantyIrish2 said:Hurricane Ian Updates - NYT
As a midday darkness fell on central Florida, and the rain grew heavy, the interstate traffic near Ocala, Fla., settled into a standard pattern recognizable to hurricane veterans: a trickle of cars and SUVs headed north, out of the storm's path, while endless convoys of power trucks, utility trailers and cherry-pickers headed south.
The cafeteria is packed at Middleton High School in East Tampa, a shelter where hundreds of people have taken refuge. People are lugging suitcases and bags as they register for beds and scarf down pizza provided by the shelter. A few dozen people are still outside, sitting at tables and watching gusts blow through the mossy trees in the high school’s courtyard.
edit - or Ivana!
Cause I remember friend of mine telling me of his experiences, back in 1969, recovering bodies along the Gulf Coast in the aftermath of Hurricane Camille.
As for Hurricane Ian, it is FAR from done with Florida AND other states . . .
Hurricane Ivan (the Terrible) would surely be more fearsome sounding than Hurricane Ian (from IT)?0 -
Mancini deliberately failed to qualify for the World Cup just to give Southgate his, that makes me drinkRoger said:Ch4 News 'Rishi Sunak not going to the Party conference because he wants Liz Truss to have her moment'
I think we can all drink to that0 -
If they need savings the only place is going to be welfare https://twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1575034643551641600 - so expect benefits to go up in line with earnings not inflation...Razedabode said:
Have you seen the reports of the chief secretary now asking for govt departments to identify cuts?williamglenn said:
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.
She won’t survive. There is no way out of this, and she won’t recover from the damage she’s done. The pensions news today was the final nail
Now personally I would be looking at private sector housing benefit and cutting that significantly but there are no easy options..0 -
Poor John Redwood looks like he's going to have a nervous breakdown. He's dry mouthed and shaking as he tells us how well the government's policy should be welcomed.4
-
Welfare includes the triple lock gold goodies promise to the client vote.eek said:
If they need savings the only place is going to be welfare https://twitter.com/AnushkaAsthana/status/1575034643551641600 - so expect benefits to go up in line with earnings not inflation...Razedabode said:
Have you seen the reports of the chief secretary now asking for govt departments to identify cuts?williamglenn said:
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.
She won’t survive. There is no way out of this, and she won’t recover from the damage she’s done. The pensions news today was the final nail
Now personally I would be looking at private sector housing benefit and cutting that significantly but there are no easy options..
So - no cut on that wedge of it.
If they freeze benefits then there will be civil disorder is my prediction.
0 -
I don't think the pensions news is as bad as reported and the issue was resolved by the BoE intervention. There might be some regulatory lessons about liability driven investment but it's not a show-stopper for Truss's supple-side plans.Razedabode said:
Have you seen the reports of the chief secretary now asking for govt departments to identify cuts?williamglenn said:
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.
She won’t survive. There is no way out of this, and she won’t recover from the damage she’s done. The pensions news today was the final nail0 -
So the tax cut for the rich is to be funded (possibly) by a massive cut for those on benefits during a CoL crisis.
Tories will have nowhere to hide anymore. The nasty party is back and we will see disorder on our streets.
0 -
Tory increased their share of vote in that one by 1%. Should steady the ship. Not a bad poll for them to be going up despite the media narrative as backdrop when is was taken.Sunil_Prasannan said:Find Out Now/Electoral Calculus poll for C4 News:
45% Lab
28% Con
and also:
14% Budget good idea
Just announced by Gary Gibbon live on TV.
0 -
So, the treasury will underwrite any losses on the BoE’s purchases of gilts.
There could be major losses to the taxpayer if yields rise further after the BoE’s special monetary operation ends.
It may never end, of course.0 -
Liz Truss is facing growing pressure from jittery Conservative MPs to sack Kwasi Kwarteng or face a mutiny after the Bank of England’s emergency intervention to address the turmoil in the financial markets.
Article to follow..0 -
Perhaps he is becoming over excited at the thought of really sticking it to the feckless undeserving poor and anyone stupid enough to have to have an actual mortgage.Roger said:Poor John Redwood looks like he's going to have a nervous breakdown. He's dry mouthed and shaking as he tells us how well the government's policy should be welcomed.
0 -
Can we be sure Sunak would have won with the MPs though? It all depends on how the Mordaunt voters would have split.FrankBooth said:The fundamental issue here is having a situation in which MPs do not choose the Prime minister. It was bad enough with Corbyn leading a parliamentary party that didn't want him. At least that was opposition. But Truss needs to be removed as PM. The backbenches could easily bring her down in a confidence vote or by sending their letters to Mr Brady. A vote of no confidence would likely mean Starmer being given a chance or a general election. Replacing her as Tory leader means having another Tory election going to the members' vote if any Tory MP refuses to back a coronation. This is simply ridiculous.
0 -
I'm starting to think this is the whole purpose behind all of this. Truss and Kwarteng might be naive but they're not stupid. The reaction to Friday was predictable, and we know LT and KK areNigelb said:No doubt some will cheer this, but I doubt it will meet with universal approbation.
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1574867846462685190
If govt doesn't reverse its fiscal plans, it may have little option but to cut public spending so enormously it could result in the end of the NHS, acc to Charlie Bean, one of UK's leading economists, of the @OBR_UK & @bankofengland
zealotsprincipled in their views.
Could this be a (from their perspective) selfless move, recognising they're going to lose the next general election regardless, taking a once-in-a-generation opportunity to force a small state and private take-over of many of the functions of government?
e.g. NHS - if it disappears, there are plenty of Tory donors waiting in the wings with their healthcare companies. Truss and Kwarteng get peerages, Labour salvages what it can, but fundamentally we are turned into the profit-making paradise that the Singapore-on-Thames lot have wanted since Brexit?2 -
The pension news is not as bad as was originally thought? Are you mad?williamglenn said:
I don't think the pensions news is as bad as reported and the issue was resolved by the BoE intervention. There might be some regulatory lessons about liability driven investment but it's not a show-stopper for Truss's supple-side plans.Razedabode said:
Have you seen the reports of the chief secretary now asking for govt departments to identify cuts?williamglenn said:
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.
She won’t survive. There is no way out of this, and she won’t recover from the damage she’s done. The pensions news today was the final nail
Tinkering with the economy almost caused a calamity and you say - ah not so bad-?
That's sociopathic.
1 -
Ivan has been retired as a storm name after a bad one in 2004.BlancheLivermore said:
Sorry was only half meant as a joke - I'm not sure if it's true, but have heard that female named hurricanes are more deadly than male named ones due to people not being too scared of, say, "Hurricane Harriet"SeaShantyIrish2 said:
Would like to laugh. But cannot.BlancheLivermore said:
Hurricane Ian sounds like a pussy. They should have called it Hurricane IvanSeaShantyIrish2 said:Hurricane Ian Updates - NYT
As a midday darkness fell on central Florida, and the rain grew heavy, the interstate traffic near Ocala, Fla., settled into a standard pattern recognizable to hurricane veterans: a trickle of cars and SUVs headed north, out of the storm's path, while endless convoys of power trucks, utility trailers and cherry-pickers headed south.
The cafeteria is packed at Middleton High School in East Tampa, a shelter where hundreds of people have taken refuge. People are lugging suitcases and bags as they register for beds and scarf down pizza provided by the shelter. A few dozen people are still outside, sitting at tables and watching gusts blow through the mossy trees in the high school’s courtyard.
edit - or Ivana!
Cause I remember friend of mine telling me of his experiences, back in 1969, recovering bodies along the Gulf Coast in the aftermath of Hurricane Camille.
As for Hurricane Ian, it is FAR from done with Florida AND other states . . .
Hurricane Ivan (the Terrible) would surely be more fearsome sounding than Hurricane Ian (from IT)?1 -
Keir Starmer excellent on Ch4 News.
What a change!
Three Shredded Wheat?2 -
Dear Prime Minister & Chancellor - Please do (NOT) do that voodoo economics that you do (NOT) do so well.0
-
If they do that i hope they are utterly destroyed beyond recovery.rottenborough said:So the tax cut for the rich is to be funded (possibly) by a massive cut for those on benefits during a CoL crisis.
Tories will have nowhere to hide anymore. The nasty party is back and we will see disorder on our streets.0 -
Would that have any credibility at this point though?MaxPB said:
"Our plan is fully costed and revenue neutral over X years, a forthcoming OBR and Treasury report with all of the details will be released in X days, the UK is and has always been a nation that pays it's way, my growth plan is part of that commitment to ensure we can continue this role over the long term"Leon said:
She is in a bind, howeverMaxPB said:I've gone from indifference to active loathing of Liz Truss. Destroying the nation's economy and not even coming out to defend her actions.
As has been noted, if she comes out and sticks to her fiscal guns, she might kick off the panic again. But if she comes out and reverses policies, she is basically committing career suicide, and she might still kick off more panic
What can she possibly say?
Of course she is largely to blame for her own problems, but I can see the dilemma
Announce that the 45p rate will return at 43p at £100k or something as a peace offering and everyone calms down.
Having said that, I agree its probably the best option.0 -
@trussliz
I spoke to President @ZelenskyyUa earlier to underline steadfast 🇬🇧 support in light of Russia’s sham referendums, which we will never recognise.
I thanked him for helping secure the release of 5 British nationals & discussed ways to protect 🇺🇦 gas supplies.
Putin must fail.
https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/15751826040219566080 -
This has always been my theory. The crisis is part of the plan (although I suspect it has turned out worse than they expected).maxh said:
I'm starting to think this is the whole purpose behind all of this. Truss and Kwarteng might be naive but they're not stupid. The reaction to Friday was predictable, and we know LT and KK areNigelb said:No doubt some will cheer this, but I doubt it will meet with universal approbation.
https://twitter.com/EdConwaySky/status/1574867846462685190
If govt doesn't reverse its fiscal plans, it may have little option but to cut public spending so enormously it could result in the end of the NHS, acc to Charlie Bean, one of UK's leading economists, of the @OBR_UK & @bankofengland
zealotsprincipled in their views.
Could this be a (from their perspective) selfless move, recognising they're going to lose the next general election regardless, taking a once-in-a-generation opportunity to force a small state and private take-over of many of the functions of government?
e.g. NHS - if it disappears, there are plenty of Tory donors waiting in the wings with their healthcare companies. Truss and Kwarteng get peerages, Labour salvages what it can, but fundamentally we are turned into the profit-making paradise that the Singapore-on-Thames lot have wanted since Brexit?2 -
It ends in 13 working days. After which the BoE will seek to sell the gilts it has bought, back to the market.williamglenn said:
I don't think the pensions news is as bad as reported and the issue was resolved by the BoE intervention. There might be some regulatory lessons about liability driven investment but it's not a show-stopper for Truss's supple-side plans.Razedabode said:
Have you seen the reports of the chief secretary now asking for govt departments to identify cuts?williamglenn said:
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.
She won’t survive. There is no way out of this, and she won’t recover from the damage she’s done. The pensions news today was the final nail
The difference in price will be paid by the taxpayer.
There could be quite a substantial loss for the taxpayer.1 -
Ah, the old Boris trickwilliamglenn said:@trussliz
I spoke to President @ZelenskyyUa earlier to underline steadfast 🇬🇧 support in light of Russia’s sham referendums, which we will never recognise.
I thanked him for helping secure the release of 5 British nationals & discussed ways to protect 🇺🇦 gas supplies.
Putin must fail.
https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/15751826040219566081 -
1. if it wasn't as bad as reported then the Bof E wouldn't have had to launch its emergency rescuewilliamglenn said:
I don't think the pensions news is as bad as reported and the issue was resolved by the BoE intervention. There might be some regulatory lessons about liability driven investment but it's not a show-stopper for Truss's supple-side plans.Razedabode said:
Have you seen the reports of the chief secretary now asking for govt departments to identify cuts?williamglenn said:
It’s too early to write the obituary on Truss the Reformer. If she survives this baptism of fire, she could yet succeed.Leon said:
Yes. The tragedy for us is that, now, no one else will be brave enough to try these reforms for ages, and something like them (though clearly more forensic and costed) is actually neededWillG said:
It was ideology over analysis of the present situation. A confirmation bias of swallowing every internet talking point from your side and believing it.Leon said:
No I think she really believes this. It is IEA economics. Low tax, low spend, Singapore on Thames and all thatkle4 said:
I cannot quite credit why Truss, who seemed generally competent, decided to stake everything on a high stakes gamble to please super rich people (and the rest of us down the line, maybe, if it worked).Leon said:
In retrospect, @HYUFD has been completely vindicated. The Tories should've stuck with Boris, and ignored the critics. He has enormous human flaws, but he did not destroy the Tory party and bankrupt the country in a single weekendEPG said:A huge % of the fiscal incontinence hammering the pound is the Sunak-Johnson legacy of unconditional spend on imported fuel. It was politically handy for the opposition to make it about the negligible 45% take, but Labour is equally committed to sterling doom right now.
Why did she do this? It isn't because she believed it was necessary, her own word re Boris prove she knows it wasn't, it was a choice.
What's more, it might have worked and it might still work one day, and something like it probably needs to be tried. But they chose the worst possible moment to try it, a time when it is basically impossible. The world is drowning in debt and lenders are even looking suspiciously at the USA, the ultimate safe haven. Then the UK pops up and says Hey we're going on a borrowing spree!
Turns out they chose to do that 140mph drive down the wrong side of the motorway during rush hour, and therefore crashed immediately
The reality is that tax cuts can create growth, but rarely enough growth to make up for the shortfall in receipts. So it is ultimately creation of more debt we can't afford. And now they are looking to reduce the impact by bringing in more low skilled migrants, further cementing us into a low skill, low productivity economy.
Instead, Labour will take over and we will get lukewarm, uber-Woke, mildly inept social democracy on top of a stagnating economy, plus no hope of sorting out migration
After that inevitably runs out of road, which it will, fuck knows. Communism or Fascism maybe
Perceptions of the last few days could also switch depending on how the global situation develops.
She won’t survive. There is no way out of this, and she won’t recover from the damage she’s done. The pensions news today was the final nail
2. Nobody in the industry thinks anything has been resolved
But apart from that, you're bob-on. I think Mel Stride was talking about you as well as his parliamentary colleagues when he told Channel 4 News that they were talking out of their backside.1 -
What else can they do ? I don't see what works, or indeed what else might be planned for Trussonomics, other than huge chops in spending. The markets will be begging for similar announcements probably again within only a few days, or weeks.
Emergency, they can say, because we're in one, and that's true, but it's very signifcantly self-created.0 -
It's a good trick. I care about the defeat of a fascist power as far more important than short term economic struggles.Daveyboy1961 said:
Ah, the old Boris trickwilliamglenn said:@trussliz
I spoke to President @ZelenskyyUa earlier to underline steadfast 🇬🇧 support in light of Russia’s sham referendums, which we will never recognise.
I thanked him for helping secure the release of 5 British nationals & discussed ways to protect 🇺🇦 gas supplies.
Putin must fail.
https://twitter.com/trussliz/status/15751826040219566082
